Integrating social learning into climate change adaptation public policy cycle: Building upon from experiences in Brazil and the United Kingdom

Journal Pre-proof Integrating social learning into climate change adaptation public policy cycle: Building upon from experiences in Brazil and the United Kingdom Mariana Nicolletti, Fernanda Maschietto, Thais Moreno PII:

S2211-4645(19)30092-2

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envdev.2019.100486

Reference:

ENVDEV 100486

To appear in:

Environmental Development

Received Date: 17 March 2019 Revised Date:

7 September 2019

Accepted Date: 28 November 2019

Please cite this article as: Nicolletti, M., Maschietto, F., Moreno, T., Integrating social learning into climate change adaptation public policy cycle: Building upon from experiences in Brazil and the United Kingdom, Environmental Development (2019), doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envdev.2019.100486. This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. © 2019 Published by Elsevier B.V.

Integrating Social Learning into climate change adaptation public policy cycle: building upon from experiences in Brazil and the United Kingdom

Mariana Nicolletti a Fernanda Maschietto b Thais Moreno c a

Center for Sustainability Studies, São Paulo School of Business Administration,

Fundação Getulio Vargas. Avenida 9 de Julho , 2029, 11o andar, São Paulo, Brazil. Email address: [email protected] b

Center for Sustainability Studies, São Paulo School of Business Administration,

Fundação Getulio Vargas. Avenida 9 de Julho, 2029, 11 o andar, São Paulo, Brazil. Email address: [email protected] c

FGV Projetos, São Paulo School of Business Administration, Fundação Getulio

Vargas. Avenida Paulista, 1294, 15o andar, São Paulo, Brazil. E-mail address: [email protected] www.linkedin.com/in/thais-m-soares1

*

Corresponding author: Mariana Nicolletti E-mail address: [email protected] Postal address: Avenida 9 de Julho, 2029, 11o andar, 01313-902, São Paulo, Brazil Telephone numbers: +55 11 37994194 / +55 11 981165138

Acknowledgements We gratefully acknowledge the partners that contributed to this research providing information on their experiences and sharing knowledge: Adrian Bannister (Institute of Development Studies) Alan Stanley (Institute of Development Studies) Alexandre Castro (Instituto Ilhas do Brasil) Ana Elisa de Faria Bacellar (Instituto Chico Mendes de Biodiversidade - ICMBio) André Ferretti (Observatório do Clima) Ben Garside (International Institute for Environment and Development - IIED) Caroline Nóbrega (Instituto de Pesquisa da Amazônia - IPAM) Demétrio de Toledo (Ministério da Indústria, Comércio Exterior e Serviços – MDIC) Eduardo Hosokawa (Prefeitura de Santos) Fleur Ruckley (2020 Climate Group) Gabriela Cyrulin (residente em pesquisa da FGV) Iago Haron (Engajamundo) Kate Lonsdale (IMC Worldwide) Katia Ribeiro (Instituto Chico Mendes de Biodiversidade - ICMBio) Kristen Guida (London Climate Change Partnership) Laura Silici (International Institute for Environment and Development - IIED) Leonardo Póvoa (Ministério da Indústria, Comércio Exterior e Serviços – MDIC) Lincoln Alves (Centro de Ciência do Sistema Terrestre – CCST/INPE) Márcio Nóbrega (Agência Nacional de Águas – ANA) Natalie Unterstell (Fórum Brasileiro de Mudança do Clima - FBMC) Pedro Christ (Ministério do Meio Ambiente - MMA) Roger Street (UK Climate Impacts Programme - UKCIP) Ruth Wolstenholme (Adaptation Scotland/SNIFFER) Raquel Rosenberg (Engajamundo) Sigmund Kluckner (Climate Knowlege Brokers Group - CKBG) Simon Anderson (International Institute for Environment and Development - IIED) Tiago Capela Lourenço (Faculdade de Ciências da Universidade de Lisboa) We also acknowledge Professor Renato Orsato and the researchers Simone Barakat e José Guilherme Ferraz de Campos for pioneering the research on Social Learning at the Center for Sustainability Studies of Getulio Vargas Foundation.

This work was supported by the Research Fund of Gestulio Vargas Foundation School of Business Administration of São Paulo (FGV EAESP) through FGVPesquisa, in the call for projects of 2016/2017.

Integrating Social Learning into climate change adaptation public policy cycle: building up from experiences in Brazil and the United Kingdom 1

1

This paper outlines good practices and serves as a guide to promote Social Learning in

2

the elaboration and implementation processes of public policies for climate change

3

adaptation at a local level. It is based on a multiple-case study covering 18 experiences

4

from the United Kingdom and Brazil, an analysis of existing research about the

5

contributions of Social Learning to socioenvironmental governance and public policies

6

regarding wicked problems, as well as, empirical information collected during workshops

7

held as part of the development of the AdaptaClima Platform. From the literature review,

8

key aspects of Social Learning were identified, such as active participation; co-production

9

of knowledge and development of capacities; iterative reflection and action. These were

10

compared with four phases of the adaptation to climate change public policy

11

implementation cycle [i) preparation and engagement; ii) analysis of impacts and

12

vulnerabilities; iii) planning; iv) implementation and monitoring] and used to analyse the

13

empirical information gathered. The results bring practical examples of how to include

14

key Social Learning aspects in each phase. The findings may apply to different contexts,

15

but are especially useful to developing countries.

16

Keywords: climate change adaptation; wicked problem; public policy; Social Learning;

17

municipal government

1

Abbreviations used throughout the article: SL – Social Learning MMA – Brazil Environment Ministry

18

1. Introduction

19

Climate change adaptation is understood as a set of initiatives and preventive measures,

20

which promote adjustments in natural, human and economic systems to reduce damages

21

and explore existing opportunities in response to current and expected impacts from

22

climate change (IPCC, 2001; UNFCCC2). It is not simply a linear or bureaucratic

23

process; on the contrary, dealing with climate change risks and impacts is classified as a

24

wicked problem (Head & Aford, 2013). This means that adjustments need to be made in

25

relation to the traditional public policy approach on risk management, which is based on

26

particular and ‘optimised’ decisions on risk occurrence, often short term, with little or

27

no involvement of other sectors, and more importantly, ignoring processes of

28

knowledge production and learning - which are fundamental to all stages of the public

29

policy cycle (Fischer, Miller & Sidney, 2007; Fisher et al., 2016). Moreover, despite

30

being a global issue, the impact of climate change is felt locally, in the territories,

31

therefore municipal and state governments’ engagement on the agenda is essential. This

32

can be done by promoting transversal integration of the climate change perspective

33

across development plans and within different public departments (Margulis, 2017).

34

Actualizing adaptation public policies, strategies and plans at the community

35

level is already challenging in countries with a much longer history of investments in

36

the area, like Scotland (Mabon & Wolstenholme, 2019). This challenge becomes

37

significantly tougher for developing countries where financial resources are scarce and

38

there are many crucial socioeconomic issues that compete with each other for the same

39

resources. Brazil is an emblematic example, where the climate change adaptation 2

UNFCCC Topics webpage, available at: https://unfccc.int/topics/adaptation-and-resilience/the-bigpicture/what-do-adaptation-to-climate-change-and-climate-resilience-mean. Accessed on 3/6/2019.

40

agenda is still under construction despite of its leadership position internationally

41

acquired at the Conferences of Parties (CoP) of the United Nations Framework

42

Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the advances in public policy regarding

43

the theme (Speranza & Resende, 2015; Margulis & Dubeaux, 2010). Amongst the

44

public policies, the National Climate Change Adaptation Plan (NAP)3 stands out, as it

45

represents a significant milestone in structuring the climate change agenda. Comprised

46

of a set of objectives and guidelines for prioritized sectors (MMA, 2016) NAP’s main

47

gap is that it does not present means for implementation. In fact, the governance for the

48

implementation phase, under the coordination of the Brazilian Ministry of Environment

49

(MMA), was still being designed in 2018.

50

Also, the Plan asserts that the participation of Municipalities, with decentralized

51

and articulated actions, is fundamental for building resilience in the country (MMA,

52

2016), nevertheless, the Working Group responsible for drawing up the NAP

53

(Adaptation WG) was composed of ministries and federal agencies only. In fact,

54

Municipal representatives did not participate directly in any part of the preparation of

55

the Plan. Since the actions are localized, this will most probably impact the

56

implementation phase. Thus, the traditional gap from public policy planning to

57

implementation is also felt in the adaptation domain, with the NAP struggling to reach

58

the territory.

