In recent years, the manifestation of the effects of climate change in coastal zones has prompted governments to mobilize and propose adaptation measures to reduce the vulnerability of their populations. For the governments responsible for the implementation of climate policies, adaptation still represents a novel field of action. The purpose of this paper is to show, via the example of Quebec’s coastal zone, how the transformation of public action relating to adaptation remains difficult.
For this case study, a qualitative method which combines documentary analysis and semi-directed interviews was selected.
The study shows how adaptation becomes a new issue in public action for the different authorities dealing with the effects of climate change in Quebec’s coastal zone. However, the results show that, as with other public policies, path dependence and incrementalism can be observed and limit the scope of public action and of the transformational processes in the field of adaptation. The technical–scientific approach to risk management is dominant, and the adaptation is not approached in a transversal way, despite its importance. Finally, concrete adaptation initiatives appear to be mostly relegated to the local scale, in an informal decentralization process.
This study contributes to improve climate action by favouring a reflection on the consideration of the conceptual and theoretical framework in the climate change adaptation literature and offers decision-makers and practitioners keys to the understanding of mechanisms underlying public action in the field of adaptation.
1. Introduction
Adaptation, while being a response to the impacts of climate change since the early 1990s (IPCC, 1990), remains a concept with various interpretations depending on scientific disciplines and postures. For a long time, adaptation was simply viewed as an adjustment of socio-ecological systems to climate impacts (IPCC, 2001). Nowadays, it is viewed more as a process of transformation of those systems via the concept of transformational adaptation (IPCC, 2014).
For the governments responsible for the implementation of climate policies (mitigation and adaptation), adaptation remains a novel field of action, even though it has been discussed for over 25 years now. A great deal of literature has been devoted to the obstacles to adaptation over recent years (Adger et al., 2010; Nielsen and Reenberg, 2010; Lorenzoni et al., 2007). Originating from geography or environment sciences, this literature rarely resorts to the theoretical framework and analytical methods of political science to explain the difficulties encountered in the implementation of adaptation, even though it is well known that any change in public action, not only in the case of climate change, contains stumbling blocks and is often limited. The study of adaptation in Quebec’s coastal zone (Lamari and Jacob, 2015; Boyer Villemaire et al., 2015) singles out these limitations, without specifically being a study on change in public action and on the process of transformational adaptation. This article, however, considers adaptation as a public policy and is grounded in the field of political sciences. The text aims to analyse the difficulties of public action transformation in the field of adaptation using the example of Quebec’s coastal zone. This can contribute to improved public action by favouring a reflection on the consideration of the theoretical framework and concepts of the climate change literature. With the addition of an empirical study to the scientific literature in the field, this article will contribute to the development of the reflection of social sciences on the climate issue.
After presenting the theoretical and conceptual framework underlying the proposed analysis, this article will explain the relevance of Quebec as a case study, as well as the methodology used. The results illustrate the construction of adaptation as a public policy in Quebec and the limits of the integration of adaptation in the governance structures. Finally, the conclusion offers a discussion of the transformation process of public action modes.
2. Theoretical and conceptual framework
2.1 Planned adaptation: a governmental responsibility
Planned or organized adaptation is the result of political decisions made by the public sector (IPCC, 2001), based on the realization that the living conditions of societies change – or have been altered – and that action is necessary to reduce losses or to profit from opportunities. The term “planned or organized adaptation” includes all actions undertaken by the governments, including legislation, regulations and incentives, to favour evolutions within socio-economic systems, allowing them to ultimately reduce their vulnerability to climate change (Burton et al., 2002). In this context, organized adaptation is considered a public policy, with the main objectives being protecting the most vulnerable by addressing the main causes of vulnerability; providing information to non-governmental actors to plan and stimulate adaptation; protecting public goods such as ecosystem services, public resources or the coastal zone; and devising early warning systems to predict extreme weather events (Tompkins et al., 2010).
According to Klein[1], adaptation is generally reactive, undertaken in reaction to current or past events. But adaptation can also be anticipated, based on an assessment of future conditions, although that approach is not easily implemented in practice.
This article considers planned adaptation as adaptation resulting from actions undertaken by public authorities (plans, strategies, targeted action program, regulation, legislation, incentives, etc). and favouring anticipatory measures over reactive measures. Transformational adaptation favours a long-term vision of actions to be undertaken, as opposed to a short-term vision, in which reactive measures are more common (Lonsdale et al., 2015). It has been demonstrated that reactive actions by the state, such as protective measures which are very common in coastal zones, tend to exacerbate the vulnerability in the long term (Bernatchez and Fraser, 2012) and contribute to maladaptation (Barnett and O’Neill, 2010).
