Dr. Brennan Vogel BES MA PhD

Post-Doctoral Fellow

UWO-MEOPAR

ICLEI Presentation

September 13, 2016

Municipal Climate Change

Adaptation Planning in Nova Scotia:

Lessons and Opportunities

Panel Discussion

LESSONS LEARNED:

How do the findings in this study resonate in terms

of your direct involvement with the MCCAP planning

process? What are the most important 'lessons

learned' in these findings, and why?

OPPORTUNITIES:

Based on this study's findings, what do you see as

the key opportunities for directly enabling the

integration of adaptation into municipal policy and

planning? What are the most important

opportunities and why?

CCA Policy and Planning:

Grand and Complex Challenges

• Climate Uncertainty: Adaptation and

GHG Mitigation

• Long Time Frames: Attribution of

“Success”

• Social Systems: Structures, Institutions

• Context: Sector, Goals, Outcomes

• Jurisdictions: Overlapping, Unclear,

Conflicting

Vogel and Henstra (2015). Studying local climate adaptation: A heuristic research framework

for comparative policy analysis. Global Environmental Change (31). Pp. 110-120.

Based on: Fussel & Klein, 2006

Adaptation: Adjustments in human and

natural systems in response to actual

and/or expected climatic stimuli and/or

effects in order to moderate harm or exploit

beneficial opportunities

IPCC, 2001

Rules, rights and decision-making procedures relevant to stabilizing societal activities

in more/less predictable and desirable ways (Ekstrom and Moser, 2013; Young, 1999; North, 1990)

Adaptation Governance

Moser, 2009Governance: ‘The sets of decisions, actors,processes, institutional structures and mechanisms,including the division of authority and underlyingnorms, involved in determining a course of action [foradaptation]’

1. In which decision-making arena?

2. Who initiates or has responsible for developingoptions and implementation?

3. Who influences decisions?

4. What are the decision-making outcomes?

Moser, S. (2009). Chapter 20: Whether our levers are long enough and the fulcrum strong? Exploring the soft underbelly of

adaptation decisions and actions. In: Adapting to climate change: Thresholds, values, governance. Edited by Adger, N. Lorenzoni, I.

and O’Brien, K. Cambridge University Press.

Tracking Adaptation Policy Processes

CONCEPTUAL FUNDAMENTALS

• Sector: Governance? Industry?

• Scale: National? Regional? Local?

• Scope: How much responsibility is assumed and by whom?

• Elements: Instruments? Agents? Goals? Objectives? Targets?

• Object of Analysis: Process? Content? Quality? Change Outcomes?

• Means: What tools are used and how?

TRACKING METHODS

• Deductive: concepts, theories and principles

• Inductive: observation and comparison

DESIRED RESULTS

• Determining variation and learning across jurisdictions

• Theory-building for broader societal applications

Vogel and Henstra (2015). Studying local climate adaptation: A heuristic research framework

for comparative policy analysis. Global Environmental Change (31). Pp. 110-120.

Adaptation initiation: Agenda-setting and problem framing

Adaptation capacity-building: Formulating options and risk prioritization processes

Adaptation integration: Stakeholder and public engagement

Political support

What are the social factors that impacted municipal climate

change adaptation policy and planning processes in the

multi-level governance context of Nova Scotia’s MCCAP?

Based on: Corfee-Morlot et al., (2009), Horak (2012) and Vogel and Henstra (2015).

Focus groups =

35 participants

Interviews =

10 participants

Online survey =

26 participants

Content Analysis=

4 regions, 22 MCCAPs

RESEARCH METHODS

Municipal participants Non-municipal participants

CAOs - 1 NGOs – 2

Water Utilities – 1 Provincial Government (NB) – 1

REMOs - 2 Provincial Government (NS) – 3

Sustainability Planning - 3 Academia – 6

Land use Planning - 8

Wardens - 1

Mayors – 2

Councilors – 5

TOTAL: 23 TOTAL: 12

Focus Group Participant Demographics S

taff

Co

un

cil

2014: 4 Focus Groups – 23 municipal focus group participants

Representing 14 Nova Scotia municipalities [9 Counties & 5 Towns]

