Suchergebnisse

Arme Länder treffen Stürme, Überflutungen und Dürren ungleich härter, weil sie ohnehin verwundbarer sind. Planerisch lässt sich dem auf verschiedene Arten begegnen. Erfolg haben Strategien aber nur dann, wenn die lokale Bevölkerung bei der Planung und Umsetzung ausreichend beteiligt wird.

Der Windenergieausbau an Land wird durch Proteste vor Ortoft verzögert oder gar verhindert. Finanzielle Teilhabe wird in diesem Kontext als Maßnahme diskutiert, um lokale Akzeptanz zu fördern, indem sie das empfundene Gerechtigkeitserlebnis positiv beeinflusst. Aufbauend auf dem Konzept der Energiegerechtigkeit wird in diesem Beitrag untersucht, inwieweit verschiedene Formen der finanziellen Teilhabe geeignet sind, um Kosten und Nutzen besser zu verteilen, um Mitsprachemöglichkeiten zu schaffen und um zu prüfen, wer finanziell teilhaben kann. Neben einer umfassenden Literaturanalyse wurden dazu Interviews mit Planerinnen/Planern und Betreiberinnen/Betreibern von Windenergieanlagen geführt. Diese zeigen, dass finanzielle Teilhabe in verschiedenen Projekten unterschiedlich gut angenommen wird und die präferierte Form der Beteiligung regional unterschiedlich ist. Außerdem erscheint keine Form der finanziellen Beteiligung dafür geeignet, alle Dimensionen der Energiegerechtigkeit anzusprechen, wobei alle Formen unterschiedliche Vor- und Nachteile haben. Die Ergebnisse zeigen daher, dass finanzielle Beteiligung allein nicht in der Lage ist, lokale Akzeptanz zuerhöhen. Sie kann aber in einem Maßnahmenmix als Mittel zur Akzeptanzsteigerung effektiv sein.

The measures implemented to adapt to climate change are primarily designed to address the tangible, biophysical impacts of climate change in a given geographic area. They rarely consider the wider social implications of climate change, nor the politics of adaptation planning and its outcomes. Given the necessity of significant investment in adaptation over years to come, adaptation planning and implementation will need to place greater concern on justice-sensitive approaches to avoid exacerbating existing vulnerabilities and creating maladaptive and conflicting outcomes. Building on recent calls for more just and transformative adaptation planning, this paper offers a flexible analytical framework for integrating theories of justice and transformation into research on climate change adaptation. We discuss adaptation planning as an inherently normative and political process linked to issues pertaining to recognition justice as well as distributional and procedural aspects of justice. The paper aims to contribute to the growing discussion on just adaptation by intersecting theoretical justice dimensions with spatial, temporal and socio-political challenges and choices that arise as part of adaptation planning processes. A focus on justice-sensitive adaptation planning not only provides opportunities for examining spatial as well as temporal justice issues in relation to planning and decision-making processes. It also paves the way for a more critical approach to adaptation planning that acknowledges the need for institutional restructuring and offers steps towards alternative futures under climate change conditions.

The measures implemented to adapt to climate change are primarily designed to address the tangible, biophysical impacts of climate change in a given geographic area. They rarely consider the wider social implications of climate change, nor the politics of adaptation planning and its outcomes. Given the necessity of significant investment in adaptation over years to come, adaptation planning and implementation will need to place greater concern on justice-sensitive approaches to avoid exacerbating existing vulnerabilities and creating maladaptive and conflicting outcomes. Building on recent calls for more just and transformative adaptation planning, this paper offers a flexible analytical framework for integrating theories of justice and transformation into research on climate change adaptation. We discuss adaptation planning as an inherently normative and political process linked to issues pertaining to recognition justice as well as distributional and procedural aspects of justice. The paper aims to contribute to the growing discussion on just adaptation by intersecting theoretical justice dimensions with spatial, temporal and socio-political challenges and choices that arise as part of adaptation planning processes. A focus on justice-sensitive adaptation planning not only provides opportunities for examining spatial as well as temporal justice issues in relation to planning and decision-making processes. It also paves the way for a more critical approach to adaptation planning that acknowledges the need for institutional restructuring and offers steps towards alternative futures under climate change conditions.