59

Aiming to subsidize effective resilience building through public interventions,

60

by illustrating how climate change adaptation public policy can promote social learning

61

processes throughout the policy cycle, this research looked at the contributions of Social

62

Learning theory and approach to socioenvironmental governance and global 3

Coordinated by the Ministry of the Environment (MMA), NAP was established in May 2016 aimed at promoting the reduction of national vulnerability to climate change and managing the risk associated with this phenomenon (MMA, 2016). It is a component of National Plan for Climate Change, which in turn is an instrument of the National Policy on Climate Change (2009).

63

environmental change (Pelling & High, 2005; Cash et al., 2006; Bos, Brown & Farrelly,

64

2013; Fisher et al., 2016). This was compiled into a guideline for policy makers,

65

managers and leaders of public initiatives at local level to promote social learning

66

processes across the adaptation public policy cycle, and enriched with good practices

67

based on the study of 18 experiences in the United Kingdom and Brazil.

68

The demand for this paper and its relevance came about during the development

69

of the AdaptaClima Platform (2016- 2017), which aimed at delivering NAP’s 1.3 goal,

70

under the Objective 1, concerning production and dissemination of climate change

71

adaptation knowledge (MMA, 2016). Despite its primary focus being the Brazilian

72

context, the proposed framework and practices are useful in different settings, especially

73

for developing countries, where the lack of resources and capabilities jeopardize risk

74

assessments and access to information.

75

This paper begins by construing the premise that many of the challenges

76

presented by the current adaptation policy agenda, especially concerning: coordination

77

between actors, lack of information and institutional capacity, can be overcome via

78

processes that involve Social Learning (SL) aspects, such as: participation and

79

mobilization; co-production of knowledge and development of capacities; iterative

80

reflection and action; and revision of institutions, norms, and practices, resulting in

81

higher local adaptive capacity.

82

The second section presents the qualitative analyses of multiple-case studies,

83

followed by the third section that introduces the Social Learning approach and its main

84

key aspects. In the fourth section the findings regarding how to integrate the SL into the

85

adaptation public policy cycle are presented, including examples of activities and good

86

practices mapped. Finally, the last section, further explains the meaning of having the

87

adaptation agenda being materialized at the local level, establishing a dialogue with the

88

literature.

89

2. Methodological approach and experiences studied

90

2.1 Research background

91

This research is strongly rooted in practical local interventions to promote

92

climate change adaptation. A total of 18 initiatives where studied in this research, of

93

which 12 emphasised acting at the local level4. This is relevant considering the fact that

94

specific social, environmental and economic dynamics interfere both with how climate

95

change impacts are felt and are managed, which suggests that adaptation measures are

96

strongly dependent on institutional capacities for action (Paterson et al., 2017).

97

The empirical basis of this research was the collective effort to build the

98

AdaptaClima Platform5, led by the Brazil Environment Ministry (MMA). This was a

99

two-year project implemented under the Ministry’s coordination by the Centre for

100

Sustainability Studies of Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGVces), in partnership with the

101

International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) and with the support

102

from Newton Fund through the British Council. The project engaged 63 stakeholders of

103

the adaptation agenda in Brazil (49 organizations) and the United Kingdom (14

104

organizations) in a participatory process represented in Figure 1. The aim of this

105

collective work was to create and deliver the following: i) a web platform that

106

systematizes existing data and information on adaptation related themes in Brazil; ii)

107

mobilization and engagement actions to create a network of stakeholders; and iii) a

4

The following initiatives favor the local level for reducing vulnerabilities in face of climate change and building resilience to reduce negative impacts: International Institute for Environment and Development, London Climate Change Partnership, UKCIP, SNIFFER, Climate Knowledge Brokers Group, Climate Observatory, Engajamundo, ICMBio, IPAM, Islands Institute, Santos Municipality and Porto Alegre Municipality. 5 The AdaptaClima Platform can be accessed through the link: http://adaptaclima.mma.gov.br/ (visited on 18 of May, 2019).

108

governance model capable of maintaining the participatory operational and decision-

109

making processes and foster the platform’s sustainability. The last two pillars were

110

added to the project once it became clear that a web platform would soon become

111

obsolete if not anchored in a cohesive social network and supported by a consistent

112

governance arrangement. The platform aims to meet the 1.3 goal of the National

113

Adaptation Plan (NAP) (MMA, 2016).

114 115

Figure 1: AdaptaClima Platform’s diagram Source: AdaptaClima Platform, 2017

116

SL was assumed as the most fitting theoretical basis to face the challenge of

117

building trust amongst different stakeholders, as it promoted engagement and a sense of

118

ownership of such a complex theme as climate change adaptation. In fact, Ison &

119

Watson (2007), Pahl-Wostl et al. (2008) and Reed et al. (2000) state that effective

120

adaptation interventions are only possible when planned and implemented through

121

continuous and complex processes of social learning. Effective adaptation interventions

122

are those capable of strengthening resilience in a perennial basis. In other words, the

123

collective learning of a social system is taken as sine qua non condition for building

124

endogenous resilience6 in face of the present and future impacts of climate change. The

125

literature review indicated an abundance of recent references on SL; these are

126

summarized in the third section.

127

Nevertheless, whilst the literature discussed in depth about the concepts and

128

constituent elements of SL (e.g. Pelling & High, 2005; Scholz et al., 2014; Cundill et

129

al., 2014), it gave few practical experiences to assess learning (Pelling et al., 2015;

130

Tschakert and Dietrich, 2010) and scarce guidance was found on how to implement SL

131

practices. That is the gap that this research wants to help address. 6

The IPCC (2014) defines resilience as the capacity of the social, economic and environmental systems to deal with hazardous events and disturbance trends in order to maintain its essential function, identity and structure, as well as its capacity to adapt, learn and transform.

132

2.2 The experiences studied

133

A total of 63 stakeholders where mapped as relevant for the adaptation agendas of

134

Brazil and UK, from that group eight organisations operating in the UK and 10 in Brazil

135

were selected as key experiences for further investigation. The analysis contemplated (i)

136

procedures and practices applied to promote inclusive, participatory processes; (ii) the

137

relation of these procedures and practices to SL components found in literature; and (iii)

138

changes undertaken in institutional and operational aspects in order to foster

139

participation and experimentation.

140

Even though the UK examples were applied in a different context, they served

141

as case studies for the application of SL precepts. The experiences gathered in Brazil,

142

on the other hand, were selected based on the identification of SL elements that were

143

being put into practice, even if not named as such. They were chosen to understand the

144

adherence of the SL approach; that is to identify how the main elements of SL could be

145

applied to strengthen adaptation initiatives in Brazil. Table 1 describes the 18

146

experiences studied.

147

Table 1: List of the 18 organisations and respective experiences considered in this study

Sets of case studies

Reference experiences: UK

Projects/programmes in focus

Purpose

Organisations International Institute for Environment and Development – IIED

Case studies in Uganda, India and Kenya aimed at understanding how social learning could strengthen local planning for climate change.

London Climate Change Partnership (LCPP)

The operation and management of LCPP: a centre for expertise on climate change adaptation and resilience, comprising public, private and community sector organisations. Climate-ADAPT: online platform for information about adaptation initiatives across Europe. Climate Change Compass: Project aimed at monitoring, evaluating and learning from the International Climate Fund. Adaptation Scotland: programme that provides

UKCIP IMC Worldwide

SNIFFER

Understand how processes of social learning have been planned, promoted and monitored, as well as, the procedures and practices involved in such processes

2020 Climate Group

Institute of Development Studies

Climate Knowledge Brokers (CKB) Group Climate Observatory (OC)

Engajamundo

Brazil Environmental Ministry Brazilian Forum of Climate Change (FBMC)

Brazilian experiences

ICMBio

IPAM

Islands Institute

Santos Municipality

advice and support for organisations, business and communities to prepare and build resilience in face of climate change. Scotland’s 2020 Climate Group: business-led network aimed at stimulating collaboration between industry, government and society. Open Knowledge and Digital Services Hub: supports evidenced informed policy-making and practice and works on an open data platform on development, including adaptation. CKB Group: community of knowledge brokers on climate information dedicated to enhance knowledge-sharing and connect key players. OC: coalition of Brazilian civil society organisations to discuss climate change and push forward the agenda through articulation and information circulation. Youth network dedicated to enhance their participation in the most important decisions through capacity building, mobilisation and activism. Formulation of the National Adaptation Plan: it was conducted by the Working Group formed by ministries and federal agencies and involved consultations of state bodies. FBMC: instance for actors of government and society to discuss and take positions on issues related to climate change; the Forum is one of the institutional instruments of the National Climate Change Policy. Project Monitoring Biodiversity Climate Relevant at Conservation Unity level, considering adaptation and mitigation measures: the project involved multiple participatory methods, including collective mapping. SOMAI: web-platform of data about indigenous lands in Brazil Amazon concerning climate change adaptation and mitigation; the platform was built with the participation of indigenous community mapping the territory and reporting climate events. Project “Adaptar Brasil”: aimed at building tools and mechanisms for 10 islands and coastal regions to adapt to climate change and conserve the natural resources. Municipal Plan for Climate Change of Santos: published in 2016, it was one of the first municipal adaptation plans in the Country; it was formulated

Understand what elements that constitute the Social Learning approach were already in being applied, and how they could be further promoted

Porto Alegre Municipality

National Confederation of Industry (CNI)

148

by the Municipal Commission for Adaptation to Climate Change. Urban Resilience Strategy: launched in 2016, its elaboration process was participatory from the outset; around 500 representatives of different sectors were involved, organised in communities of practice by common territories and interests. Technical Chamber of Climate Change Adaptation: formed by representatives of CNI, industry federations, sectorial associations and firms, the chamber came out with contributions to the industrial chapter of NAP.

