The framing and governance of climate change adaptation projects in Lao PDR and Cambodia

  • Louis Lebel
  • Mira Käkönen
  • Va Dany
  • Phimphakan Lebel
  • Try Thuon
  • Saykham Voladet
Original Paper
  • 36 Downloads

Abstract

This study explores the way climate change adaptation projects in Cambodia and Lao PDR have been framed. Four frames were identified: inadequate infrastructure; information deficits; limited planning capacity; and insecure access. In all frames, there was internal coherence among: the problems identified; the form solutions are expected to take; and who should be included and in what roles. All projects claimed to be addressing the needs of farmers vulnerable to climate change. The infrastructure, information, and capacity frames are apolitical and privilege expert knowledge, whereas the access frame places rights and justice issues centrally, and thus holds more potential for addressing the root causes of vulnerabilities and supporting more just distribution of resources and power. Framing can interact with how projects are governed, for example, through assigning roles to actors based on types of solutions prescribed. The extent and direction of frame elaboration also depend on how a project is governed. Meeting local needs and objectives, for example, is constrained when external actors have too much influence in project governing structures, and initial project plans written from afar are followed too narrowly. This study shows that frames are an important part of the governance of adaptation projects.

Keywords

Climate change Adaptation projects Frames Governance Discourse 

References

  1. ACIAR. (2010). Developing research options to mainstream climate adaptation into farming systems in Cambodia, Laos, Bangladesh and India. Final Report Canberra: Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research.Google Scholar
  2. ADB. (2012a). Proposed loan and administration of loan and grant. Kingdom of Cambodia: Greater Mekong Subregion Flood and Drought Risk Management and Mitigation Project. Project Administration Manual. Manila: Asian Development Bank.Google Scholar
  3. ADB. (2012b). Proposed loan and administration of loan and grant. Kingdom of Cambodia: Greater Mekong Subregion Flood and Drought Risk Management and Mitigation Project. Report and Recommendation of the President to the Board of Directors. Manila: Asian Development Bank.Google Scholar
  4. ADB. (2013). Proposed loans and administration of grants and loan. Kingdom of Cambodia: Climate-Resilient Rice Commercialization Sector Development Program. Report and Recommendation of the President to the Board of Directors. Manila: Asian Development Bank.Google Scholar
  5. Adger, W. N., Benjaminsen, T. A., Brown, K., & Svarstad, H. (2001). Advancing a political ecology of global environmental discourses. Development and Change, 32, 681–715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baird, I. G., & Barney, K. (2017). The political ecology of cross-sectoral cumulative impacts: Modern landscapes, large hydropower dams and industrial tree plantations in Laos and Cambodia. Journal of Peasant Studies.  https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2017.1289921.Google Scholar
  7. Benford, R., & Snow, D. (2000). Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 611–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bisaro, A., Wolf, S., & Hinkel, J. (2010). Framing climate vulnerability and adaptation at multiple levels: Addressing climate risks or institutional barriers in Lesotho? Climate and Development, 2(2), 161–175.  https://doi.org/10.3763/cdev.2010.0037.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bowen, K. J., Miller, F., Dany, V., McMichael, A. J., & Friel, S. (2013). Enabling environments? Insights into the policy context for climate change and health adaptation decision-making in Cambodia. Climate and Development, 5(4), 277–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cacciatore, M. A., Scheufele, D. A., & Iyengar, S. (2016). The end of framing as we know it … and the future of media effects. Mass Communication and Society, 19(1), 7–23.  https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2015.1068811.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Carter, J., & Sok, V. (2013). Cambodia community based adaptation programme (CCBAP). Programme Review. Final Report, Feb 13, 2013. Swedish International Development Agency.Google Scholar
  12. Christoplos, I., & McGinn, C. (2016). Climate change adaptation from a human rights perspective: Civil society experiences in Cambodia. Forum for Development Studies, 43(3), 437–461.  https://doi.org/10.1080/08039410.2016.1199443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. D’Agostino, A. L., & Sovacool, B. K. (2011). Sewing climate-resilient seeds: Implementing climate change adaptation best practices in rural Cambodia. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 16(6), 699–720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dahlgren, S., Christoplos, I., & Phanith, C. (2013). Evaluation of the Joint Climate Change Initiative (JCCI) in Cambodia. Final Report. Dec 2013. Stockholm: Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency.Google Scholar
