When Does Participation Add Value in Climate Change Adaptation?

Add a comment

Co-producing Climate Futures: Benefits, trade-offs and  design principles for participatory adaptation

Public participation in environmental decision-making is a legal right (1998 Aarhus Convention)1 and is further promoted as a basis for inclusive and representative governance (The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction2 and the Sustainable Development Goals – Target 16.73).

Following these commitments, participatory approaches in climate adaptation have expanded considerably, aiming to reduce vulnerability by strengthening adaptive capacity.4

Shifting away from top-down models by integrating diverse knowledge, values, lived experience, and agency into risk governance can improve both the legitimacy and effectiveness of actions.5

This raises an empirical question : does the evidence support this promise?

In practice, participatory approaches in climate adaptation do not always align with their stated goals6:

  • Symbolic inclusion: Outcomes are frequently measured by event attendance, rather than impact outcomes.7
  • Elite driven: Marginalized groups are often underrepresented.8 Maladaptation risk arises when participation is not inclusive and equitable in design and implementation.9
  • Early-stage and shallow: Engagement is clustered heavily in the early planning stages (implementation, monitoring, and follow-up remain underrepresented).6 It is often limited to information-gathering and consultation, rather than co-production of adaptation strategies or genuine power-sharing. 5

Participation should not be understood as a  discrete tool: not a ladder, but as a dynamic and iterative process shaped by three interdependent dimensions:

1) Boundary Conditions:

  • They collectively predetermine how deeply participation can realistically go beyond consultation (engagement frequently begins within pre-existing constraints).
  • When these conditions are supportive, methodological quality can help participation lead to genuine power-sharing and transformative outcomes.
  • Boundary conditions should be audited before any participation commitment. This sets realistic expectations and ensure honest practice.

2) Process Quality (Within that constraints, how well was the available space used?):

While classic participation models like Arnstein’s Ladder11 assume a linear progression toward empowerment, “wicked” climate problems demand a more context-sensitive approach driven by scientific uncertainty and diverse societal values. Ignoring deep-seated structural inequalities, conflicting values, and low trust, can cause public engagement to backfire (maladaptive outcomes and reinforce existing inequalities).12, 13

Adaptation value emerges when process quality supports genuine inclusion, power-sharing, trust-building, and iterative feedback over the long term. 8,14  Communities can successfully navigate complex climate challenges together through collective action, transparency, and trust-building.

 

3) Outcome Types:

Evaluation of participation should move beyond attendance14:

  • Procedural outcomes: Was the process perceived as fair, transparent, and inclusive?
  • Substantive outcomes: Did participation produce better-informed decisions or more contextually relevant adaptation measures?
  • Transformative outcomes: Were power relations altered? Was vulnerability measurably reduced? Did outcomes reach policy implementation?

Even where transformative outcomes are out of reach, participation can still add value through policy-ready, tangible outputs.

 

Participation can reproduce inequality as well as enable change, both are possible within the same framework. To raise what participation can achieve, three things matter:

  • Policy translation: Convert locally-generated visions into policy-actionable metrics institutions can act on.
  • Stronger evaluation: Co-design monitoring and evaluation frameworks to measure outcome quality (reporting, inclusion tracking, post-implementation assessment.
  • Long-term institutional commitment: Move beyond one-off projects and support long-term maintenance, while checking whether community capacity still exists after funding ends.

 

References

 

  1. Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental  Matters, UN, Geneva :. 1998-04-21, 28 p. At head of title: Fourth Ministerial Conference  “Environment for Europe”, Arhus, Denmark

Available from: https://unece.org/environment-policy/public-participation/aarhus-convention/text

  1. United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (2015). Sendai framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030. In: UN world conference on disaster risk reduction, 2015 March 14–18, Sendai, Japan. Geneva. Available from: http://www.wcdrr.org/uploads/Sendai_Framework_for_Disaster_Risk_Reduction_2015-2030.pdf
  2. United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (A/RES/70/1). United Nations. Available from: https://sdgs.un.org/sites/default/files/publications/21252030%20Agenda%20for%20Sustainable%20Development%20web.pdf
  3. (2022). Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009325844
  4. Komendantova, N., Erokhin, D., Scolobig, A., Bruley, E., Mattera, M., & Baldelli, M. (2026). Co-creating adaptation solutions: A critical review of participatory instruments in climate change adaptation laws and policies. Earth System Governance, 28, 100326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esg.2026.100326
  5. Ravazzoli, E., Lavarello-Schettini, R., Oberti, B., & Maino, F. (2025). Community-based approaches in disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation: An analysis of applied participatory processes. Climatic Change, 178(12), 225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-025-04078-0
  6. Hügel, S., & Davies, A. R. (2020). Public participation, engagement, and climate change adaptation: A review of the research literature. WIREs Climate Change, 11(4). https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.645
  7. Parsons, M., Godden, N. J., Henrique, K. P., Tschakert, P., Gonda, N., Atkins, E., Steen, K., & Crease, R. P. (2025). Participatory approaches to climate adaptation, resilience, and mitigation: A systematic review. Ambio, 54(12), 2005–2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-025-02202-z
  8. Cattino, M., & Reckien, D. (2021). Does public participation lead to more ambitious and transformative local climate change planning? Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 52, 100–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2021.08.004
  9. Uittenbroek, C. J., Mees, H. L. P., Hegger, D. L. T., & Driessen, P. P. J. (2019). The design of public participation: who participates, when and how? Insights in climate adaptation planning from the Netherlands. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 62(14), 2529–2547. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2019.1569503
  10. Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35(4), 216–224. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944366908977225
  11. Ostojic, J. (2022). Community-based Adaptation to Climate Change – A Scoping Review of Success Factors, Challenges & Lessons Learnt. Master Thesis, Division of Risk Management and Societal Safety, Lund University. Available from: https://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9103886
  12. Eriksen, S., Schipper, E. L. F., Scoville-Simonds, M., Vincent, K., Adam, H. N., Brooks, N., Harding, B., Khatri, D., Lenaerts, L., Liverman, D., Mills-Novoa, M., Mosberg, M., Movik, S., Muok, B., Nightingale, A., Ojha, H., Sygna, L., Taylor, M., Vogel, C., & West, J. J. (2021). Adaptation interventions and their effect on vulnerability in developing countries: Help, hindrance or irrelevance? World Development, 141, 105383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.105383
  13. Hurlbert, M., & Gupta, J. (2024). The split ladder of participation: A literature review and dynamic path forward. Environmental Science & Policy, 157, 103773. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2024.103773
  14. Sartorius, J. V., Geddes, A., Gagnon, A. S., & Burnett, K. A. (2024). Participation and co‐production in climate adaptation: Scope and limits identified from a meta‐method review of research with European coastal communities. WIREs Climate Change, 15(3). https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.880

 

Recommended Readings:

What is public participation?: https://www.epa.gov/international-cooperation/public-participation-guide-introduction-public-participation

Defining and understanding transformational adaptation at different spatial scales and sectors, and assessing progress in planning and implementing transformational adaptation approaches at the global level : https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/tp2024_08.pdf

Method choose in EU: https://actioncatalogue.eu/

 

Leave a Reply