Source: Authors (Nicolletti, Maschietto and Moreno)

149

The case studies are distinctive examples identified from an already existing

150

group through ‘theoretical sampling’ (Eisenhard, 1989), selected to test the validity of

151

the SL theory and approach to enhance climate change adaptation at the local level in

152

Brazil, as well as to add some practical guidance to the SL literature (Eisenhard, 1989;

153

Voss et al., 2002).

154

2.3 Multiple-case studies method

155

As previously mentioned, this research used multiple case-studies analysed through a

156

Social Learning (SL) lens adding to the SL approach some practical examples to

157

support its implementation (Handfield and Melnyk, 1998). The case study method was

158

adopted due to its potential for a holistic understanding of complex and interconnected

159

events (Yin, 2008) and its adequacy to respond to questions ‘why’, ‘what’ and ‘how’

160

(Voss, Tsikriktsis and Frohlich, 2002, p. 127). Hence, this method is useful taking into

161

consideration the dynamism and complexity of the socio-environmental governance and

162

global environmental change (Armitage et al., 2009; 2011; Rodela, 2011).

163

To further understand the experiences of organisations engaged in the

164

AdaptaClima process, semi-structured interviews and observations in workshops and

165

public events were carried out. Although it is difficult to conduct an in-depth

166

investigation of more than 10 case-studies (Eisenhard, 1989), the researchers decided

167

keep all as part of this study, since none offered a comprehensive application of all SL

168

elements identified in the literature review, but rather presented complementary parts of

169

practical applications of SL elements.

170

2.4 Data collection

171

Multiple data sources are employed in this qualitative theory testing and extension

172

research (Voss, Tsikriktsis and Frohlich, 2002). The data collection encompassed:

173

documentary analysis; participant observation in seven workshops, one meeting with

174

experts in climate data and two public events; interactions in nine webinars; and 18

175

semi-structured interviews. Table 2 schematizes the data collection per year and

176

country.

177

Table 2. Data collection: sources and interactions Participant observation Documentary analysis Workshops

BR

Websites, projects' reports, studies and other publications

201 6

UK

Adaptation platforms, networks' websites and publications

#

Public Events

2

In Edinburgh (15) and London (11): 'Exchanging experiences and gathering contributions to AdaptaClima'

1

1

'Climate data: What is available? How to apply on the ground?' (15 experts)

3 1

AdaptaClima platform release event (82 attendees)

UK

201 8

178

BR

Public news about the adaptation initiatives; new reports and publications

#

'Building the communication and engagement stream' (27)

'Representing the social system and designing the platform governance’(36)

201 7

Meeting with experts

'Conceiving the platform we wish' (30 attendees)

'Drawing communication processes; and results of SL research' (35) BR

#

Online interactions

'Reviewing the activities and collaboration agreements' (19)

New reports, publications and updates in reference platforms

Source: Authors (Nicolletti, Maschietto and Moreno)

1

Seminar: SL within adaptation initiatives; research's results (60)

#

Interviews

Webinars Contributions to the platform working flow (43 participants) Communication and engagement stream (21) The AdaptaClima so far: validating and gathering contributions (9) Resuming the first year of project (30) Governance model (25) Intermediary version of AdaptaClima (22)

9

1

The AdaptaClima so far: validating and gathering contributions (9)

8

1

SL components and perspectives: validating the research results

1

1

SL components and perspectives: validating the research results

Procedures and practices; relations to the SL components; and barriers and lessons learned Procedures and practices; relations to the SL components; and barriers and lessons learned Additional interview: private sector practices: National Industry Confederation

179

The interactions were mainly with one key-informant per organisation, and the

180

organization had been previously identified as a key stakeholder by the steering

181

committee of AdaptaClima due to the influence and relevance in the adaptation agenda.

182

As the key informants were leading the initiatives of interest, and could reliably answer

183

all questions, it was not necessary to expand the group of interviewees.

184

The case studies were complemented by semi-structured interviews, which

185

aimed to obtain both retrospective and real-time accounts by those people experiencing

186

the phenomenon of theoretical interest (Rubin & Rubin, 2005). Whilst the interviews

187

held with stakeholders from UK shed a light on how the SL theory was deliberately

188

being put into practice and how it was considered in the decision-making process, the

189

Brazilian ones explored methods and procedures supporting co-participatory processes,

190

experience and knowledge sharing, trust building, as well as empowerment and co-

191

management governance models. These categories were identified as characteristics of

192

social learning throughout the literature review and workshops interactions. The

193

interviews also unveiled barriers and success factors both within the initiatives and

194

emanating from wider socio-technical context, in other words, contexts of their social-

195

economical structures of production and propagation of knowledge.

196

The participant observations (Yin, 1984) made by the facilitators (members of

197

AdaptaClima’s team) during the AdaptaClima Plataform workshops were crucial to

198

understand the different institutional views, perspectives and positions (of the

199

organizations involved in the project) on the adaptation agenda in Brazil and the UK,

200

including not just their role, but the roles that other actor should have, investment

201

priorities, etc. Furthermore, it allowed the identification of the relationships between the

202

organisations and individuals and capture how some experiences of SL practices were

203

employed by organisations in the group. A specific meeting with experts in climate data

204

in Brazil offered the chance to deepen the understanding on one of the SL pillars:

205

integrating scientific and empirical knowledge.

206

Apart from workshops, online interactions – webinars and remote consultations

207

– were opportunities to be in contact with a broader group of organisations involved in

208

the adaptation agenda in Brazil and in the UK, who also collaborated with the

209

AdaptaClima Platform project. Finally, observations made by a representative of the

210

project’s team during two public events informed different perspectives and practices of

211

adaptation as a learning process, including inhibitors and success factors of such

212

practices. It was possible to gather different perspectives because the events had about

213

80 attendees each, who had the chance to participate in round table discussions with

214

specialists, asking questions and commenting on the debate topics. Based on these

215

observations it was possible to complement the research on SL.

216

2.4 Data analysis

217

Three levels of analysis (as proposed by Yin, 1984) were covered: 1) key SL elements

218

were identified within each of the 18 initiatives studied; 2) cross-case patterns were

219

identified (Eisenhardt, 1989); and 3) these findings were tested in the AdaptaClima

220

Platform project experience - a two-year participatory process involving 35 key

221

stakeholders of the adaptation agenda in Brazil. The analytical process contemplated the

222

construction of a matrix where key elements found in literature were plotted and from

223

which categories were devised and further investigated.

224

Figure 2 illustrates the data analysis process through which new categories

225

emerged and others discarded, since they could not be identified in the practices

226

gathered from the documents, interviews and events observation.

227 228

Figure 2: Data analysis process from constructs to analytical categories Source: Authors (Nicolletti, Maschietto and Moreno)

229

This analysis also evidenced crosscutting elements that are needed in the

230

implementation of adaptation policies, which should be promoted on a continuous basis

231

throughout the strategy, program, project or initiative. This is the case of the facilitation

232

role within communities of practice (CoP), the promotion of effective equitable

233

participation and the bridging of scientific and empirical knowledge for example.