  15. Dany, V., Taplin, R., Bajracharya, B., Regan, M., & Lebel, L. (2017). Entry points for climate-informed planning for the water resources and agriculture sectors in Cambodia. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 19(4), 1167–1188.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-016-9788-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dewulf, A. (2013). Contrasting frames in policy debates on climate change adaptation. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 4(4), 321–330.Google Scholar
  17. Dwyer, M. B. (2015). The formalization fix? Land titling, land concessions and the politics of spatial transparency in Cambodia. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 42(5), 903–928.  https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2014.994510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Eriksen, S. H., Nightingale, A. J., & Eakin, H. (2015). Reframing adaptation: The political nature of climate change adaptation. Global Environmental Change, 35, 523–533.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.09.014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fünfgeld, H., & McEvoy, D. (2014). Frame divergence in climate change adaptation policy: Insights from Australian local government planning. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 32(4), 603–622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Godfrey-Wood, R., & Naess, L. O. (2016). Adapting to climate change: Transforming development? IDS Bulletin, 47(2), 49–62.  https://doi.org/10.19088/1968-2016.131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. High, H. (2013). Laos in 2012: In the Name of Democracty. Southeast Asian Affairs, 2013, 135–150.Google Scholar
  22. Hurlbert, M. (2015). Learning, participation, and adaptation: Exploring agri-environmental programmes. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 58(1), 113–134.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2013.847823.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hurlbert, M. A., & Diaz, H. (2013). Water governance in Chile and Canada: A comparison of adaptive characteristics. Ecology and Society.  https://doi.org/10.5751/es-06148-180461.Google Scholar
  24. JCCI. (2013a). A guide to climate change response: A learning manual for Cambodian organisations and institutions. Phnom Penh: Joint Climate Change Initiative Cambodia and Partners.Google Scholar
  25. JCCI. (2013b). JCCI Newsletter #12. Aug 2013. Phnom Penh: Joint Climate Change Initiative.Google Scholar
  26. Jerneck, A. (2014). Searching for a mobilizing narrative on climate change. Journal of Environment and Development, 23(1), 15–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Käkönen, M., Lebel, L., Karhunmaa, K., Dany, V., & Try, T. (2014). Rendering climate change governable in the least-developed countries: Policy narratives and expert technologies in Cambodia. Forum for Development studies, 41(3), 351–376.  https://doi.org/10.1080/08039410.2014.962599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kallis, G., & Zografos, C. (2014). Hydro-climatic change, conflict and security. Climatic Change, 123(1), 69–82.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-013-0893-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lebel, L., Grothmann, T., & Siebenhuner, B. (2010). The role of social learning in adaptiveness: Insights from water management. International Environmental Agreements, 10, 333–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lebel, L., Salamanca, A., & Kallayanamitra, C. (2017). The governance of adaptation financing: Legitimacy at multiple levels. International Journal of Global Warming, 11(2), 226–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. MAF, & UNDP. (2010). Improving the resilience of the agriculture sector in Lao PDR to climate change impacts. Project Document. Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry Lao PDR and United Nations Development Programme.Google Scholar
  32. MOI, & UNCDF. (2015). LoCAL pilot phase in Cambodia. Final Assessment. New York: Ministry of Interior, Royal Government of Cambodia, and Local Climate Adaptive Living Facility, United Nations Capital Development Fund.Google Scholar
  33. MRC. (2014a). Local demonstration projects on climate change adaptation: Final report of the first batch projects in Lao PDR. Demonstration Project Series No. 1. Vientiane: Mekong River Commission.Google Scholar
  34. MRC. (2014b). Mid-term review of the MRC programmes: Climate change and adaptation initiative. April 2014. Vientiane: Mekong River Commission.Google Scholar
  35. O’Brien, K., Eriksen, S., Nygaard, L. P., & Schjolden, A. N. E. (2007). Why different interpretations of vulnerability matter in climate change discourses. Climate Policy, 7(1), 73–88.  https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2007.9685639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pan, Z., & Kosicki, G. M. (1993). Framing analysis: An approach to news discourse. Political Communication, 10(1), 55–75.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.1993.9962963.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Paschen, J. A., & Ison, R. (2014). Narrative research in climate change adaptation—Exploring a complementary paradigm for research and governance. Research Policy, 43(6), 1083–1092.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Phadke, R., Manning, C., & Burlager, S. (2015). Making it personal: Diversity and deliberation in climate adaptation planning. Climate Risk Management, 9, 62–76.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crm.2015.06.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. PLAN International, & ADB. (2015). Mainstreaming climate resilience into development planning—Civil society support mechanism. Inception Report. Manila: Asian Development Bank.Google Scholar