Complex policy issues such as climate change adaptation can be interpreted in many different ways, resulting in different assumptions about their purpose and goals. Using material from a qualitative study in the Australian local government sector, this research shows that stakeholders involved in local adaptation policy formulation often do not have a shared view about the meaning and purposes of adaptation, although such shared understanding is commonly assumed in adaptation processes. Drawing on the frame-research literature and current conceptualisations of climate change adaptation, we argue that subconscious frame divergence can present a major challenge for effective organisational-level adaptation. Conversely, making frames and framing processes explicit is a first step towards clarifying adaptation goals and generating shared ownership of adaptation processes. While frames have been shown to be intrinsically subjective, we discuss three dominant frames that emerged from the study: avoiding disasters, community resilience, and averting organisational risk. We evaluate these in light of their theoretical origin and recent application towards climate change adaptation. Our research suggest that the 'averting organisational risks' frame is by far the most commonly activated frame. Individuals working in the community services sector frequently referred to the 'community resilience' frame, while the 'avoiding disasters frame' was used in public and policy discourse to circumvent the arguments of those sceptical about the existence and causes of climate change. We suggest that, by incorporating frame reflexivity into existing adaptation planning processes, a more diverse range of policy options can be explored, delivering more effective adaptation policies.

In river deltas, human interference with regional and global socio-ecological systems has led to a plethora of gradual and more abrupt environmental changes that result in inundation, coastal and river bank erosion, land loss and, ultimately, displaced people. Often apolitically framed as protective, state-led transfer of people to new housing grounds, resettlement has become a common response to such displacements. In its process, existing arrangements of land tenure and occupancy and, at times more covertly, related arrangements of capital, labor and the social fabric become dislocated and reassembled. In line with emerging critical geographies of resettlement, this paper conceptualizes resettlement in river deltas against the background of environmental change as a highly political process with far-reaching environmental, economic, social and cultural implications. For this article is based on an in-depth review of both resettlement and political ecology literature, we first elucidate the concept of resettlement before providing a structured overview of categories and recent trends in resettlement literature. We then focus on river deltas that due to multi-scale environmental change are about to become hotspots of future resettlement. Building on identified gaps in resettlement literature, the article concludes with opening up three analytical strands of political ecology as entry points to resettlement studies, understood as critical geographic research into localized manifestations of environmental change in river deltas. Overall, our paper aims to initialize conceptual debate, grounded in a thorough review of recent case study literature on resettlement that is informed by political ecology. The review challenges positivist reductions of resettlement processes as technocratic-managerial tasks that so far have dominated scientific literature in this field and opens up new perspectives for critical research on resettlements in river deltas for human geographers.

ABSTRACTIn political ecology, violence is usually associated with conflicts over the control of natural resources. Up to now, political ecology has lacked a sound conceptual approach for analysing how violence that has its origin in political conflict induces environmental and social change. This article examines how the environment serves as an arena for exerting power, by using different forms of violence, affecting both ecosystems and the entitlements of the people who are dependent on natural resources. After a brief description of the role of violence in political ecology research, a conceptual framework for a political ecology of violence is laid out. In this framework, the notion of 'violent environments' introduced by Nancy Peluso and Michael Watts is blended with new approaches in livelihood research in which the political dimension of livelihood processes is emphasized. Case study material from eastern Sri Lanka, an area affected by prolonged violence and protracted conflict, is presented. This illustrates how violent struggles over environmental entitlements and the politicization of resource‐based livelihoods created alternative systems of power and control over natural resources and triggered new processes of disentitlement and social vulnerability.

Übergeordnete Konzepte und Strategien zur Anpassung an die Folgen der Erderhitzung sind weniger objektiv, als es den Anschein hat. Eine stärkere Auseinandersetzung mit den gesellschaftlichen und politischen Werten, die die planerische Klimawandelanpassung vor Ort leiten, tut Not.

The gales of climate change blow the future open and closed. In response, we are having to learn to live with a renewed notion of limits and a novel level of uncertainty. One emerging governance response is a turn to scenario planning, which generates narratives about multiple futures refracted out from the present. Like climate change itself, scenario planning, and the broader field of futures studies it is part of, is historically and socially positioned, belying its application as a mere method or tool. This paper discusses the growing turn to scenario planning within government climate change adaptation initiatives in light of parallel shifts in governance (eg, interest in efficiency and wicked problems) and adaptation efforts (eg, framed as risk management or resilience) and their shared roots in the ambiguities of sustainable development. It provides an extended introduction to a theme issue that provides, overall, a nested discussion of the role of scenario planning by government for climate change adaptation, noting how governance, climate change adaptation, and scenario planning all fold together the motifs of openness and closedness. This paper engages with the emerging field of future geographies and critical interest in future orientations to highlight the way society's growing engagement on climate change adaptation exposes, critiques, replicates, and amplifies our existing orientations to the future and time and their politically contested and embedded character. It points to the way the motif of open futures can be both progressive and conservative, as political and economic interests seek to open up some futures while closing down others in the name of the ambivalent goals of adaptation and sustainable development.