234

3. Climate Change Adaptation Public Policy as a Social Learning Process

235

The incorporation of learning processes into public policy is imperative within agendas

236

involving complex issues. The resilience of a community or organisation depends on

237

the combination of the strengths, attributes and resources available to prepare for and

238

undertake actions aimed at reducing adverse impacts, moderate harm, or explore

239

beneficial opportunities (World Economic Forum, 2014). In other words, it depends on

240

the development of adaptive capacity (Walker et al., 2012) which can be considered as a

241

communities’ capacity to learn, combining different types of knowledge to generate

242

new solutions as well as learning to deal with uncertainties (Armitage, 2015; Pelling et

243

al., 2015). Lastly, learning processes support the building of resilience in the face of

244

increasing complexity and uncertainty (Campos, Barakat & Orsato, 2016).

245

Once understood the context and the challenges posed by climate change, it

246

becomes clear that adaptation is a learning process. Public adaptation policy requires a

247

system that can continuously adapt, learn, and respond to incoming information about

248

new evidence of climate change impacts and vulnerabilities, as well as about the

249

positive or negative results of initiatives under implementation (Ranger & Garbett-

250

Shields, 2012). The role of public sector agencies is twofold, first adapting the way in

251

which public policy is designed to consider climatic uncertainty and complexity of

252

correlated actors and issues, while, at the same time, promoting spaces for learning

253

between different groups and sectors operating in their spheres of influence (Pelling,

254

2005; Pelling and High, 2005).

255

The promotion of this broad learning process in public policy in Brazil is still

256

incipient. So far, methodologies used to promote learning processes have been limited

257

to consultations and participatory activities with the parties involved. Information,

258

consultation, participation, and collective learning are different forms of including

259

social groups; the Social Learning approach covers them all and goes beyond (Collins &

260

Ison, 2009).

261

3.1 The Social Learning Approach

262

Amongst the various learning theories discussed in natural resource management

263

literature, the last two decades have seen significant contributions from the Social

264

Learning (SL) theory and approach for socio-environmental public policy, including

265

adaptation to climate change (Cash et al., 2006; Pelling & High, 2005; Reed et al.,

266

2010). SL is a process-oriented approach which proposes learning by doing and is

267

defined as a process of social change, in which people learn from each other in ways

268

that benefit wider social-ecological systems (Van Epp & Garside, 2014; Ensor and

269

Harvey, 2015). This is done via continuous collaborative work processes between

270

people who share a common purpose, and involves dialogue, exchange, action, and

271

reflection. From this SL process new knowledge and joint solutions emerge, leading to

272

changes in practice (Kristjanson et al., 2014). For teasing out the elements and

273

specificities of SL, it is instructive to consider four transversal dimensions, though

274

taking into account that they are interconnected in non-linear patterns (Van Epp &

275

Garside, 2014; Fisher et al., 2016; Van Epp et al., 2016): participation and mobilisation;

276

co-production of knowledge and development of capacities; iterative reflection and

277

action; and revision of institutions, norms and practices.

278

3.1.1 Participation and Mobilisation

279

A central element regarding participation and mobilisation for social learning is the so-

280

called community of practice: a group who share a problem and/or common interest and

281

interact regularly to deepen knowledge through the sharing of ideas, information and

282

tools, and seeking solutions based on the practice of social interaction (Lave, 1991;

283

Wenger, Mcdermott & Snyder, 2002). Communities of Practice can be organised by

284

subject, geographical scope, speciality or other common interests, also it is important

285

that these groups are formed by people who recognise one another as peers and are

286

willing to share their experience and take other’s views to rethink their own. Once the

287

group is constituted, it is essential to have an active and continuous process of mutual

288

engagement, strengthening of trust and respect between the parties involved, and

289

transparency concerning activities, information and decision-making (Pelling & High,

290

2005).

291

3.1.2 Co-production of Knowledge and Development of Capacities

292

In the social learning process, the knowledge obtained and built between peers through

293

social interactions support conventional instruments, such as adaptation plans and

294

information systems, focused on policy formulation and implementation. Thus, the

295

comprehension of a particular matter is often deeper and more efficient when it results

296

from the interaction of a community of practice rather than through training sessions

297

carried out by external specialists (Elwyn et al., 2001 apud Pelling & High, 2005;

298

Joiner, 1989). Also, learning flows from all directions and, in the presence of an

299

instructor, he or she also learns from the group. Moreover, empirical knowledge is

300

valued and treated as complementary to technical-scientific knowledge. Taking into

301

account a diverse array of information and perspectives, collectively generated

302

knowledge is more robust in dealing with the uncertainties of complex problems, as

303

seen in the case of identifying potential impacts and vulnerabilities based on future

304

climate scenarios (Fisher et al., 2016).

305

3.1.3 Iterative Reflection and Action

306

The process of social learning involves continuous cycles of learning, action, and

307

reflection (Fisher et al., 2016), with each cycle generating knowledge that feeds the next

308

cycle. The theory explores the concept of reflexivity, which means the act of

309

continuously reflecting on what has been learnt, in which manner, resulting in changes

310

on what to do and how to act, which can, in turn, lead to systemic transformations

311

(Cundill et al., 2014). Reflexivity can be further understood based on the ‘three learning

312

cycles’, which highlights actions, values, institutional norms, structures and power

313

relations. In the first cycle, reflection is about ‘Are we doing things correctly?’, from

314

which the existing routines and actions can be revisited and redesigned; the second

315

cycle reflects on ‘Are we doing the right things?’, resulting in a reformulation of

316

problems and objectives; finally, the third cycle reflects on ‘How do we decide what is

317

right?’, and can lead to changes in values, beliefs and even governance systems (Flood

318

& Romm, 1996). The last cycle of learning, therefore, culminates in ‘learning to learn’,

319

so as individuals and groups internalise the knowledge and learn to deal, collectively,

320

with uncertainties and complexity, gaining flexibility and becoming able to adapt to

321

new, unpredictable, situations, instead of only responding to specific events or threats

322

(Pelling & High, 2005). Hence, ‘learning to learn’ is directly related to expanding the

323

adaptive capacity of individuals, institutions and social systems as a whole. An

324

important discussion relates to the space these cycles of learning occupy within local

325

governments’ processes and structures and, hence, the chance they have to inform and

326

influence decisions (Van Epp et al., 2016).

327

3.1.4 Revision of Institutions, Norms and Practices

328

The complexity of the adaptation agenda challenges traditional paradigms for public

329

policy design and decision-making within institutions, making it necessary to reduce

330

barriers and increase opportunities for social learning, aiming to promote changes in

331

individual and organisational practices (Fisher et al., 2016). A revision of norms and

332

practices can arise from applying SL to revise institutional governance instances and

333

structures, as well as their values and cultural practices, this can culminate, for example,

334

in more democratic or co-management practices, in other words, decision-making

335

processes with active participation of interested stakeholders. This could bring about

336

opportunities for an array of social groups to influence public policy, beyond the

337

stakeholders originally involved, re-balancing power relations (Cash et al., 2006).

338

4. Integrating Social Learning into Adaptation Public Policies

339

There are several methods and tools available for planning and implementing climate

340

change adaptation policies (Margulis, 2017). The cases studied showed that

341

independently of the method used, the SL approach can be transversally applied,

342

offering the theoretical basis for connecting methods and activities, as well as

343

integrating certain key-elements for consistent adaptation into the process. This section

344

brings examples and references gathered from these cases to illustrate how this can be

345

done. Here the Adaptation Cycle7 is adopted as a framework representing the phases of

346 347

public policy implementation, into which SL may be integrated, as seen in Figure 3.

348

This framework was validated by 35 key-stakeholders of AdaptaClima Platform (2018),

7

Proposed by the authors, during the AdaptaClima project, based on Fischer et al., 2007 and UKCIP Adaptation Wizard (available at https://www.ukcip.org.uk/wizard/, accessed on 3/3/2019).

349

who emphasized that it was a good reference due to its simplicity and clarity. The

350

climate change adaptation policy cycle may be understood as a mere representation of

351

four major phases of a policy implementation cycle, which fits into an array of public

352

initiatives and organisational processes. The phases are: preparation and engagement;

353

impact and vulnerability analysis; planning; and implementation and monitoring.

354 355

Figure 3: Climate change adaptation cycle Source: Authors based on Fischer et al., 2007 and UKCIP Adaptation Wizard

356

The cases studied revealed a rich set of activities carried out by the organisations

357

and facilitators in Brazil and the UK to promote social learning (even though this

358

terminology was not used sometimes) in each phase of adaptation initiatives – Table 3

359

exemplifies some of these activities. The following sub-sections explore how the

360

transversal dimensions of SL could apply to each of the four phases of the adaptation

361

cycle and contain examples picked up from the Brazilian case studies to illustrate how

362

elements of SL assisted each phase.