2.2 Incrementalism, transformation and change in public action
One aspect of the analysis of public policies is looking at changes in public action and at factors that favour it or make it more difficult.
In his work on social protection, Pierson (2000) shows that choices linked to public policies are constrained by choices made in the past, creating a positive feedback, or self-reinforcement, known as path dependence. Thus, present choices and future options are locked in by choices previously made. The pursuit of the same path is perceived as less costly, from a cognitive and a material point of view, than choosing a new option.
It is often difficult to describe change in public action, and it can be “symbolic before it is concrete” (Hassenteufel, 2009, p. 226). What is the intensity of change? Is it rapid, radical or gradual? The work of Vlassopoulos (2013) on atmospheric pollution demonstrates that certain variables – in particular, ideas (the definition of the problem), actors and the content of the policies (the measures) – evolve at a different pace and with varying intensity. For example, an abrupt change in ideas does not necessarily entail changes in public action, because of the presence of practices already in place before the change in ideas; the author refers to this as “a double speed policy change” (Vlassopoulos, 2013, p. 6).
As in other areas of public policy, adaptation policies can be constrained by the inertia of institutions, a culture of risk denial (Tompkins et al., 2010) and power relations between interest groups and between institutions (Noblet, 2015). Furthermore, adaptation is not uncoupled from other decisions, but is, rather, embedded, like any policy, in a demographic context, in cultural and economic changes, in the transformation of information technologies, in global governance, in social conventions and in the globalization of capital and labour fluxes (Adger et al., 2005).
Recent research on environmental change points out that concepts underlying the adaptation process, and in particular risk management, rely on déjà-vu and on pre-existing practices and thought patterns (Bassett and Fogelman, 2013). These modes of action rely mainly on technical solutions and a relationship with nature based on dominance (Beck, 2008; Descola, 2005; Latour, 1991). In addition, Wise et al. (2014) conclude that adaptation measures implemented to date tend to be incremental and not inscribed in a process of transformation of modes of action.
Incrementalism in the field of public policies refers to the idea that, in most cases, public action evolves in a gradual manner through a “mechanism of small steps” (Jönsson, 2010). Authorities implement marginal changes that allow for maintenance of continuity, and thereby the status quo.
In a climate change perspective, incremental adaptation describes a situation in which the system continues to function as before, despite the climate risks and hazards, and struggles to integrate new information (IPCC, 2014). Transformation, on the other hand, describes:
[…] a discrete process that fundamentally (but not necessarily irreversibly) results in change in the biophysical, social, or economic components of a system from one form, function or location (state) to another, thereby enhancing the capacity for desired values to be achieved given perceived or real changes in the present or future environment (Park et al., 2012).
2.3 Mainstreaming
This article shows in which way change in public action can be of limited scope in the context of climate change. Mainstreaming (Dalal-Clayton and Bass, 2009) brings a particular focus in this respect. The tight link between the vulnerability to climate change and the socio-economic, demographic, territorial and other components of socio-ecological systems strongly advocates for the integration of adaptation in the respective sectorial policies. The elaboration of adaptation policies isolated from their context is strongly criticized, and mainstreaming aims at devising integrated strategies, formulating more efficient solutions and catalysing institutional changes which favour adaptation (Dalal-Clayton and Bass, 2009). However, just like the concept of sustainable development, the implementation of mainstreaming constitutes an important challenge for institutional practices, more geared towards a sectorial approach, the segregation of actors and a delimitation of respective competences of the different government agencies (Huq et al., 2003). Mainstream is adopted as a methodological framework here, and it will help determine how adaptation is taken into account and integrated in the policies of every examined ministry.
Through the use of public policy analysis, its concepts (path dependence, incrementalism, change in public action) and literature specific to climate change, the text will address the following research questions:
How does adaptation impose itself as a new issue for public action for authorities in coastal zones?
To what point are planned adaptation actions inscribed in a process of radical transformation of modes of public action?
Answers to these questions will be elaborated on through the example of Quebec’s coastal zone.