2014 focus group participants

Regional Study Area

2015 Follow Up Online Survey

26 respondents representing 19 municipalities

36% representative sample of all Nova Scotian municipalities

70% planning/development staff

15% chief administrative officersAverage of 11 years of municipal employment experience

6 participants represented a council perspectiveAverage of 4 years of municipal government experience

10 Interviewees

• Municipality 1: Land-use planner

• Municipality 2: Sustainability planner, councilor

• Municipality 3: Chief administrative officer (CAO), mayor

• Municipality 2&3: Emergency measures coordinator

• Non-municipal: – Policy-maker from the provincial government;

– Representative from municipal NGO;

– Two consultants retained to complete MCCAPs (One retained by Municipality 3)

Adaptation initiation

How did adaptation arise on the agenda?

How was the problem framed for

municipalities?

$$$

Interview Evidence Online Survey Evidence

10 / 10 confirmed that monetizing

adaptation planning using the Gas Tax was

instrumental for MCCAP completion

‘The impetus to do it really did come from

being forced to do it. ‘ CAO

‘Would it have happened without the gas

tax? I would have to say I would hope it

would have. But highly unlikely and I mean

basically it may not have... it was the

push... you will do it or you don’t get the

money.’ Mayor

19 / 22 agreed that the Gas Tax was the

most important factor for setting the

municipal adaptation agenda

21 / 22 agreed with an assessment of the

social factors and ‘enabling conditions’

MCCAP narrative that included: The gas

tax provided an economic incentive for

adaptation planning; Experience with

historical damages from storms; Regional

collaboration on emergency preparedness

planning; Building on existing ICSP

sustainability planning initiatives;

Provincial, academic and non-

governmental planning and policy-making

capacity-building and support

INITIATION: Adaptation policy initiation through a Provincial

regulatory incentive and a social context for adaptation

policy acted as the critical pre-conditions for the initiation of

adaptation policies and plans in Nova Scotia municipalities.

2005

2010

Hurricane Juan

FOCUSING EVENT

2007Focusing events

Gas tax

Agenda setting

&

Problem framingProvincial

Vulnerability

Assessment

HRM Climate SMART

2005

Adaptation initiation

2009

UNSM MOU on Climate Change

Provincial Climate Change Action Plan

MCCAP MANDATE

Capacity building

How were adaptation options

formulated?

How were adaptation priorities set?

Interview Evidence Online Survey Evidence

3/3 municipal case studies utilized the

MCCAP Guidebook

2/3 municipalities collaborated with

academia

1/3 municipalities had a sustainability

coordinator

1/3 municipalities collaborated with a

consultant

4/4 non-municipal interviewees discussed

provincial, non-governmental, academic

and consulting collaborations as social

influences on municipal adaptation

planning

19/20 identified staff knowledge and input

as key means of assessing risks and

developing priorities

18/22 reported staff capacity-building with

external support as the top planning

technique to identify risks and prioritize

actions in MCCAPs.

16/20 reported committee roundtables for

assessing risks and developing priorities

15/20 reported planning tools (e.g. HRVA)

to assess risks and develop priorities

Capacity-building: The collaborative provision of knowledge, resources and

support through government, consultants and academia served as key social

factors for enabling capacities for municipal adaptation policy and planning

processes to: identify critical infrastructure risks and develop public safety

priorities, based on an increased awareness of proximal climate hazards.