Participation and mobilisation

(based on Van Epp & Garside,

Table 3: Examples of activities in place to promote social learning throughout climate change adaptation public initiatives Phases of climate change adaptation policy cycle (AdaptaClima, 2018) Preparation and Impact and Planning Implementation and Vulnerability Analysis Engagement Monitoring 1.1.Map actors (consider 2.1.Identify synergies 3.1.Define actors to be 4.1. Update actors map diversity, vulnerability and establish involved at specific before beginning new stages of the and influence) partnerships with points and throughout relatable organizations implementation implementation plan 1.2.Share experiences, (group may change over identify common goals, 2.2.Translate scientific 3.2.Communicate data into accessible (internally and time) set group agreements information considering externally) objectives 4.2. Continuous 1.3.Systemic map: relations and functions group context and planning engagement with actors: resume goals; reaffirm 1.4.Identify roles 3.3.Co-build action 1.5.Define plan’s objectives and group agreements communication methods; define 4.3.Frequent instruments and communication communication feedback processes instruments

Co-production of Knowledge and development of Capacities Revision of institutions, norms and practices Reflection

1.6.Capture participants’ understanding and perception of social learning and adaptation 1.7. Knowledge exchange workshop (e.g. Box 3) 1.8.Document and share between participants of the agreed definitions, mapped gaps and next steps

2.3.Capacity building on climate history and regional projections (translate scientific language) 2.4. Participatory map of territorial impacts and vulnerabilities (observational data) 2.5. Participatory risk mapping, analysis and prioritisation

3.4.Participatory planning: adaptive measures, paths to change behaviours and practices (e.g. Box 5) 3.5.Clarify doubts through research and knowledge sharing 3.6.Collective revision of planned measures and actions to guarantee common understanding

4.4.Instruct on issues or tools, as needed 4.5.Meet for information exchange on implementation 4.6.Re-adapt plan according to information gathered

1.9.Document the governance structure and decision-making process for the formulation and implementation of public policy. 1.10.Debate about institutional arrangements under which the adaptation agenda is inserted and how it relates to them

2.6.Analyse how the practice and policy of groups and institutions involved relate to present and future risks, impacts and vulnerabilities 2.7.Identify, from the group discussion, the needed changes in practices and policies that result or reinforce vulnerabilities

3.7.Clearly define shared responsibilities involving participants, with specific activities, indicators and deadlines 3.8.Identify relevant institutions to be in contact with 3.9.Appoint ‘ambassadors’ to connect initiatives and disseminate outcomes inside and outside of their own organisations

1.11.Promote individual and collective reflection on the process, results, and lessons learnt (meetings, questionnaires, etc.)

2.8.Promote individual and collective reflection on the process, results and lessons learnt through this stage

3.10.Promote of individual and collective reflection on the process, results and lessons learnt through this stage

4.7.Assess comanagement viability within the institutional context 4.8.Document the participating institutions’ changes in practices, processes and norms 4.9.Revise implemented and planned actions. Reflect upon barriers and opportunities for institutional change 4.10.Participatory assessment of the process and documentation of results and lessons learnt

Source: Authors (Nicolletti, Maschietto and Moreno) 363

The activities implemented in the adaptation cycle are context-specific and it is

364

up to the people involved to identify the best fits or create other possibilities based on

365

the four transversal dimensions of SL. Public policy must be seen as a set of dynamic

366

processes, that way suggestions of activities may function as support for reflection by

367

policymakers and public administrators on practices and actions lead and coordinated

368

by local government.

369

4.1. Preparation and Engagement

370

At the beginning of the public policy cycle, the participation and mobilisation element

371

of SL is crucial for engaging different actors and maintaining their active participation

372

throughout the entire process. This way, the feeling of co-responsibility for the policy

373

implementation is shared amongst all. This is the moment for one or more Communities

374

of Practice to be promoted, so one important step is to map relevant organisations and

375

individuals, including representatives of vulnerable groups, who are implicated and

376

interested in climate-related agendas, as well as individuals able to influence changes in

377

existing norms and practices. To effectively become a Community of Practice,

378

participants must be united by a common purpose and aligned on relevant concepts,

379

objectives of the initiative, its governance structure and forms of participation. In

380

regards to the dynamic of these Communities, it is worth highlighting the importance of

381

frequent face-to-face meetings as means of building a trusting environment for the

382

sharing of experiences, knowledge and data.

383

In 2016, the city of Porto Alegre, in Brazil, launched an urban resilience strategy

384

considering the stress and shocks to which the city was exposed, including those posed

385

by climate change. Early in the process, the reflection about resilience building and

386

vulnerabilities highlighted the necessity to deepen the participatory processes, from

387

participation to co-creation of the strategy. Over 500 people from diverse sectors were

388

involved and organized into Communities of Practice by territory and common

389

interests. The process had different levels of engagement, from consultation to joint

390

decision-making. As result, 17 regional plans action plans were created in different

391

territories to implement the common strategy.

392

Although participation increases the complexity of the project, there are many

393

advantages to a participatory approach, including: the generation of new ideas and

394

initiatives to enhance the resilience of different groups across the city, the dissemination

395

of climate change as a matter of public interest and the empowerment of individuals and

396

communities within the agenda. It’s important to highlight the legitimacy achieved

397

through the participation of the mayor, secretaries, and influential organisations,

398

essential for strengthening engagement and promoting continuous participation (POA

399

Resiliente, 2016).

400

Another lesson learned from this experience is that the communication channels

401

and instruments used should be defined and agreed between participants at the

402

‘preparation and engagement’ phase, because an ongoing functional internal and

403

external communication is fundamental for maintaining engagement, updating

404

information and gathering contributions from other actors and networks. In Porto

405

Alegre’s case, there was continuous communication via an online platform, but there

406

are other technologies available for collective mobilisation, which can support the

407

creation, documentation, exchange and dissemination of knowledge for and by local

408

communities, for instance, participatory geographic information systems, community

409

radio stations and learning alliances (CCAFS, 2015).

410

4.2 Analysis of Impacts and Vulnerabilities

411

Analysis of impacts and vulnerabilities require a combination of scientific knowledge

412

and empirical knowledge. The ‘co-production of knowledge and development of

413

capacities’ dimension of SL is crucial in this phase. In addition to the demand for

414

professionals able to analyse climate historical data and projections, it is also essential

415

to have access to observational data about impacts, risks and vulnerabilities mapped by

416

the different groups who live, work and visit the territory. This phase is also an

417

appropriate moment for creating perennial spaces for knowledge exchange and for

418

discussing about access and circulation of information.

419

An example of that is how the Amazon Environmental Research Institute

420

(IPAM) and Amazonian indigenous people have been working in partnership, learning

421

more about the anthropic threats and climate vulnerabilities experienced in the region.

422

Although indigenous peoples are more sensitive to changes in climate, they usually

423

don´t have access to scientific information. On the other hand, IPAM has scientific data

424

but not so much field evidence. To promote information exchange and co-production of

425

knowledge, IPAM has organised workshops where the researchers hear testimonies

426

from the communities and share scientific information about climate change relating to

427

the described experiences. The communities are registering information about events

428

and impacts via a mobile phone app created by the NGO. This information feeds into

429

maps located in an online platform, which helps to monitor eventual threats and

430

mobilise authorities8 when necessary.

431

This phase of the policy cycle brings the opportunity to engage more people by

432

providing training and building capacity on impact and vulnerability assessments and

433

mapping so as to enhance understanding of the importance of building resilience and

434

might contribute to continuous learning within the social system.

435

4.3 Planning

436

Mobilisation of relevant actors, co-production of solutions and knowledge exchange

437

between those involved in impact and vulnerability mapping and analysis lay the

438

foundations for the assessment and definition of adaptation measures to be incorporated

439

into a strategy, plan, or other public policy instruments. During this phase it is also

440

necessary to identify who will be involved in the execution, coordination and

441

monitoring and evaluation of the defined actions, as well as the instances of governance

442

and appropriate communication strategy to be in place. At this stage in the cycle,

443

existing Communities of Practice can be rearranged by theme, common challenge or

444

any other category that encourages collective participation. The knowledge built so far 8

A semi-structured interview with IPAM researcher was held in June 2017.