3. Case study and method
3.1 Case study: adaptation to climate change and public policies in Quebec
Our analysis is limited to the province of Quebec, and its object is the management of the terrestrial portion of the coastal zone, which is of provincial jurisdiction[2]. The province of Quebec is situated in the eastern part of Canada and has an extensive coastline, much of which is highly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. The maritime region of Quebec consists of 3,600 km of coastline, divided amongst the middle, lower and maritime portions of the estuary of the Saint Lawrence River, part of the Gulf of Saint Lawrence and the Chaleur Bay (Boyer Villemaire et al., 2015). Almost 60 per cent of Quebec’s coastal zone is affected by coastal erosion (Drejza et al., 2011), and 90 per cent of the population of the province lives along the banks of the Saint Lawrence river, estuary and gulf, less than 5 km from the shore (Bourque and Simonet, 2008). Furthermore, the repercussions of climate change lead to an increase in erosion and submersion risks, because of an increase in sea levels (especially in the southern part of the Gulf of Saint Lawrence), the decrease in sea ice cover near the shore and the variability of storms (Ouranos, 2015). The Government of Quebec pays special attention to the coastal zone because of the longstanding chronic erosion problem. The future costs caused by the adverse impacts of climate change on the coastal zone are estimated at least CAN$900m by 2065 (Ouranos, 2015). Numerous government actions have been undertaken in recent decades to improve coastal zone management and confront the increased risks that the coastal zone faces (Boyer Villemaire et al., 2015). This context makes Quebec an excellent case study for the analysis of adaptation policies in the coastal zone.
3.2 Method
For this case study[3], a qualitative method which combines documentary analysis and semi-directed interviews was selected.
As a transversal and multi-scalar question, adaptation in coastal zones mobilizes several stakeholder (public, private, NGOs) and several levels of government. This article focuses on public authorities and the main ministries identified by the state as being responsible for the coastal zone. Several governance issues characterize adaptation in the coastal zone: spatial planning, which implicates the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Land Occupancy (Ministère des Affaires municipales et de l'Organisation du Territoire, MAMROT); risk prevention and reduction and the safety of the population, under the responsibility of the Ministry of Public Safety (Ministère de la Sécurité publique, MSP); maintenance and safety of the road infrastructure, through the Ministry of Transport (Ministère des Transports, MTQ); and conservation and protection of biodiversity and coastal ecosystems, which is the responsibility of the Ministry of Sustainable Development, Environment, and Climate Change (Ministère du Développement durable, de l'Environnement et de la Lutte contre les changements climatiques, MDDELCC). There are, of course, other aspects of adaptation to climate change in the coastal zone, such as public health issues. However, actions in this field are undertaken on a regional scale[4], which do not fall within the scope of our study, which focuses on centralized government action, excluding the regional and local (municipal) level.
To explore the integration of the adaptation dimension in government policies, we performed a documentary analysis of the corpus of administrative and regulatory documents (n = 40) of the main agencies regarding their activity in the coastal zone. The corpus consists of strategic plans, policies and legislations currently in place. The documentary analysis starts from 2000[5] and proceeds by keyword search, using the keyword “adaptation” in association with “climate change.” In addition, semi-directed interviews were conducted with key civil servants responsible for adaptation and the coastal territory in the respective ministries (n = 14).
4. Results
4.1 Adaptation in Quebec: construction of public policy
The case study illustrates how adaptation as a public policy evolved over time in Quebec. In the 1990s, two major events (the Saguenay Flood in 1996 and the 1998 Ice Storm) seemed to alert public authorities to the vulnerability of Quebec’s society to extreme meteorological events. The Government of Quebec became aware of the fact that this vulnerability could increase as a consequence of climate change, especially because Quebec authorities have considered coastal erosion as an important and chronic problem since the 1980s. Therefore, even though there is no fundamentally new problem in the coastal zone, climate change reactivated the state’s reaction to an existing problem and the realization that it had to respond to this kind of unresolved problem, which, if left alone, becomes worse over time. The extreme events of the 1990s put the potential negative impacts of climate change on the agenda, before climate change could really be felt. In that sense, the coastal zone was the starting point for adaptation and the first action was to scientifically document its problems. This would lead to the creation of the Ouranos Consortium in 2001[6]. Situated at the crossroads of science and policy, Ouranos’ objective is to help Quebec’s society to be better prepared for the challenges posed by climate change through an approach combining impact and adaptation studies with research on climate science, especially through the use of climate models.
At the onset of the 2000s, the Quebec Government published its first climate change action plan (2000-2002) to create a framework to address the question of global warming in Quebec. Initially, no budget was devoted to this plan; it is only in 2006[7] with the creation of the Green Fund[8] (Fonds vert) that climate-related funding was introduced: CAN$1.2bn for the 2006-2012 period, of which only CAN$100m was devoted to adaptation, with the rest going to mitigation. For the adaptation part, the first action plan focused on permafrost thawing and coastal erosion. The actions developed under that plan mainly consisted of research and development initiatives (risk assessment, socio-economic impacts, impacts on human health) to improve scientific knowledge and gain a better understanding of the impacts of climate change.