62

Figure 3: MCCAP stakeholder collaborations - conceptual diagram of multi-level adaptation governance

in Nova Scotia (Based on content analysis of 22 municipalities in 4 regions selected for 4 focus groups)

NOTE: Shading denotes bounded scope of case inquiry

2.5.2.2 Focus groups and online survey analysis

Building from the content analysis findings, field investigation and data collection

advanced opportunities for further description and analysis of social factors impacting

municipalities in the MCCAP multi-level adaptation governance framework, based on the

perspectives of municipal adaptation stakeholders. The research goal was to advance

knowledge of the social factors impacting municipal adaptation in multi-level governance

contexts by determining: i) what were considered prioritized social impact factors at the

aggregate level; and, ii) illustrating prioritized social impact factors comparatively by

using individual cases of adaptation planning to thematically explore and describe

similarities, differences and contrasting patterns across cases and externally in

relationship to the literature. Specifically, the study used ‘within MCCAP’ analysis of

provincial data to produce aggregated opinion trends about social impact factors affecting

municipal adaptation processes. Producing ‘within MCCAP’ case insights used focus

groups (See Appendices E1 and E2) to gather a breadth of data for iterative testing using

an online survey (See Appendices G1-G4).

External collaborations with consultants,

academics and the Provincial government

enabled municipal capacity-building for

adaptation planning.

Regional collaboration enables municipal

capacity-building, with important facilitation roles

for emergency measures organizations.

Internal staff capacity supports and enables

institutional adaptive capacity building for

sustainability and climate change planning and

policy at the municipal scale.

IntegrationBarriers and opportunities

How are stakeholders and the

public engaged in the

adaptation planning process?

How is adaptation integrated

into municipal activities?

Public Consultation and Municipal Adaptation Planning

Content Analysis Interview Evidence Online Survey Evidence

While public

participation was

encouraged, it was not

a requirement in the

MCCAP policy

framework.

1/3 municipalities had no public

engagement

1/3 municipalities had public

stakeholders on MCCAP

committee

1/3 municipalities had public

engagement

Concerns over raising public

‘climate alarmism’ were

reported

10/20 reported a medium level

of public consultation in the

preparation of the MCCAP with

public participation constrained

by limited time, capacity-

resources and/or limited public

interest

Integration: Adaptation policy and planning implementation in

municipalities can be regionally enabled via the provision of

capacity building resources, including those provided through

multi level governance collaboration and external stakeholders

support.Content Analysis Interview Evidence Online Survey Evidence

Top regional opportunities

to address climate

adaptation and emergency

preparedness issues

associated with inter-

governmental

collaboration, policy

jurisdiction, access to

information, access to

funding, municipal

emergency planning

collaboration and land

use planning, as well as

public education. (8/12

priorities in 4 regional

MCCAPs collaboratively

prepared by 12

municipalities)

7/10 interviewees reported issues

with vertical institutional

fragmentation in Canadian multi-

level climate change governance,

including at the provincial and

federal scales

4/4 non-municipal stakeholders

discussed lack of funding, lack of

staff capacity, lack of information

and skills to make use of

information at the municipal level as

social barriers to integration

3/3 municipalities reported

opportunities for better funding and

capacity support from higher

government to implement

adaptation policies and plans

19/20 identified internal municipal

collaboration was important to

integration of adaptation

19/19 reported the opportunity for

individual and regional integration

into municipal budgeting and capital

planning was a key opportunity for

adaptation implementation

19/19 reported opportunity to

integrate adaptation into planning

processes (work plans, capital

plans, project plans)

18/19 reported opportunity for

regional land-use coordination to

advance risk reduction through

regional land-use and emergency

management operations and

regulation processes

212

Municipality A Municipality B Municipality C

Benefits of

MCCAP

Process

Improved

opportunities for

municipal

preparedness to

address major

climate change

risks (marsh

flooding)

Preliminary information

gathering and awareness

raising; base-lining

information and putting

climate change ‘on the table’;

added new questions and

raised need for operational

changes and policy and

planning discussion topics in

procuring/developing and

deciding on new

water/wastewater

infrastructure

Improved information for

community preparedness /

emergency management to

minimize storm damages through

adaptation planning and

infrastructure investment (e.g.

vulnerable sewage lift stations);

stakeholder education of local

climate risks beneficial outcome

of MCCAP process

Emergency management

coordinator

(Involved in Municipality 2

and 3 MCCAP processes)

