Author:
Van Cauwenbergh Nora,Giordano Raffaele,Le Coent Philippe,López Gunn Elena,Mayor Beatriz,van der Keur Peter
Abstract
AbstractThis chapter discusses the methodological approach for natural assurance schemes (NAS). We developed and applied methodologies and strategies to increase the readiness in technology (TRL), institutions (IRL) and investment/financing (IVRL) and illustrated them in contrasting case studies. To assess how readiness is crafted to effectively green water risk reduction and water security plans, we propose an integrated analytical framework that builds on participatory adaptive planning approaches. Through an ex-post expert assessment of NAS implementation in 9 case studies, we demonstrate how methodologies and strategies to increase TRL, IRL and IVRL can contribute to operationalization of NAS under a wide range of contexts and boundary conditions. Case studies have (1) varying biophysical conditions, spatial scale and vulnerability to water related natural hazards that require diverse NAS approaches, but also (2) varying readiness levels for implementation of nature based solutions in NAS. Institutional readiness is generated throughout the entire planning process, through a combination of joint assessment of risk perceptions and the institutional set-up as well as facilitation of awareness and agreement on responsibilities. Investment readiness is generated through the generation of the NAS business canvas and can be translated into investment plans built around the 5 business cases proposed in the Financing Framework for water security. We illustrate that for nature-based solutions (NBS) to be integrated in water security and climate adaptation strategies effectively, the NAS approach needs to craft readiness at all levels, tailoring an integrated set of methods and tools available through a collaborative process with stakeholders.
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Reference21 articles.
1. Altamirano MA, de Rijke H, Basco-Carrera L, Arellano B (2021) Handbook for the implementation of nature-based solutions for water security: guidelines for designing an implementation and financing arrangement, DELIVERABLE 7.3: EU Horizon 2020 NAIAD Project, Grant Agreement N°730497 Dissemination (1st edn)
2. Brugnach M, Ingram H (2012) Ambiguity: the challenge of knowing and deciding together. Environ Sci Pol 15(1):60–71
3. Eisenack K, Moser SC, Hoffmann E, Klein RJ, Oberlack C, Pechan A et al (2014) Explaining and overcoming barriers to climate change adaptation. Nat Clim Chang 4(10):867–872
4. European Commission (2013) Guidelines on developing adaptation strategies. https://ec.europa.eu/clima/sites/clima/files/adaptation/what/docs/swd_2013_134_en.pdf
5. Giordano R, Brugnach M, Pluchinotta I (2017) Ambiguity in problem framing as a barrier to collective actions: some hints from groundwater protection policy in the Apulia region. Group Decis Negot 26(5):911–932. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-016-9519-1