In 2012, a new climate action plan was devised for the 2013-2020 period. Under this plan, CAN$200m was earmarked for adaptation, out of a total budget of CAN$3.3bn. For this new period, the main objective was to better document the issues in each sector of the economy and to start implementing specific actions, in particular regarding water management, ecosystems and transport in the permafrost zone. The first governmental adaptation strategy to climate change was published in 2012. Through this strategy, the government wanted to increase “the resilience of Quebec’s society” to climate change (Stratégie QC-2013-2020). Adaptation is considered to be complementary to mitigation and to correspond to “all actions that reduce the negative impacts of climate change or that allow to seize the opportunities presented by it” (Stratégie QC-2013-2020). It consists, on the one hand, of reducing the vulnerability of the sensitive components of society, those most exposed to the negative impacts of climate change (individuals, communities, built environment, economic activities, natural environment), and on the other hand, of increasing the resilience of components of society to climatic stressors (Stratégie QC-2013-2020).
The issue of adaptation has thus gained momentum within the government since the early 2000s, but it is only from 2006 onwards that concrete actions could be implemented thanks to the financing through the Green Fund. The 2006-2012 period allowed for increased scientific knowledge and identification of impacts. This first period also reinforced the capacities of the government in the field of adaptation, via the MDDELCC, and led to the formulation of the 2013-2020 strategic action plan. However, the budget devoted to adaptation remains small compared to that spent on mitigation. Likewise, few human resources (five employees – three at the time of our study) are assigned to adaptation.
4.2 Adaptation in the coastal zone: a difficult integration within the government framework
Adaptation is integrated in different plans, policies, strategies and regulations in the respective ministries. But how is public policy grounded within the public system?
4.2.1 Environmental management: multiple roles.
In Quebec, environmental issues fall within the authority of the MDDELCC. According to the Environment Quality Act, these include air, water, pollution, biodiversity and sustainable development. Climate change is also mainly its responsibility. The MDDELCC is responsible for the mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions and for adaptation. The Bureau for Climate Change coordinates adaptation at the government level and is, in particular, in charge of the repartition of funds between the various ministries, as the Green Fund is administered by the MDDELCC. The repartition is determined through negotiations with each ministry and officialized by an administrative agreement. The MDDELCC is also in charge of the financial reports, and thus has an insight into all projects and expenses in adaptation in the respective ministries.
The MDDELCC is in charge of sustainable development. However, the adaptation dimension only appears in the latest sustainable development strategy (2015-2020) and not in previous versions. Adaptation is integrated in Orientation 6, through Objective 6.4: “Reinforcing the resilience of communities through adaptation to climate change and the prevention of natural disaster”.
Finally, the MDDELCC is a key stakeholder in the management of the coastal zone, among others, on account of the policy on the protection of lakeshores, riverbanks, littoral zones and floodplains under the Environment Quality Act (Art. 2.1, 1987). This policy wants to ensure the sustainability and quality of streams and other water bodies, to reduce bank and coastal erosion and to maintain and improve environmental quality through the adequate protection of riverbanks, lakeshores, littoral zones and floodplains. The policy recommends a minimal buffer zone of 10 to 15 m along the coast and along rivers, a zone which can be further extended by municipalities. The policy also allows the protection of banks and shores through stabilization measures.
As administrator of the budget, government coordinator for climate change and sustainable development and protector of the coastal zone, the MDDELCC emerges as a key player in public action on climate change adaptation in the coastal zone. Other ministries do, however, also play a role and share the responsibility for climate adaptation.
4.2.2 Public safety: a central sector in risk management in the coastal zone.
The Ministry for Public Safety (MPS) plays a pivotal role in the management of the coastal zone, as its mandate is to manage risks and disasters. Climate change is considered by the MSP as an additional risk, which has to be managed in the same way as hazardous materials (Politique québécoise de sécurité civile: 1)[9].
The mandate of the MPS is split in two parts, risk prevention and mitigation on one hand, and emergency management on the other hand. For risk prevention and mitigation, the MPS has developed a normative framework, aimed at controlling zones designated as “zones subjected to coastal erosion” (zones de contraintes relatives à l’érosion). With progressing climate change, sea level rise will have an increasing impact on the erosion and submersion risks; this phenomenon is, however, not yet included in the cartography of the MPS. Starting in the summer of 2015, the normative framework is being transmitted to the regional county municipalities (RCM) on the south shore of the Gulf of Saint Lawrence, together with a cartography of the coastal properties. According to our interviews with members of the MPS, the whole plan is based on previous experience of landslides (Ministère de la sécurité publique, 2005).
