JDR Vol.10 No.3 pp. 404-419
doi: 10.20965/jdr.2015.p0404


Challenges of Implementing Climate Change Adaptation Policy for Disaster Risk Reduction – Implications from Framing Gap Among Stakeholders and the General Public –

Kenshi Baba* and Mitsuru Tanaka**

*Center for Regional Research, Hosei University
2-17-1 Fujimi, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 102-8160, Japan

**Faculty of Social Sciences, Hosei University
4342 Aihara, Machida, Tokyo 194-0298, Japan

December 26, 2014
May 22, 2015
June 1, 2015
consensus building, risk communication, website-based questionnaire, stakeholder analysis
Local governments are expected to play a significant role in making cities resilient, especially in reducing disaster risks and adapting to climate change. To obtain the relevant actors’ understanding and cooperation in implementing adaptation measures, it is essential that the potential framing gaps which may arise between them in terms of the impacts and risks of climate change be filled in. In this study, we have identified the framing gaps between stakeholders and the general public. We analyzed the questionnaire data obtained from the general public and the stakeholder data obtained by means of a case study carried out in Tokyo. We then integrated the results and derived three implications: i) it is effective to implement climate change adaptation policy that local governments obtain an understanding of multi-benefit of the the policy as well as climate change risk from the public through community-based groups, avocational groups and other organizations in the local community. ii) as for a firmly locked-in view of climate change policy that the policy means just reducing greenhouse-gas emissions, communication strategies for accurately explaining the relationship between adaptation measures and mitigation measures is required, and iii) as for the challenges of agenda setting for incorporating climate change risk into administrative plans, the department of the environment who is in charge of climate change policy is required to take a leadership in a coordinating function, for example, raising the awareness of other departments in terms of adaptation measures and providing them with scientific knowledge of climate change risk.
Cite this article as:
K. Baba and M. Tanaka, “Challenges of Implementing Climate Change Adaptation Policy for Disaster Risk Reduction – Implications from Framing Gap Among Stakeholders and the General Public –,” J. Disaster Res., Vol.10 No.3, pp. 404-419, 2015.
Data files:
  1. [1] Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: The Fourth IPCC Assessment Report “Climate Change 2007,” 2007.
  2. [2] The Ministry of the Environment, “Climate change and smart adaptation,” 2008.
  3. [3] J. Laukkonen et al., “Combining climate change adaptation and mitigation measures at the local level,” Habitat Int., Vol.33, pp. 287-292, 2009.
  4. [4] P. Kirshen et al., “Interdependencies of urban change impacts and adaptation strategies: a case study of Metropolitan Boston USA,” Climate Change, Vol.86, pp. 105-122, 2008.
  5. [5] K. Halsnaes et al., “Development and climate change: A mainstreaming approach for assessing economic, social, and environmental impacts of adaptation measures,” Environmental Management, Vol.43, pp. 765-778, 2009.
  6. [6] M. K. van Aalst, et al., “Community level adaptation to climate change: The potential role of participatory community risk assessment,” Global Environmental Change, Vol.18, pp. 165-179, 2008.
  7. [7] A. S. Alhakami and P. Slovic, “A psychological study of the inverse relationship between perceived risk and perceived benefit,” Risk Analysis, Vol.14, No.6, pp. 1085-1096, 1994.
  8. [8] S. C. Moser, “Communicating climate change: history, challenges, process and future directions,” John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., Vol.1, pp. 31-53, 2010.
  9. [9] B. Fischhoff, “Risk Perceptions and Communication Unplugged: Twenty Years of Process,” Risk Analysis, Vol.15, No.2, pp. 137-145, 1995.
  10. [10] S. Jasanoff, “Is Sciences Socially Constructed – And Can It Still Inform Public policy?” Science and Engineering Ethics, Vol.2, Issue 3, pp. 263-276, 1996.
  11. [11] T. D. Lowe, and I. Lorenzoni, “Danger is all around: Eliciting expert perceptions for managing climate change through a mental models approach,” Global Environmental Change, Vol.17, pp. 131-146, 2007.
  12. [12] K. Akerlof, E. W. Maibach, D. Fitzgerald, A. Y. Cedeno, and A. Neuman, “Do people “personally experience” global warming, and if so how, and does it matter?” Global Environmental Change, Vol.23, pp. 81-91, 2013.
  13. [13] A. A. Leiserwitz, E. W. Maibach, C. Roser-Renouf, N. Smith, and E. Dawson, “Climategate, Public Opinion, and the Loss of Trust,” Working Paper Subject to revision, Yale University, pp. 1-24.
  14. [14] E. Maibach, “Climate Change : Identifying Publics to Enhance Understanding and Engagement,” ICA-RUS Int. Workshop Tokyo, 2013.
  15. [15] B. Nerlich., N. Koteyko, Institute for Science and Society, and B. Brown, “Theory and language of climate change communication,” John Wiley & Sons, Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, pp. 1-17.
  16. [16] L. Flint, “Risk Communications on Climate Change and Variability,” Preliminary guidance for ACCA teams, 2007.
  17. [17] E. U. Weber, “Experience-Based and Description-Based Perceptions of Long-Term Risk: Why Global Warming does not scare us (yet),” Climate Change, Vol.77, pp. 103-120, 2006.
