February 12, 2022
Robert Burns observation that “the best laid schemes o’ Mice an’ Men / Gang aft agley” (go often awry) has relevance in climate change risk assessment and adaptation planning. The social-ecological complexities of climate change together with the human dynamics of adaptation work elevate the risk of best laid plans going awry and the potential for ‘maladaptation’. Barnett and O’Neill (2010) define maladaptation as “action taken ostensibly to avoid or reduce vulnerability to climate change that impacts adversely on, or increases the vulnerability of other systems, sectors or social groups” (p. 211). My observation is that the process itself of adaptation planning either amplifies or mitigates the risk of maladaptation. In the CALS501 design challenge we are developing a workshop prototype to help Albertans explore what climate change means to their community, identify adaptation approaches, and empower action. The following are reflections on maladaptation and risk reduction of relevance to this work.
The human impacts of climate change are “place and culture specific” (Reed & Kendrick, 2018, p. 6) and are differentially experienced by Indigenous and non-indigenous peoples (p. 6). When assessing climate change risks and formulating adaptative strategies, how does the exclusion of Indigenous voices lead to maladaptation?
Western models of climate risk assessments pose blind spots rooted in a cultural-economic system that neglects the interdependence of people and nature, elevates people over nature, and favours short-term thinking (Tuhiwai Smith, 2012, pp. 100-109). While adaptation planning solely derived from Western knowledge systems may provide near-term benefits for some parts of Western systems, Reed and Kendrick (2018) highlight that they may also promote maladaptation through failing to consider how these approaches may increase vulnerability and risks to Indigenous peoples (p. 13). They assert that these risks can be mitigated by early engagement with Indigenous knowledge holders to shape the risk assessment and adaptation planning process, and further by including Indigenous voices in the deployment of these processes (p. 8-11). While our class project did not allow for co-development with Indigenous knowledge keepers, we requested input on our prototype from an Indigenous advisor. One learning outcome was the potential to transform mindsets and enhance agency through the integration of Indigenous storytelling in the workshop process. Another was the importance of integrating guidance in our prototype on the protection of Indigenous knowledge from misappropriation.
Participatory community engagement processes comprise individuals with diverse values, worldviews and identities. Moser (2016) emphasises that such attributes colour an individual’s perception and interpretation of climate science, and subsequently the acceptability of potential adaptation approaches (p.350). Moser underscores that efforts to “bring into consciousness the momentousness of what is actually occurring” (p. 347) can give rise to both acceptance and resistance. Leaders of participatory adaptation processes may be faced with strong responses such as denial, disbelief, grief, and anxiety, which can pose risks to the participants and to workshop outcomes. How then do we mitigate these risks?
Climate communications research literature offers guidance on participatory climate action approaches that is of relevance to our prototype. For example, Moser (2016) recommends a set of strategies when communicating about climate change to lower the psychological defenses that may arise as individuals seek to avoid the discomfort associated with this information (p. 354-356). Framing is also highlighted as effective in climate communications (Armstrong, 2018). Framing refers to the “features of a message to evoke ideas and ways of thinking” (p. 59); for example, climate change health framing. Our prototype employs local framing which can help dimmish the sense that climate change is far away in time and place by “localizing the consequences and… giving personal, local meanings to global issues” (Altinay, 2017, p. 295). To mitigate the risk of being overwhelmed by the magnitude of the climate challenge, our prototype offers a participatory process that encourages dialogue to foster shared understanding, motivate self-efficacy and collective agency, and inspire hope (Armstrong, 2018, p. 60). Finally, to address the risk that participants may experience anxiety and grief, our prototype will include resources on eco-anxiety.
In climate adaptation planning, the process employed either amplifies or mitigates the risk of maladaptation. Including Indigenous voices in community adaptation planning initiatives promotes holistic thinking about climate impacts and adaptation approaches as well as outcomes that reduce risks to Indigenous and non-indigenous peoples. Climate change communications research literature offers insights to reduce risks within participatory community engagement processes. These include strategies to reduce psychological defenses, framing approaches to give local meaning to global climate change, and participatory dialogue to foster shared understanding, collective action, and hope. The complexity of this work necessitates pre-emptive planning to mitigate best laid plans from going awry.
References
Altinay, Z. (2017). Visual communication of climate change: Local framing and place attachment. Coastal Management 45(4), 293-309. doi: 10.1080/08920753.2017.1327344. (17 pages) https://go.openathens.net/redirector/royalroads.ca?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdoi.org%2F10.1080%2F08920753.2017.1327344
Armstrong, A. K., Schuldt, J. P., & Krasny, M. E. (2018). Establishing trust. Communicating climate change: A guide for educators. Cornell University Press. Ebook. (1 page) https://cornellopen.org/9781501730795/communicating-climate-change/
Barnett, J. and O’Neill, S. (2010) Maladaptation. Global Environmental Change 20, 211–213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2009.11.004
Burns, R. (1785). To a Mouse. Poetry Foundation. https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/43816/to-a-mouse-56d222ab36e33
Moser, S.C. (2016). Reflections on climate change communication research and practice in the second decade of the 21st century: What more is there to say? WIREs Climate Change May/June, 345-369. (24 pages). WIREs Climate Change 2016, 7:345–369. doi: 10.1002/wcc.403 https://go.openathens.net/redirector/royalroads.ca?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwires.onlinelibrary.wiley.com%2Fdoi%2Ffull%2F10.1002%2Fwcc.403%3Fsid%3Dworldcat.org
Reed, G., & Kendrick, A. (2018). Including Indigenous Knowledge Systems in Canada’s climate assessment. Including Indigenous Knowledge Systems in Canada’s climate assessment (02 -25-2018v).
Tuhiwai Smith, L. (2012). Decolonizing methodologies – Research and Indigenous Peoples (2nd Ed.). Zed Books. Retrieved from the Ebook Central e-book database*.