Beyond the aspect of mainstreaming, the MPS works at reinforcing scientific knowledge through several research projects. Besides its ties with the Ouranos Consortium, the MPS works in collaboration with the Coastal Geoscience Chair and the Laboratoire de dynamique et de gestion intégrée des zones côtières (Laboratory of Coastal Dynamics and Integrated Coastal Zone Management) of the University of Quebec in Rimouski (UQAR) on the production of coastal erosion risk maps and on the development of a method of cartography of zones affected by coastal submersion. The MPS thus wants to reinforce the aspect of disaster prevention and mitigation.
Finally, in Quebec, municipalities are ultimately legally responsible for public safety, as well through disaster prevention and mitigation as through emergency management. The MPS’s role, through its regional offices, is to accompany and advise municipalities and to provide them with tools, such as risk maps, that the municipalities can use to put additional regulations in place to reduce risks.
4.2.3 Land use: a central field, but minimal climate action.
In Quebec, land use is a responsibility shared between three authoritative bodies belonging to two government levels. The land use development plan is the central instrument of spatial planning. It is developed at a supra-local scale by RCM and then integrated into the urban plans developed by the municipalities. It is, however, the provincial government, through the Ministry of Municipal Affairs, Regions and Land Occupancy (MAMROT), which produces guidelines for the plans and has to approve them. The land use development plan is not enforceable against citizens.
The government’s orientations for land use development plans integrate adaptation, albeit in a minimal way, through a strategic plan to ensure the viability and occupation of the territory (2011-2016) and its orientation 4.1: “Act to better occupy our territories”[10]. Moreover, the MAMROT is currently revising its Regional and Local Land Use Planning Act (Bill n°47: Sustainable Regional and Local Land Use Planning Act, introduced on 8 December 2011), as well as the governmental orientations on land use planning, to include the dimensions of sustainable development and of climate change. Eventually, these government orientations will require RCMs to integrate the normative framework formulated by the MPS in the land use development plans (Art. 53-14 of the Sustainable Regional and Local Land Use Planning Act).
Until now, few actions have been pursued in terms of adaptation, apart from the climate–municipality programme under the 2006-2012 Climate Change Action Plan (CCAP) that allowed five municipalities to develop adaptation plans. However, actions by MAMROT linked to the 2013-2020 CCAP will focus on the two aspects of the climate problem (adaptation and mitigation) through the development of land use planning tools, integration in government orientations, knowledge transfer and diffusion and the creation of support tools for municipalities.
4.2.4 Maintenance and safety of coastal roads.
About 100 km of coastal roads in Quebec are under threat from the impacts of climate change (Drejza, et al., 2014). The MTQ integrates the adaptation dimension in its 2013-2015 strategic plan (Table I), but its first adaptation “actions” dates back to 2006 with the CCAP (2006-2012), and in particular with actions on erosion and permafrost thawing problems. The main concern at that time was to reinforce research and knowledge. For that purpose, the Research Chair in Coastal and River Engineering was created at the Institut National de Recherche Scientifique (INRS) in collaboration with the MPS to provide both ministries with expertise on the adaptation of infrastructure to the impacts of climate change.
Integration of the adaptation dimension in the ministries
| Ministries | Regulatory tools | Integration of the climate dimension | Strategies and policies | Integration of the climate dimension |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MDDELCC | Sustainable Development Act (interministerial) Environment Quality Act Policy on the Protection of Lakeshores, Riverbanks, Littoral Zones and Floodplains | Sustainable Development Strategy (2015-2020) | Orientation 6 (p. 55): Ensure the sustainable development of the territory and support dynamic communities | |
| MSP | Public Safety Act (2001): currently under revision Normative framework for the coastal zone | Integrates the consideration of risk in the coastal zone (submersion, erosion), but not sea level rise | Quebec Policy on Public Safety 2014-2024: Towards a more disaster resilient society in Quebec (2014-2024) Prevention framework (2006) | Orientation 4: Resort in priority to prevention |
| MAMOT | Regional and Local Land Use Planning Act: currently under revision | Integration of climate change and sustainable development in the next revision of the Sustainable Regional and Local Land Use Planning Act | Strategic plan to insure the occupation and vitality of the territories 2011-2016 Government orientations on land planning | Orientation 4.1: “Act to better occupy our territories” Integration of climate change in the new government orientations on land planning |
| MTQ | MTQ strategic plan (2013-2015) | Objective 1.7: “Contribute to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and adaptation to the impacts of climate change in the transport sector” Indicator 15: Number and nature of climate change adaptation measures Support to research and adaptation Revision of the conception, management and maintenance of infrastructures |
| Ministries | Regulatory tools | Integration of the climate dimension | Strategies and policies | Integration of the climate dimension |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MDDELCC | Sustainable Development Act (interministerial) | Sustainable Development Strategy (2015-2020) | Orientation 6 (p. 55): Ensure the sustainable development of the territory and support dynamic communities | |
| MSP | Public Safety Act (2001): currently under revision | Integrates the consideration of risk in the coastal zone (submersion, erosion), but not sea level rise | Quebec Policy on Public Safety 2014-2024: Towards a more disaster resilient society in Quebec (2014-2024) | Orientation 4: Resort in priority to prevention |
| MAMOT | Regional and Local Land Use Planning Act: currently under revision | Integration of climate change and sustainable development in the next revision of the Sustainable Regional and Local Land Use Planning Act | Strategic plan to insure the occupation and vitality of the territories 2011-2016 | Orientation 4.1: “Act to better occupy our territories” |
| MTQ | MTQ strategic plan (2013-2015) | Objective 1.7: “Contribute to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and adaptation to the impacts of climate change in the transport sector” Indicator 15: Number and nature of climate change adaptation measures |
The 2006-2012 CCAP finances different research projects, mainly on scientific knowledge on climate hazards, vulnerability assessment and the identification of solution options. In the new CCAP (2013-2010), the research aspect is strengthened with 14 funded projects aimed at further developing scientific knowledge of risks and solutions. Pilot projects will allow for testing some of the solutions identified to provide regional offices with decision support tools that integrate scientific knowledge in the management plans for the road network for which they are responsible.