  18. [18] P. D. Chopwdhury and C. E. Haque, “Knowledge of the environmental risk and communication gaps between experts and the public: the case of climate change-induced heat waves in Winnipeg,” Prairie Perspectives, Vol.11, pp. 99-117,
  19. [19] R. N. Jones, “An Envionmental Risk Assessment/ Management Framework for Climate Chenge Impact Assessments,” Natural Hazards, Vol.23, pp. 197-230, 2001.
  20. [20] D. Etkin and E. Ho, “Climate Chenge Perceptions and Discourses of Risk,” Journal of Risk Reseach, Vol.10, No.5, pp. 623-641, 2007.
  21. [21] J. D. Sterman and L. B. Sweeney, “Understanding public complacency about climate chenge : adults’mental models of climate chenge violate conservation of matter,” Climate Chenge, Vol.80, pp. 213-238, 2007.
  22. [22] J. Doyle, “Picturing the Clima(c)tic: Greenpeace and Representational Politics of Climate Change Communication,” Science as Culuture, Vol.16, No.2, pp. 129-150, 2007.
  23. [23] S. M. Marx, E. U. Weber, B. S. Orlove, A. Leiserowitz, D. H. Kranz, C. Roncoli, and J. Phillips, “Communication and mental processes :Experiential and analytic processing of uncertain climate information,” Global Environmental Change, Vol.17, pp. 47-58, 2007.
  24. [24] A. Patt and S. Dessai, “Communicating uncertainty : lessons learned and suggestions for climate change assessment,” C. R. Geoscience, Vol.337, pp. 425-441, 2005.
  25. [25] S. A. Nicholson-Cole, “Representing climate change futures: a critique on the use of images for visual communication,Computers,” Environment and Urban Systems, Vol.29, pp. 255-273, 2005.
  26. [26] L. Susskind and J. Thomas-Larmar, “Conducting a Conflict Assessment,” Consensus Building Handbook, pp. 99-136, 1999.
  27. [27] D. Stone, “Policy Paradox: The art of political decision making,” W. W. Norton, 1997.
  28. [28] J. Kingdon, “Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies,” Little Brown, 1984.
  29. [29] D. Yanow, “Conducting Interpretive Policy Analysis,” Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2000.
  30. [30] F. Fischer, “Reframing Public Policy: Discursive politics and deliberative practices,” Oxford University Press, 2003.
  31. [31] N. Mimura, “The challenges and situation of climate change adaptation,” Global Environmet, Vol.11, No.1, pp. 103-110, 2006.
  32. [32] M. Yano, “Risk management systems,” Osaka University Press, 2009.
  33. [33] K. Baba, “A View on Fairness in NIMBY Facility Siting Process – Primary Considerations in Evaluation Framework for Public Participation concerning Distributive Justice and Procedural Justice –,” Japanese Journal of City Planning, Vol.37, pp. 295-300, 2002.
  34. [34] K. Baba, “Each Actor’s Role on Decision Making Process – Examining a Possibility of Hybrid Public Participation on NIMBY Facility Siting Issue –,” Japanese Journal of City Planning, Vol.38, pp. 217-222, 2003.
  35. [35] T. R. Tyler and P. Degoy, “Collective Restraint in Social Procedural Justice and Social Identification Effects on Support for Authorities,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol.69, No.3, pp.482-497, 1995.
  36. [36] T. Webler, ““Right” Discourse in Citizen Participation: An Evaluative Yardstick,” Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation: Evaluating Models for Environmental Discourse, pp. 35-86, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1995.
  37. [37] O. Renn, “The Challenge of Integrating Deliberation and Expertise: Participation and Discourse in Risk Management,” RISK and Governance, 2000.
  38. [38] T. Yamagishi, “Structure of trust,” University of Tokyo Prress, 1998.
  39. [39] K. Nakayachi and Cvetkovich, “Trust to risk management organization; Integration of the SVS model and the traditional trust model,” Japanese Journal of social psychology, Vol.23, No.3, pp. 259-268, 2008.
  40. [40] New York City Panel on Climate Change, “Climate Change Adaptation in New York City: Building a Risk Management Response,” Wiley-Blackwell, 2010.
  41. [41] ICLEI USA, The Process Behind PlaNYC, 2010, gov/html/planyc2030/downloads/pdf/icleitextunderscore planyctextunderscore casetextunderscore study textunderscore 201004.pdf [accessed May 26, 2015]
  42. [42] Department for Communities and Local Government, “Climate Change Communication Strategy A West Sussex Case Study,” limateCommunication s%20Strategy.pdf [accessed May 26, 2015]
  43. [43] R. Shaw, J. M. Pulhin, and J. J. Pereira, “Climate Change Adaptation and Disaster Risk Reduction: Overview of Issues and Challenges,” Climate Change Adaptation and Disaster Risk Reduction, Issues and Challenges, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp. 1-19, 2010.
  44. [44] S. Mehrotra, C. Rosenzweig, W. D. Solecki, C. E. Natenzon, A. Omojola, R. Folorunsho, and J. Gilbridge, “Cities, disasters, and climate risk. Climate Change and Cities: First Assessment Report of the Urban Climate Change Research Network,” Cambridge University Press, pp. 15-42, 2011.
  45. [45] S. Nagamatsu, “Approach to disater risk reduction policy,” Kobundo Press, 2008.
  46. [46] K. Aoki, “A potentiality of policy diffusion of Tokyo Metropolitan Government’s obligation on total volume control of CO2 emission and institution of emission trading – From the perspective of mechanizm of consensus building in local governments’ policy process –,” Japanese Journal of Environmental Sciences, Vol.23, No.4, pp. 321-331, 2010.

*This site is desgined based on HTML5 and CSS3 for modern browsers, e.g. Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge, Opera.

Last updated on Apr. 05, 2024