  40. Ribot, J. (2014). Cause and response: Vulnerability and climate in the Anthropocene. Journal of Peasant Studies, 41(5), 667–705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Roth, C. H., & Grünbühel, C. (2012). Developing multi-scale adaptation strategies: A case study for farming communities in Cambodia and Laos. Asian Journal of Environment and Disaster Management.  https://doi.org/10.3850/S1793924012100055.Google Scholar
  42. Scheufele, D. A., & Tewksbury, D. (2006). Framing, agenda setting, and priming: The evolution of three media effects models. Journal of Communication, 57(1), 9–20.Google Scholar
  43. Shanahan, E. A., Jones, M. D., & McBeth, M. K. (2011). Policy narratives and policy processes. Policy Studies Journal, 39(3), 535–561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Snow, D. (2004). Framing processes, ideology, and discursive fields. In D. Snow, S. Soule, & H. Kriesi (Eds.), The Blackwell companion to social movements (pp. 380–412). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sovacool, B. K., D’Agostino, A. L., Rawlani, A., & Meenawat, H. (2012). Improving climate change adaptation in least developed Asia. Environmental Science & Policy, 21, 112–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sovacool, B. K., Linnér, B.-O., & Klein, R. J. T. (2017a). Climate change adaptation and the Least Developed Countries Fund (LDCF): Qualitative insights from policy implementation in the Asia-Pacific. Climatic Change, 140(2), 209–226.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-016-1839-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sovacool, B. K., Tan Mullins, M., Ockwell, D., & Newell, P. (2017b). Political economy, poverty, and polycentrism in the Global Environment Facility’s Least Developed Countries Fund (LDCF) for Climate Change Adaptation. Third World Quarterly.  https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2017.1282816.Google Scholar
  48. Taylor, M. (2013). Climate change, relational vulnerability and human security: Rethinking sustainable adaptation in agrarian environments. Climate and Development, 5(4), 318–327.  https://doi.org/10.1080/17565529.2013.830954.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Taylor, M. (2014). The political ecology of climate change adaptation: Livelihoods, agrarian change and the conflicts of development. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  50. UNDP. (2009). Promoting climate-resilient water management and agricultural practices in rural Cambodia. PIMS no. 3867. 29 April 2009 United Nations Development Programme.Google Scholar
  51. UNDP. (2010). Cambodia community based adaptation programme (CCBAP). Project document. United Nations Development Programme.Google Scholar
  52. UNDP. (2012a). Effective governance for small-scale rural infrastructure and disaster preparedness in a changing climate (LDCF2). Project Document. Vientiane: United Nations Development Programme.Google Scholar
  53. UNDP. (2012b). Promoting climate resilient water management and agricultural practices in rural Cambodia. Annual Project Report 2012. United Nations Development Programme.Google Scholar
  54. UNDP. (2013). Integrated disaster and climate risk management project in Lao PDR. Project Document. United Nations Development Programme.Google Scholar
  55. UNDP. (2016). Effective governance for small-scale rural infrastructure and disaster preparedness in a changing climate (LDCF2). Project Brief. Vientiane: United Nations Development Programme.Google Scholar
  56. UNDP, & MONRE. (2016). Effective governance for small-scale rural infrastructure and disaster preparedness in a changing climate. Mid-term Review. United Nations Development Programme.Google Scholar
  57. van Hulst, M., & Dvora, Y. (2016). From policy “frames” to “framing”: Theorizing a more dynamic, political approach. The American Review of Public Administration, 46(1), 92–112.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074014533142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Weisser, F., Bollig, M., Doevenspeck, M., & Müller Mahn, D. (2014). Translating the ‘adaptation to climate change’ paradigm: The politics of a travelling idea in Africa. The Geographical Journal, 180(2), 111–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Unit for Social and Environmental Research, School of Public PolicyChiang Mai UniversityChiang MaiThailand
  2. 2.School of Ecosystem and Forest SciencesUniversity of MelbourneMelbourneAustralia
  3. 3.University of TurkuTurkuFinland
  4. 4.Royal University of Phnom PenhPhnom PenhCambodia
  5. 5.National Economic Research InstituteVang ViengLao PDR

Personalised recommendations