The MTQ is a stakeholder in the governmental adaptation strategy. Its role is to develop knowledge on hazards, to identify solutions and to implement them and, if necessary, to modify current norms. However, to this day, the norms do not seem to be harmonized over the entire territory. Each of the 14 regional offices plans and responds – without central directives – to problems they face, which leads to regional variations in the strategies to address climate change.
5. Discussion: a difficult transformation of public action modes
The results of the case study show that adaptation makes progress within Quebec’s Government authorities as a new public policy that should be implement to reduce vulnerability and the adverse impacts of climate change. It could be presumed that climate change, as a new phenomenon, would lead to the elaboration of new objectives, instruments and actors. However, in public action, no project is devised in virgin territory (Lascoumes, 1996). In Quebec, action plans and specific measures have been elaborated within the adaptation framework, but we observe that actions put in place rely on pre-existing management modes and are more reactive than anticipatory.
5.1 Risk management: a well-known mode of action
In the 1980s, Beck (2008) already proposed that the challenge of modern societies was to solve the problems caused by techno-economic development. In other words, the challenge is to manage the risks produced by modernity. Modern societies evolved by confronting major natural events and by harnessing and dominating nature (Descola, 2005; Latour, 1991). To do that, they elaborated management modes based in particular on the concepts of risk and natural hazard (Burton et al., 1993). Management relies on the assessment and reduction of risk, and the reduction of damages in the event that a disaster occurs. Through technological means, authorities produce quantitative risk assessments, implement early warning systems, build dykes and other protections, etc.
In Quebec, like in all societies possessing a coastal zone, management modes have been put in place for decades to deal with erosion, storms and floods. Although they are exacerbated by climate change, these events are fundamentally well known. The recent acceleration of sea level rise and intensification of other phenomena related to climate change is more difficult to address for authorities. In this context, even though the MDDELCC is officially responsible for climate change, the MPS play an important role. The MPS is traditionally in charge of risk management and therefore has the authority, as well as the expertise, in this field. The Quebec case study shows that the MPS was already dealing with coastal hazards, and thus does not consider them as new. Even though climate change is a new phenomenon, the MPS can integrate it into its traditional management modes and does not call for new approaches to be put in place. For example, when anticipatory adaptation is considered, preventive actions remain limited, and solutions such as retreat and relocalization of infrastructures and residences is rarely considered. Its competence in risk management bestows upon the MPS a central role in erosion control, and from there in climate change management. The other ministries do not hold the same level of expertise in hazard and risk management, and thus appear to be relegated to inferior roles, despite the importance of their respective domains for climate adaptation. For example, land planning is an essential sector that has control over land use and can prevent development in zones exposed to natural hazards, through regulations and plans. Nevertheless, the MAMROT does not easily integrate the climate dimension, in part because the risk approach dominates the view of the problem and the MAMROT is not competent in risk management, and in part, because the sectorial approach continues to govern the modes of public action, granting the MPS exclusivity over risk management. The phenomenon of path dependence is clearly visible here: it is easier to continue functioning like before, rather than engaging on a new path with the onset of this new problem.
Another example of the lack of anticipation of the MPS’s action is the impact of sea level rise. This very specific manifestation of climate change does not find any representation in the cartography produced by the MPS, an observation that demonstrates how difficult the integration of a new element is and how changes are made marginally. Instead, incrementalism is predominantly observed, as in the cases studied by Bassett and Fogelman (2013) or Park et al. (2012) on decisions in the agriculture sector in Australia.