445

can gain new meanings and be applied to create innovative solutions. In Brazil, the

446

experience of the municipality of Santos is an example of planning for adaptation. In 2015, Santos hosted Metropole9 a research project focusing on the impacts of

447 448

sea level rise on real estate assets in the coastal city, which already suffers from high

449

tide and floods (Marengo et al., 2018). The hypothesis of the study was that the

450

understanding of climate change risk is best assimilated when co-produced, correlating

451

a scientific basis to social, political and cultural contexts. The existing tidal database

452

facilitated the research on coastal vulnerability and different future scenarios were

453

drawn for the municipality. Moreover, a survey was undertaken with civil society to

454

assess their perceptions on climate change and workshops were held for conceptual

455

alignment, whilst the attendees pointed out possible adaptation measures after inputs

456

from a technical-financial feasibility analyses. The participants included representatives

457

of NGOs, municipal secretaries, businessmen, neighbourhood associations, universities

458

and public agencies.

459

Metropole, and its mobilisation process, resulted in the establishment of the

460

Municipal Commission for Adaptation to Climate Change, responsible for the Santos

461

Municipal Climate Change Plan, launched in December 2016. Other outcomes of this

462

research were increasing the population’s awareness about the theme, involvement of

463

city technicians’ in the process and the expansion of the scientific community interested

464

on climate change in the region.10 As a next step for deploying the plan, it is expected

465

that the Commission and other formal and informal Communities of Practice in place

466

succeed in promoting the necessary changes in the existing institutions, norms and

9

The Metropole research project covered three areas, Santos in Brazil, Broward County in the USA, and Selsey in the UK. It was supported by the Belmont Forum and implemented in Brazil by Cemaden, INPE, FAPESP and UNICAMP. 10 The representative of Urban Development Secretariat of Santos Municipality was interviewed on August 2017.

467

practices, so that resilience building and social learning is transversal in the municipal

468

management.

469

4.4 Implementation and Monitoring

470

The implementation of the actions set out in the planning phase, as well as the required

471

changes, depend on functional participatory governance. Once again, it is the

472

incorporation of learning processes, empowerment of local actors, and coordinated

473

collective action that strengthens capacity for adaptation. Moreover, the implementation

474

process must guarantee moments of assessment and regularly-timed monitoring of

475

actions consistent with agreed implementation, monitoring and evaluation plans, ideally

476

considering the diverse perspectives of actors involved and implicated in the selected

477

adaptation measures. In this sense, activities for individual and collective reflection on

478

the process are an integral part of the adaptation plan and its results are carried out with

479

the objective of making adjustments during its implementation.

480

An enriching example is offered by Chico Mendes Institute for Biodiversity

481

Conservation (ICMBio), which deals with the great challenge of implementing a

482

participatory management model in the Federal Conservation Units in Brazil, promoting

483

social learning processes and empowerment of actors through the management of their

484

territory of influence (ICMBio, 2014). To do so, the Institute holds participatory

485

management courses and works together with a diverse advisory board to facilitate the

486

dialogue with society and co-design appropriate and novel solutions.

487

It is essential to ICMBio’s work that different types of knowledge and

488

perspectives are valued in the interactions with the communities, including monitoring

489

and evaluation. The results are based on participatory maps and stories of their everyday

490

lives and the collective discussions of these results offer a great opportunity for

491

collective learning11, even the name of this activity was changed from ‘feedback’ to

492

‘collective discussion of results’ to better reflect what actually is happening..

493 494

Table 4: Examples of initiatives in Brazil where SL elements were identified and their connections to Climate Change Adaptation Cycle phases Context

SL elements and practices identified Mobilisation; Communities of practice; Co-creation; Communication platform: Political legitimacy

Phase of Adaptation Public Policy Cycle Preparation and engagement

IPAM and Indigenous people partnership to identify threats to forest and climate vulnerabilities

Co-production of knowledge; Valuation of traditional knowledge; Capacity building

Analysis of impacts and vulnerabilities

Santos Municipal Climate Change Plan created in a multistakeholder process

Bridging scientific and empirical Planning knowledge by partnering with academia

Porto Alegre Urban Resilience Strategy mobilized over 500 people

495

ICMBio Participatory Participatory management; Management of Capacity building; Reflective Conservation Units dialogues; Joint solutions Source: Authors (Nicolletti, Maschietto and Moreno)

11

Implementation and monitoring

Interviews with ICMBio Research Support Coordination was held in May 2017.

496

5. Discussion

497

Currently, with the National Adaptation Plan (MMA, 2016) under implementation, the

498

adaptation agenda is beginning to gain momentum in Brazil, and the number of

499

municipal plans and strategies is expected to grow. It is also a worldwide tendency as

500

the impacts of the changing global climate are intensifying and the efforts to reduce the

501

greenhouse gas emissions are falling short (IPCC, 2018). As adaptation gains relevance,

502

it becomes crucial that the actions and investments towards higher resilience are

503

effective in both the short and long term. Low and middle-income countries have to deal

504

with the difficulties traditionally faced in the realm of public policy, which is

505

aggravated when combined with the challenges posed by the characteristics of the

506

adaptation agenda. Amongst the traditional difficulties, we highlight the gap between

507

planning and implementation of public policies and their instruments, short-termed

508

decisions, displacement and non-adherence to the realities and lack of resources and

509

institutional capacity.

510

Based on the two-year experience building the AdaptaClima Platform, the

511

repertories of 18 professionals and organisations in Brazil and the United Kingdom, and

512

literature review, we affirm the potential of the SL approach for supporting policy-

513

makers and public administrators to design and implement targeted solutions capable of

514

addressing the challenges posed by adaptation to climate change.

515

The examples of social learning practices that support the objectives in each of

516

the four simplified stages of the adaptation public policy cycle are: partnering with

517

multiple stakeholders; building and maintaining participatory planning, implementation

518

and monitoring, as well as reviewing decision-making processes; including iterative

519

reflection; and fostering the co-production and sharing of knowledge.

520

Regarding the specificities of adaptation as a wicked problem, we found that

521

dealing with uncertainty and managing several sources of information, disciplines of

522

knowledge and stakeholders’ views that are required to resilience building, are also

523

aided through social learning processes. The evidence from practice reinforced the idea

524

posed by literature of adaptation as inherently a continuous social learning process.

525

Therefore, assuming local governments as the immediate and closer governance

526

instance of territories, where climate change impacts incur and vulnerabilities are

527

rooted, it is crucial that policymakers and public administrators at this level comprehend

528

adaptation beyond contingency plans and disaster minimisation. They must realise that

529

the adaptive capacity of a socio-technical system is directly linked to its capacity for

530

learning and mobilising individuals and groups for action. It is not about short-termism,

531

but benefits are felt from the initial stages, in the first cycle of learning (Flood &

532

Romm, 1996), when a broader understanding on climate change adaptation is achieved.

533

For that, local government representatives may lead the collective process, convene

534

actors to be involved and coordinate efforts.

535

Furthermore, other two elements are worth highlighting from the experiences,

536

which were also identified as important by literature (Callon, 2004), they are the roles

537

of knowledge brokers and boundary organisations. Both act towards spreading what has

538

been learned and changes in practices and behaviours to other groups and individuals

539

who are part of the social system, connecting them to the regional and national levels,

540

hence collaborating for the adaptive capacity to be structurally and systemically

541

installed. While knowledge brokers aim at bringing knowledge to different realities in

542

an intelligible manner - as IPAM and ICMBio do by connecting climate change to

543

indigenous and traditional communities - boundary organisations link communities of

544

practice to other groups enhancing collective action – as Porto Alegre municipal

545

government did during the elaboration of its resilience strategy. Individuals,

546

organisations or even communication materials and technologies, like the mobile app

547

adopted by IPAM, can carry out these roles and act as facilitators. It is important to pay

548

attention, take care and encourage actors, both human and non-human (i.e.: technology,

549

documents and nature), to play both roles within the system (Pelling & High, 2005).

550

An obstacle to incorporate SL into practices is the lack of concrete guidelines for

551

promoting learning processes as part of public policy cycle. The literature points out

552

three main and inter-related barriers for the integration of SL in adaptation policy:

553

legitimacy, resources, and long-term vision (Bos, Brown & Farrelly, 2012). Building

554

upon that, the lack of support and priority given to the agenda reduces the availability of

555

resources, which in turn inhibits active participation of interested and implicated actors

556

and hinders implementation and long-term monitoring and evaluation. Two initiatives

557

in Brazil can be mentioned to exemplify that point: while the National Confederation of

558

Industry (CNI in the Portuguese acronym) has adaptation integrating its climate change

559

working group’s agenda, there is just one project on this specific agenda and others

560

depend on fundraising to be implemented. Reducing greenhouse gases emissions is still

561

taken as priority, especially by the top management. Another evidence is found in the

562

implementation of the Brazil National Adaptation Plan, which does not have budget

563

allocated for its actions and the initial efforts to monitor its implementation were short-

564

termed and delayed until after the presidential elections, which led to a transition within

565

the government, resulting in complete demobilization.