MCCAP provided collaborative

and motivating opportunities to

‘expand the team’ in dealing with

regional scale climate risks;

MCCAP motivated staff

Table 10: Across-case evidence of the social benefits of the MCCAP process (municipal perspective)

NGO

representative

Awareness raising for stakeholders; institutionalizing adaptation in municipal

governments; raising recognition of climate change through public awareness

Provincial policy-

maker

Increasing stakeholder and public awareness of climate hazards and flooding and

ensuring operational capacities to respond are in place are beneficial social examples

of adaptation measures taken by municipalities’ post-MCCAP. Confirmation of

utility of MCCAP: predictive modeling and preventative measures were used by

municipalities’ to anticipate and adapt to storm surge and high tide impacts

associated with coastal storms on municipal infrastructure (lift stations, waste water

systems, public works and maintenance operations) by taking preventative risk

reduction actions.

Consultant 1 MCCAP was more successful in some municipalities than others; good awareness

raising exercise; benefited long-term planning discussions and outlooks and

perspectives for current infrastructure and future development; influenced

‘subconscious thinking process’ - positive for municipal implementation and

operations integration ‘over time’; proactive emergency planning and collaborative

stakeholder engagement; importance of regional collaboration on shared adaptation

planning issues (e.g. causeways; ferries; coastal infrastructure)

Consultant 2 Integrating HRVA into MCCAP process; raising municipal planning capacity to

incorporate sea-level rise information into land-use strategies; potential for municipal

storm surge monitoring to be integrated into federal environmental emergency

response policy development: feeding local monitoring and climate change baseline

information up to provide evidence of the provincial and national need for updating

floodplain mapping to inform adaptive municipal land-use planning

Table 11: Across-case evidence of the social benefits of the MCCAP process (non-municipal perspective)

Multi-level adaptation governance coordination,

planning facilitation and policy leadership is required

to address municipal adaptation issues.

Adaptation policy failure may be associated with

problems of inter-governmental collaboration, opaque

policy jurisdictions, limited access to information, poor

access to funding, barriers to horizontal emergency

planning collaboration and a lack of coordinated

coastal land use planning reform to address climate

risks at regional scales.

Increasing public education about climate adaptation

and emergency preparedness may assist with reducing

vulnerability to climate impacts at the local scale,

where storms, surges and sea-level rise manifest.

The will to adapt

Is political support important

for adaptation policy

development?

Content Analysis Interview Evidence Online Survey Evidence

Based on a sample of 22 MCCAPs in 4

regions:

• 37% of MCCAP committees had

political representation (6/22

included mayors/wardens)

• 4/22 had no political representation

on the MCCAP committee

• There was an average of 2 council

members per MCCAP committee

(average committee size was 8-9

people)

8/12 priorities identified in an analysis

of 4 regional MCCAP plans prepared

by 12 municipalities indicated that

facilitation, advocacy, leadership and

public education were the top

opportunities for integration. This

finding illustrates the role for political

leadership and procedural facilitation

across governance scales.

6/10 interviewees felt staff/political

knowledge and skills to make use of

climate change information were the

most important social factor impacting

adaptation planning and policy

integration.

1/3 municipalities had sustainability

planning staff capacity that enabled

and enhanced institutional adaptive

capacity building and facilitation of

the MCCAP process by internally

supporting political decision-

makers knowledge and awareness

of key issues

3/3 municipalities identified social

factors impacting political support:

1. Lack of skills and resources (6/10

interviewees);

2. An austere provincial and

municipal fiscal environment

3. A need for municipal support from

higher levels of government

4. Low levels of public demand to

prompt political leadership

100% agreement (19/19) that political

leadership and support is important for

:

1. Collaboration with staff on

implementing adaptation priorities

(Ex. Capital investment planning,

budgeting)

2. Inter-departmental staff motivation

and collaboration on MCCAP

priorities implementation (ex. land-

use planning strategic reviews,

integrating MCCAP priorities into

infrastructure and asset

management)

3. Public education and awareness-

raising initiatives to reduce climate

risks and increase resilience to

climate impacts

18/19 agreed that inter-municipal

collaboration to address adaptation

priorities through regional approaches

requires political leadership and

support (Ex. REMOs, shared planning

approaches)

Integration: Adaptation policy and planning implementation in municipalities can be enabled by political

support across governance levels. Public demand and internal staff resources to provide capacity support

are impactful social factors affecting political support for municipal adaptation policy and planning

integration into municipal practices of infrastructure and capital planning. Widespread social and

governance barriers persist impacting the long-term sustainability of municipal adaptation initiatives.