The observation of path dependence and incrementalism points towards a short-term and reactive vision of Quebec’s Government towards adaptation. Adaptation is still perceived as a simple adjustment which does not, for the moment, necessitate a fundamental questioning of the government’s management modes, or dealing with the root causes of the problem and not only its consequences.
5.2 Quebec’s climate action: a double speed policy change
In Quebec, climate change is perceived as an environmental problem, and therefore tied to the environment ministry. As observed for other socially and politically apprehended phenomena (Hassenteufel, 2010; Cobb and Ross, 1997; Hannigan, 1995), the process of defining the problem remains confusing: a new element must be dealt with, in this case, climate change (mitigation) and its impacts (adaptation). But in treating impacts, old problems will first be considered. Also, the multidimensional nature of impacts and of vulnerability calls a variety of actors to the stage: Ouranos for scientific research, and the MPS, MAMROT and MTQ for specific issues. Each of these actors has an interest in becoming involved in the question of the impacts of climate change, if only to be able to define the problem and the avenues for solutions (Vlassopoulou, 1990). Indeed, as Marquet and Salles (2014) point out, the integration of adaptation in sectorial politics leads actors to renegotiate pre-existing issues through the pretext of adaptation and, in the case of the MPS, to maintain its leadership in imposing a risk-management approach.
Our results show that the content of the actions instigated by these different ministries only sparsely integrates the question of adaptation, based on the analysis of their respective strategies and budgets. There is no specific budget earmarked for adaptation in the overall budget of the ministries. In each ministry, the official recognition of adaptation began in 2006, when the government released its CCAP accompanied by a budget. Would adaptation actions in the respective ministries have been implemented without financing from the CCAP? Adaptation is just beginning to be introduced in certain policies or strategies, but it does not percolate to policy instruments such as regulations, even though vulnerability has been on the agenda since the early 2000s. The appropriation of the issue of adaptation therefore remains very superficial.
The change is only partial; it can be qualified as “double speed policy change” (Vlassopoulos, 2013). The emergence of climate change as a new public problem constitutes a change of paradigm in terms of ideas and actors (action plans, mobilization of certain actors around climate vulnerability and risks), but does not necessarily lead to changes in the contents of the policies and modes of actions put in place to confront the problem. As in the case studied by Marquet and Salles (2014), the normative and institutional approach to crisis, or, in our case, risk management, puts adaptation at a distance and does not favour the transition to a change in practices. Thus, we did not observe a process of deep transformation in the sense of Park et al. (2012). On the contrary, the Quebec case study shows that change in public action is slow and progressive. It is not surprising to find that path dependence and incrementalism seem to be firmly rooted in public action modes.
Even though transformation of public policies is always difficult to enact (Hassenteufel, 2009), the difficulties encountered by Quebec’s authorities in the implementation of anticipatory adaptation to the impacts of climate change could, in the future, lead to practices which can be qualified as maladaptation (Barnett and O’Neill, 2010) and to a reinforcement of the vulnerability of coastal communities. However, in Quebec, it would be possible to effect minor changes that could noticeably improve the way in which adaptation is taken into account by the authorities. Could the interministerial Sustainable Development Act be a vehicle for the integration of the adaptation in Quebec’s administration? Could the principles contained in the Act, such as the precautionary principle and the priority of prevention, be used to develop proactive and anticipatory measures in the coastal zone?
6. Conclusion
This case study contributes to the body of analysis on public climate action in Quebec (Lepage and Milot, 2013; Marquet and Salles, 2014; Cloutier et al., 2015). The results are in part pay tribute to the individuals who agreed to participate in the interviews. It is possible that other points of view could influence the conclusions, as could the unfolding of the second phase of the CCAP. Nevertheless, the interviews with key informants validated the preliminary results and led us to believe that the main conclusions reached in this exploratory study are robust and realistic.
In Quebec, the process of adaptation to climate change is in its infancy. It is too early to really speak of adaptation, even less of anticipatory adaptation. Presently, the authorities are still at the stage of scientific fact-finding to better define the problem, and in particular to document the vulnerability to climate change. In this context, the role played by the Ouranos Consortium would merit further investigation, as its position as an interface between science and policy on climate issues and the dependency of authorities on its expertise raise questions on the challenges and limits of its action and also on its propensity to incite the government to address the problem of adaptation (Vescovi et al., 2009; Huard et al., 2014).