566

A way to get support and openness for elements of social learning to be put into

567

practice is to have support from social leaders, who endorse and legitimise the

568

initiatives. In fact, the very manner in which traditional institutional structures and their

569

practices and incentives work, combined with the mismatch between the timing

570

required for implementation of policies and the mandates of municipal administrators,

571

often limits the integration of social learning, as well as, the engagement of the various

572

interested actors. An example that illustrates that difficulty is the experience of Porto

573

Alegre Municipality: despite the broad participatory process undertaken for its

574

elaboration, when the government changed, and with it the priority public policies,

575

another pace and method were adopted for the implementation of the Urban Resilience

576

Strategy and a great part of the local and sectorial groups demobilised. As consequence,

577

decision-makers must adjust the SL elements to institutional conditions and existing

578

policies in their municipalities and seek creative solutions to deal with the lack of

579

support, short-term vision and resource constraints. There is no formula, but possible

580

paths are partnerships with other projects that have allocated resources or regional

581

arrangements, as inter-municipal consortia, public-private partnerships and international

582

fundraising.

583

The material threats to the process within the everyday dynamics of social

584

learning are the rotation of participants in communities of practice, lack of internal

585

communication in-between meetings, historical barriers to build trust relations and share

586

strategic information, as well as the influence of established and hardened social,

587

economic, and political relationships. Those threats are exemplified by the experiences

588

of Brazilian Forum of Climate Change (FBMC) and ICMBio. The FBMC is composed

589

of two types of participants, a group that continuously attends, and another that

590

fluctuates according to changes in the organisations’ teams or the individual’s interest

591

about a specific topic or meeting. This makes it difficult to build a cohesive group, with

592

the same level of understanding and hinders also the building of trust. Another

593

experience is the one of ICMBio working with traditional communities in areas of

594

environmental conservation, where the hardened unequal relations of power, based on

595

economic disparities, gender and age have to be softened throughout the process. These

596

examples show that such threats are interrelated and reinforce that a reflexive,

597

propositional and empathetic facilitation is a central component of the SL.

598 599 600

6. Conclusion This research was born from the authors’ experience of leading a collective

601

process designing a climate change adaptation knowledge platform to deliver one of the

602

NAP’s goals by integrating SL theory and approach into this process. The resulting

603

guide aims to aid others on how to integrate these elements into adaptation public policy

604

at local level. The AdaptaClima project and participatory process was the ground that

605

allowed a connection to be made with the selected case studies. Although this research

606

is placed and contextualised in Brazil, it feeds from experiences from the UK to bridge

607

an overall gap of SL and climate change adaptation literature. The goal was to

608

understand in practical terms how social learning processes can be designed and

609

fostered. This paper dialogues with the challenges faced in developing countries, as SL

610

showed to be crucial in face of the low priority assigned to the adaptation agenda and

611

the lack of institutional capacities of local governments to lead and implement

612

adaptation actions. In addition, it highlights the importance of effectively engaging a

613

wide range of groups and institutions, especially when dealing with the scarcity of

614

resources and capacities within organisations.

615

As many experiences were assessed, it was not possible to conduct in depth

616

analysis of any of them to further identify possible SL elements used and socio-political

617

dynamics of the initiatives. That is a limitation of the paper and, at the same time, a

618

possible path for subsequent studies.

619

620

Declaration of Interest Statement

621

The authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any

622

organisation or entity with any financial interest, or non-financial interest in the subject

623

matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.

624

References

625 626 627 628

ARMITAGE, D. (2005). Adaptive Capacity and Community- Based natural resource Management. Environmental Management. 2005 Jun;35(6):703-15. BOS, J.J., BROWN, R.R., FARRELLY, M. A (2012). A design framework for creating social learning situations. Global Environmental Change (23). Issue: 2. 398 - 412

629

BRASIL (2015). Pretendida Contribuição Nacionalmente Determinada Para Consecução do

630

Objetivo da Convenção-Quadro das Nações Unidas sobre Mudança Do Clima. Itamaraty.

631

BRASIL (2016). Plano Nacional de Adaptação à Mudança do Clima. Ministry of the

632

Environment.

633

CALLON, M. (2004). The role of hybrid communities and socio-technical arrangements in the

634

participatory design. Journal of the Center for Information Studies, Vol. 5, No. 3. (2004),

635

pp. 3-10.

636

CAMPOS, J. G., BARAKAT, S. & ORSATO, R. (2016). Social Learning for Adaptation to

637

Climate Change: Evidence from a Community of Practice. Academy of Management

638

Proceedings. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026618775325.

639

CASH, D. W., ADGER, W., BERKES, F., GARDEN, P., LEBEL, L., OLSSON, P., et al.

640

(2006). Scale and Cross-Scale Dynamics: Governance and Information in a Multilevel

641

World. In: Ecology and Society. Vol. 11, No. 2, Art. 8.

642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649

CB27 (2018). Forum of Secretaries of Environment of the Brazilian Capitals. Available at http://www.forumcb27.com.br/. CCAFS (2015). Social learning for climate resilience – Research in action. CCAFS Working Paper. CGIAR Research Program on CCAFS, Denmark. CNI (2016). Contribuição da Indústria à Estratégia Nacional de Adaptação às Mudanças Climáticas. Confederação Nacional da Indústria. Brasília, 2016. CNM (2016). Defesa Civil e Prevenção de Desastres: Como seu Município pode estar preparado – Coletânea Gestão Pública Municipal: Gestão 2017-2020 . P. 21.

650

COLLINS, K. & ISON, R. (2009). Jumping off Arnstein’s Ladder: Social Learning as a New

651

Policy Paradigm for Climate Change Adaptation. Environmental Policy and Governance

652

19, 358–373.

653

CUNDILL, G. et al. (2014) Social Learning for Adaptation: a descriptive handbook for

654

practitioners

655

University/Ruliv. http://hdl.handle.net/10625/52509.

656

and

action

researchers.

IDRC/Rhodes

ENSOR, J. & HARVEY, B. (2015) Social learning and climate change adaptation: evidence

657

for

658

https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.348.

international

development

practice.

WIREs

Climate

Change.

659

ETHOS (2016). Observatório de Políticas Públicas de Mudanças Climáticas do Fórum Clima.

660

FISCHER F., MILLER, G. J. &. SIDNEY, M. S. (2007) Handbook of public policy analysis:

661

theory, politics, and methods. Public administration and public policy/ 125.

662

FISHER, S, GARSIDE, B, VAN EPP, M, DODMAN, D, D’ERRICO, S, ANDERSON, S &

663

CARLILE, L. (2016). Planning and implementing climate change responses in the context

664

of uncertainty: exploring the importance of social learning and the processes of decision-

665

making. IIED Working Paper. IIED, London.

666

FLOOD, R. L. & ROMM, N. R. A. (1996). Contours of diversity management and triple loop

667

learning.

668

https://doi.org/10.1108/03684929610149747.

669 670

Kybernetes.

Vol.

25

Issue:

7/8,

pp.154-163,

GCMCE (2018). Global Covenant of Mayors for Climate & Energy. Available at: https://www.globalcovenantofmayors.org/

671

GVCES (2013). Relatório final sobre dimensões temporal, espacial e temática no

672

planejamento de adaptação às mudanças climáticas. Centro de Estudos em Sustentabilidade

673

da Escola de Administração de Empresas de São Paulo da Fundação Getulio Vargas

674

(EAESP/FGV).

675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682

HEAD, B. W. & ALFORD, J. (2013). Wicked Problems: implications for public policy and management. Administration & Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399713481601. ICMBIO (2014). Conselhos Gestores de Unidades de Conservação Federais - um guia para gestores e conselheiros. Instituto Chico Mendes de Conservação da Biodiversidade. IPCC (2001). Climate Change 2001 - IPCC Third Assessment Report. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: WMO; UNEP. IPCC (2018). Global Warming of 1.5 ºC. Special Report. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Available at: https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/. Last accessed: 09/12/2018.

683

JOINER (1989); ELWYN et al. (2001) apud PELLING, M. & HIGH, C. (2005). Social

684

Learning and Adaptation to Climate Change. Benfield Hazard Research Centre. Disaster

685

Studies Working Paper 11.

686

KRISTJANSON, P., HARVEY, B., VAN EPP, M., THORNTON, PK. (2014). Social learning

687

and

688

http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2080.

sustainable

development.

Nature

Climate

Change

4:

5–7.

689

LAVE, J. E E. WENGER (1991). Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation.

