Suchergebnisse

AbstractToday the world is confronted with dual crises: creeping and acute threats unfolding at the same time—for example, the manifestation of extreme weather events such as drought and flooding and the creeping crisis of climate change. To cope with dual crises, this article develops a novel temporal perspective that offers policy actors a repertoire of interrelated strategies for enhancing the robustness of institutional efforts. The repertoire consists of five temporal strategies that policy actors can use to navigate the twin challenges of immediate and latent threats in conjunction: strategic coupling of short‐term shocks and creeping crises, crafting time horizons, molding the pace of public problem‐solving, mobilizing anticipatory capacity through futuring techniques, and adaptive iteration of policy decisions. We illustrate the practical application of these strategies in an exploratory case study of adaptive water management in the Netherlands.SamenvattingDe wereld wordt geconfronteerd met duale crises: sluipende en acute dreigingen op hetzelfde moment, zoals extreme weersgebeurtenissen als droogte of watersnood tegelijkertijd met de sluipende crisis van klimaatverandering. Om te reageren op duale crises, ontwikkelt dit artikel een nieuw repertoire van vijf temporele strategieën voor beleidsmakers om de robuustheid van overheidssystemen te vergroten. Dit repertoire bestaat uit de volgende strategieën: strategische koppeling van onverwachte korte termijn schokken en sluipende crises, tijdshorizonnen creëren, het tempo aanpassen van implementatie, het mobiliseren van anticiperende capaciteit door middel van scenariotechnieken, en de adaptieve iteratie van beleidsbeslissingen. We illustreren de werking van deze vijf strategieën aan de hand van een uitgewerkt voorbeeld van adaptief watermanagement in Nederland: de invoering van het programma Ruimte voor de Rivier.

Abstract
Background
Dual crises happen when an acute shock unfolds in the context of a creeping crisis. The July 2021 floods in the Vesdre river basin (Wallonia, Belgium) is a typical case of such dual crises in the context of climate change. This study is based on 16 semi-structured interviews (conducted in Spring 2023) with 10 mayors, 4 representatives of the Public Service of Wallonia, 1 person working for the federal government, and 4 project managers, coupled with a document analysis (n = 13). It investigates the temporal strategies that connect short and long-term considerations in the aftermath of this disaster (timing, futuring, pacing, cyclical adaptation, and determining time horizons), at two different governmental levels: river basin and municipal level.

Results
In general, the window of opportunity to improve disaster resilience has been seized. Several studies were initiated by the Walloon region that shape the idea of an ideal future for the river basin and give recommendations for how to reach it. Unfortunately, those recommendations still come late compared to the temporal reality of the reconstruction process. Municipalities wish to strengthen disaster resilience as soon as possible, but they have to prioritize certain actions over others because of limited resources. The recommendations are considered flexible enough to adapt strategies to future contexts, but no monitoring and evaluation system for doing so has been implemented so far. In addition, clear policy agendas with transformational goals are scarce, and they diverge between the river basin and the municipalities. All these temporal strategies are shaped by elements of the institutional policy arrangement: resources, which affect them all, as well as actors, power, and formal rules, which affect some. These policy dimensions notably slow down the implementation of disaster resilience strategies and limit the determination of consensual time horizons.

Conclusions
The temporal strategies are passively shaped by the policy arrangement dimensions to a greater extent than actively chosen by the stakeholders. A structural transformation of the institutional policy arrangement is therefore needed to enable more coherent temporal strategies between different governance levels and to facilitate the consideration of long-term resilience during the recovery process from disasters.