Furthermore, our results illustrate the question of time frames. Although the problem of vulnerability emerged towards the beginning of the 2000s, adaptation actions remain minimal 15 years later. This observation is not exclusive to Quebec. From a historical perspective, societies have always been slow to respond to environmental challenges that they faced; But can they afford that luxury in relation to climate change (Theys, 2015)? In light of the Quebec case study, a more in-depth analysis of the question of the time frame of public action in the context of climate change would clearly be warranted to assist decision-makers, among other reasons.
Our results also show that climate change is managed in a silo mentality by a ministry, that of the environment, which does not have the greatest authority over the problem and seems to be marginalized within the government apparatus (Ouimet et al., 2010). This internal division of government action does not favour the development of transversal policies and can, in part, account for the weakness of the response to the problems caused by the effects of climate change. In the future, the study of other factors associated with the limited capacity of authorities to engage in meaningful and ambitious action on climate change adaptation should be undertaken, and the Quebec case study could be pursued in that direction.
Finally, as Ostrom (2010) points out, all scales of action have to be considered to formulate an effective response to the climate problem. In this article, we focused our analysis on the provincial scale. However, it is clear that the interaction between the different scales of action must be taken into account. For example, in the case of Quebec, the role of the federal scale in climate adaptation can be considered as secondary (Marquet and Salles, 2014); nevertheless, the federal government remains the official focal point on climate issues on the international level. It would be interesting to analyse in more detail the interaction between those two scales. Finally, the central authority seems to act in a minimal way, and therefore, the local scale has to play a pivotal role in the implementation of adaptation measures. In fact, the province increasingly encourages the local scale to assume responsibility for adaptation. Even though the local scale plays a defining role in the adaptation process (Wamsler and Brink, 2014; Cloutier et al., 2015), putting an exclusive onus on the local scale to deal with climate adaptation raises a number of issues (e.g. human and financial resources, legal responsibility), in particular in small communities (Noblet et al., 2016).
Notes
Cited in IPCC (2001), Chapter 18, p. 885.
Constitution Act, 1867, Article 92, Subjects of exclusive Provincial Legislation: 5. “The Management and Sale of the Public Lands belonging to the Province and of the Timber and Wood thereon”, 13. “Property and Civil Rights in the Province”.
The work presented here stems from a post-doctoral research project conducted in 2015 under the Community-University Research Alliance (CURA) on Coastal Communities Challenges in the Estuary and Gulf of St. Lawrence facing climate change (CCC-CURA) programme financed by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (Grant number 833-2009-4010).
The first actions implemented in relation to the coastal zone by the Ministry of Health and Social Services date from 2015 and could therefore not be considered in this study.
It can be considered that Quebec’s action regarding climate change started in 1995 with the publication of the first climate action plan. It does not, however, address impacts and adaptation. It is only from 2000 onwards that the government includes the adaptation dimension in its climate action, which is why our documentary review starts in that year.
The Ouranos Consortium was jointly created by the Government of Quebec, Hydro-Québec and Environment Canada with “the mission to acquire and develop knowledge on climate change and its impacts as well as on the socio-economic and environmental vulnerability, such as to inform decision-makers on the evolution of climate and advise them in order to identify, evaluate, promote and implement local and regional adaptation strategies” (Ouranos, 2015, Plan Stratégique, 2014-2020, free translation).
In November 2005, Canada hosted the COP-11 in Montreal. As Simonet (2013) points out, holding such a conference in Quebec has probably further stimulated and grounded public action on climate change.
Quebec’s Green Fund was created in 2006 under the Law on the Ministry of Sustainable Development, Environment and Parks, and allows for support of measures favouring sustainable development. The revenue of the Green Fund stems from different environmental fees (residual material, water, carbon market, etc.). The revenue from the carbon market and the levy on fossil fuels and other combustibles (which ended in December 2014) are devoted to the fight against climate change. Source: www.mddelcc.gouv.qc.ca/ministere/fonds-vert/index-en.htm, consulted January 26, 2016.
The aspect of adaptation can be considered included in Orientation 4: Resort in priority to prevention.
“Adaptation and fight against climate change: by reducing greenhouse gas emissions, by preserving the health and safety of people and goods, in an evolving context of climate change, by updating scientific knowledge to that effect, and putting in place risk control and management mechanisms for earth movements, erosion, inundation, creation of heat islands, and all other forms of natural hazards”, Strategic plan to insure the occupation and viability of the territory, 2011-2016, p. 46.
This work was supported by a grant from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada under the Community-University Research Alliance (CURA) on Coastal Communities Challenges in the Estuary and Gulf of St. Lawrence facing climate change (CCC-CURA) program (grant number 833-2009-4010). The authors also thank the Institut National de Santé Publique du Québec for its logistic support.