690

Learning

691

http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815355.

692 693

in New

York,

NY,

US:

Cambridge

University

Press.

MABON, L. & WOLSTENHOME, R. (2019). Climate Adaptation Competencies Scotland overview. Traction Project. Scottish Government, IIED and Sniffer.

694

MARENGO, J.A., MULLER, K., PELLING, M. & REYNOLDS, C.J. (2018). The

695

METROPOLE Project: An Integrated Framework to Analyse Local Decision Making and

696

Adaptive Capacity to Large-Scale Environmental Change: Decision making and adaptation

697

to sea level rise in Santos, Brazil. October 2018. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-96535-2.

698

Project: INCT-Mudancas Climaticas Fase II.

699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706

MARGULIS, S. (2017). Guia de Adaptação às Mudanças do Clima para Entes Federativos. WWF. MCTI (2016).Terceira Comunicação Nacional do Brasil à Convenção-Quadro das Nações Unidas sobre Mudança do Clima. Volume II, p. 103. NEUMAN, W.L. (2003). Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Pearson Education Limited. Seventh Edition. NICOLLETTI, M. (2017). Contributions of Social Learning to local public planning on adaptation to climate change in Brazil. Lund ESG Conference, 2017.

707

PEELING, M., Sharpe, J., Pearson, L., Abeling, T., Swartling, A. G., Forrester, J. & Deeming,

708

H. (2015). Social Learning and Resilience Building in the emBRACE framework.

709

University of York. Center Inf. Studies, 5 (3).

710 711 712

PELLING, M. & HIGH, C. (2005). Social Learning and Adaptation to Climate Change. Benfield Hazard Research Centre. Disaster Studies Working Paper 11. POA

RESILIENTE

(2016).

Desafio

Porto

Alegre

Resiliente.

Available

713

at: http://www.portoalegreresiliente.org/downloads/estratgia_de_resilincia_de_porto_alegr

714

e.pdf Accessed on 12/11/18

715

RANGER, N. & GARBETT-SHIELS, S-L. (2012). Accounting for a Changing and Uncertain

716

Climate. In: Planning and Policymaking Today: lessons for developing countries. Climate

717

and Development. Pages 288-300. https://doi.org/10.1080/17565529.2012.732919.

718

REED, M., EVELY, A.C., CUNDILL, G., FAZELY, I. R. A., GLASS, J., LAING, A. &

719

STRINGER L. (2010). What is social learning? Ecology and Society. 15(4): r1. [online]

720

URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss4/resp1/.

721

RegionsAdapt (2018). Initiative of Network of Regional Governments for Sustainable

722

Development

723

change/regionsadapt/.

724 725

(nrg4SD).

Available

at:

http://www.nrg4sd.org/climate-

RUBIN, H. J., & RUBIN, I. S. (2005).Qualitative interviewing (2nd ed.): The art of hearing data. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Ltd.

726

SANTOS (2016). Plano Municipal de Mudança do Clima de Santos. Municipality of Santos.

727

UKCIP Adaptation Wizard. Available at https://www.ukcip.org.uk/wizard/. Accessed on

728 729 730

3/3/2019. VAN EPP, M & GARSIDE, B (2016) Solving ‘wicked’ problems: can social learning catalyse adaptive responses to climate change? IIED Working Paper. IIED, London.

731

VAN EPP, M., BARIHAIHI, M. & FISHER S. (2016) Exploring the role of social learning in

732

addressing climate uncertainties in district planning in Uganda. Country Report, December

733

2016. IIED and ACCRA.

734

VAN EPP, M. AND GARSIDE, B. (2014). Monitoring and Evaluating Social Learning: A

735

Framework for Cross- Initiative Application. CCAFS Working Paper no. 98. CGIAr

736

research Program on CCAFS, Copenhagen.

737

WALKER, B. et al. (2002). Resilience management in social-ecological systems: a working

738

hypothesis for a participatory approach. Conservation Ecology. 6(1): 14. [online] URL:

739

http://www.consecol.org/vol6/iss1/art14/.

740 741 742 743

WENGER, E., MCDERMOTT, R. & SNYDER, W. M. (2002). Cultivating Communities of Practice. Harvard Business School Press: Boston, Boston, MASS. WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM (2014). Climate Adaptation: Seizing the challenge. Published by World Economic Forum, Geneva, Switzerland, 2014.

744

Websites and online platforms

745

ADAPTACLIMA (2018). Available at: http://adaptaclima.gov.br. Last accessed on

746 747 748 749 750 751

12/03/2018 ADAPTATION SCOTLAND website. Available at: https://adaptationscotland.org/about-us. Last accessed on 16/05/2019. CLIMATE KNOWLEDGE BROKERS webpage at REEP website. Available at: https://www.reegle.info/climate-knowledge-brokers-group. Last accessed on 16/05/2019. EDINBURGH CENTRE FOR CARBON INNOVATION website. Available at:

752

https://edinburghcentre.org/projects/scotland-s-2020-climate-group. Last accessed on

753

16/05/2019.

754

ENGAJAMUNDO website. Available at: http://www.engajamundo.org/o-engajamundo/. Last

755

accessed on 16/05/2019.

756

ICMBio website. Available at:

757

http://www.icmbio.gov.br/portal/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4607&

758

Itemid=999. Last accessed on 16/05/2019.

759 760 761 762

IDS website. Available at: https://www.ids.ac.uk/projects/global-open-knowledge-hub/. Last accessed on 16/05/2019. ILHAS INSTITUTE website. Available at: http://ilhas.org.br/novo/pt/top/programas-/. Last accessed on 16/05/2019.

763 764 765 766 767 768 769

LONDON CLIMATE CHANGE PARTNERSHIP website. Available at: http://climatelondon.org/lccp/. Last accessed on 16/05/2019. SOMAI online platform. Available at: http://www.somai.org.br/#!/. Last accessed on 16/05/2019. UKCIP website. Available at: https://www.ukcip.org.uk/projects/. Last accessed on 16/05/2019. UNFCCC. United Nations Climate Change website. UNFCCC Topics webpage, available at:

770

https://unfccc.int/topics/adaptation-and-resilience/the-big-picture/what-do-adaptation-to-

771

climate-change-and-climate-resilience-mean. Last accessed on 3/6/2019.

Figure 1: AdaptaClima Platform’s diagram Diagram presenting the social impact aimed, challenges faced and objectives focused by the Platform, as well as the outcomes comprising the AdaptaClima. Source: AdaptaClima Platform, 2017

Figure 2: Data analysis process Representation of data analysis process from constructs to analytical categories Source: Authors (Nicolletti, Maschietto and Moreno)

Figure 3: Climate change adaptation cycle Expresses the Adaptation Cycle adopted as a framework representing public policy phases, into which the SL may be integrated Source: Authors based on Fischer et al., 2007 and UKCIP Adaptation Wizard

Challenges • • •

Knowledge is fragmented with information that is difficult to access Great diversity of players provide and use information Gaps between research, policy and practice

Objectives • To systematize and to provide access to the information already available in Brazil’s agenda priority areas • To connect stakeholders that produce and use knowledge, encouraging knowledge exchange and building partnerships • Promote knowledge production in appropriate format to fill the gaps identified

Outcomes Contribute to strenghten Brazil’s adaptive capacity against climate change Social Impact

Web Platform

Transparent and participative Governance Structure

Communication and Engagement Actions

Constructs

Key elements

Central Categories

from literature

from the cases

for practice

Community of practice Experience sharing among peers Facilitation of the social process Active participation Scientific and empirical knowledge Reflectivity Cycles of learning Behavior change

Frequency of interactions Mobilisation and facilitation as crucial for participation Conflicts based on previous experiences and ingrained views Diverse sources of knowledge accessed Connections with networks and other groups The relevance of participation in decisionmaking for ownership Connections to particular experiences Willingness to act depend on level of involvement in building process Legitimacy of the key-stakeholders and leading organisation matters Continuous mobilisation and engagement Frequent interactions and technological solutions Champions of the theme- leadership ‘Translation’ for specific contexts Linking to day-by-day needs and interests Capacity and competences Community empowerment Co-production of knowledge Knowledge brokerage and network connections

Participation and mobilisation

Capacity development

Revision of institutions, norms and practices

Co-production of knowledge

Interactive reflection

Highlights

Effective climate change adaptation requires social learning processes. Climate change effects occur at local level, specifically in each territory. Municipal governments are a privileged instance to lead resilience building. The Social Learning approach can be applied across the public policy cycle. Some of Social Learning elements are already in practice in Brazil.