“The quality of an MCCAP was deemed largely by a municipality’s

internal capability to interpret climate trends and projections in a local

context, in order to understand what impacts are likely and the potential severity

of their consequences…”

Lessons Learned

1. Fortification of the relationship between land use and disaster-risk reduction and

response through the inclusion of emergency-management personnel on municipal

climate change committees (improved information exchange)

2. Municipal staff, council and public education about climate risks and adaptation

3. Identification of when/where policy is needed to control development to reduce

risks

4. Need for nuanced and site-specific solutions to balance municipal responsibility

when addressing coastal hazards

5. Improved provincial level collaborations to organize and disseminate relevant data

to municipalities

6. Adaptation planning now understood as a broad, ongoing social process to assess

and evaluate the impacts of external forces (i.e., macroeconomics, demographics,

health and governance) on municipal adaptive capacities to adapt to future

challenges, including dealing with climate hazards and risks

Canada’s Marine Coasts in a Changing Climate

There are considerable opportunities in the

East Coast region to increase the capacity for

adapting to climate change and implementing

effective adaptation measures to address

coastal risks. Basic steps include increasing

awareness, engaging and empowering

stakeholders, reviewing and adjusting

legislation and codes of practice where

appropriate, enhancing inter-jurisdictional

collaboration, and addressing regional and

local differences in adaptive capacity.

Adaptation is fundamentally a social process

that leads to modification of long-standing

habits. Lemmen, D.S. and Warren, F.J. (2016): Synthesis; in Canada’s Marine Coasts in a Changing Climate, (ed.) D.S.

Lemmen, F.J. Warren, T.S. James and C.S.L. Mercer Clarke; Government of Canada, Ottawa, ON, p. 17-26.

Gas tax capacity-building

The gas tax agreement details how municipalities may use gas tax capacity-building

funds for developing and implementing: ‘studies, strategies, or systems related to

asset management, which may include software acquisition and implementation

[and] training directly related to asset management planning and, long term

infrastructure planning’ in order to ‘strengthen the ability of municipalities to

improve local and regional planning, including capital investment plans, integrated

community sustainability plans, life-cycle cost assessments, and asset

management plans’

However, ineligible expenditures are ‘salaries and other employment benefits of any

employees of the Ultimate Recipient [municipality], its direct or indirect operating

or administrative costs of the Ultimate Recipient [municipality], and more

specifically its costs related to planning, engineering, architecture, supervision,

management and other activities normally carried out by its staff, except in

accordance with eligible categories’ (NS-Canada Gas Tax Agreement 2014-2024:

Schedule B, Item 18 & Schedule C, Items 1b & 2c)

Research

Funding:In-Kind

Partnerships:

December 11, 2015 University of Western Ontario

London, ON

PhD Committee:

Dr. Gordon McBean

(UWO)

Dr. Daniel Henstra

(UW)

Dr. Tony Weis

(UWO)

Dr.Jamie Baxter

(UWO)

Department of Municipal Affairs

Union of Nova Scotia

Municipalities

Nova Scotia Planning

Directors Association

Panel Discussion

LESSONS LEARNED:

How do the findings in this study resonate in terms

of your direct involvement with the MCCAP planning

process? What are the most important 'lessons

learned' in these findings, and why?

OPPORTUNITIES:

Based on this study's findings, what do you see as

the key opportunities for directly enabling the

integration of adaptation into municipal policy and

planning? What are the most important

opportunities and why?