2.4.2. Findings from self-assessment survey

Working groups and task forces are common ways to achieve coordination across sectors and levels of governance

European countries report a variety of institutional mechanisms to support horizontal coordination of adaptation across sectors. Examples of horizontal coordination mechanisms have been reported by 21 out of 29 countries (Table 2.7). Ministries that are responsible for the environment or the use of natural resources are generally reported to carry the responsibility for horizontal coordination. The most common form of horizontal coordination at the national level is the establishment of working groups or task forces that bring together representatives from different ministries and other organisations. Some countries, for example, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Italy, Liechtenstein and Lithuania, have reported that also non-governmental stakeholders have been invited to take part in the horizontal coordination mechanisms.

Table 2.7 Examples of horizontal coordination mechanisms reported by European countries, along with the countries’ assessment of the horizontal mechanism’s effectiveness

Examples of vertical coordination mechanisms for adaptation were reported by 18 out of 29 countries (Table 2.8). Vertical coordination of adaptation is either a task of each sector ministry, or a more general task coordinated by the ministry in charge of adaptation at the national level. Similar to horizontal coordination mechanisms, vertical coordination takes place through joint task forces, panels and working groups as well as more informal channels of communication. Sub-national plans and programmes also serve a coordinating function in, for example, France and Finland. Inclusion of stakeholders from regional and local levels in national level institutions was reported by Cyprus, Finland, Italy, Lithuania, The Netherlands and Portugal.

Table 2.8 Examples of vertical coordination mechanisms reported by European countries, along with the countries’ assessment of the vertical mechanism’s effectiveness

Countries that are implementing adaptation report that they have effective coordination mechanisms

Established horizontal coordination mechanisms are reported at least medium effective by 20 out of 29 countries (Figure 2.11). The remaining third of countries state that mechanisms are either not in place or are unknown to the respondent. No country has reported less or not effective coordination mechanisms.

All countries that are implementing adaptation policies have horizontal coordination mechanisms in place and report them to be at least medium effective, as indicated by the empty space in the lower right corner of Figure 2.11 (Table 2.7 for details of the mechanisms). Countries in early stages of the adaptation policy process have generally not yet established horizontal coordination mechanisms, as indicated by the empty space in the top-left corner of Figure 2.11. Of countries in policy formulation and decision phases, ten out of 16 report that they have at least medium effective horizontal coordination processes.

Figure 2.11 Effectiveness of horizontal coordination mechanisms in national adaptation policy processes relative to stage of adaptation policy process in EEA member countries (n=29). Bubbles indicate the number of countries in a given stage of adaptation policy process with a similar perception of the effectiveness of their horizontal coordination mechanism

The general pattern for vertical coordination mechanisms is similar to the horizontal coordination. All countries that implement or monitor and evaluate their adaptation policies report having vertical coordination mechanisms in place (Figure 2.12, see Table 2.8 for details of the mechanisms). The perceived effectiveness of the vertical coordination is moderately lower than for horizontal coordination, with five countries reporting “less effective” vertical coordination mechanisms. Eight out of nine countries in the implementation and monitoring and evaluation stages of the policy process report their vertical coordination mechanisms to be at least medium effective. In the formulation stage, only one of nine countries reports having an effective vertical coordination mechanism in place. Overall 16 out of 29 countries report less effective (or unknown effectiveness of) vertical coordination mechanisms or not to have a vertical coordination mechanisms in place.

Figure 2.12 Effectiveness of vertical coordination mechanisms in national adaptation policy processes relative to stage of adaptation policy process in EEA member countries (n=29). Bubbles indicate the number of countries in a given stage of adaptation policy process with a similar perception of the effectiveness of their vertical coordination mechanism

Knowledge exchange, coordination of stakeholders and assignment of responsibilities can both support and present challenges to coordination

Countries provided multiple examples of factors related to institutions and processes, which, when in place, contribute to successful coordination but when missing, make coordination more challenging. These factors range from general transparency and information exchange to stakeholder coordination, commitment of actors and institutional factors such as legal frameworks and the assignment of responsibilities (Table 2.9).

Reported challenges relate to similar issues as the reported success factors. Insufficient mechanisms for knowledge exchange can present a challenge along with limited resources to coordinate large and diverse groups of stakeholders. Lack of formal structures and agreements may present a challenge for coordination e.g. in the case of public sector reorganisations. Countries also report challenges arising from competing interests between different stakeholders and unclear responsibilities linked to coordination of adaptation activities.

Table 2.9 Examples of success factors and challenges of coordination reported by countries