Capítulo 3 Metodología
3.3 El efecto irónico: instrumento analítico
3.3.1 El efecto irónico: la dimensión semántica
The case study from RftR also provides an opportunity to reflect on the Multi Pattern Approach (MPA). In the research presented here, this new method has been applied for the first time to the transition to IFRM. It has been easy to fit the framework to the case study, as others (Van der Brugge et al., 2005) already argued that the Dutch water sector has been following a transition pathway. However, the application of MPA has to some extent been ambiguous and multiple lessons can be drawn from it.
The MPA was developed for the description and understanding of the dynamics of societal transitions. The results of this research show that it can also be applied to explain the contribution of a single programme to a transition. In retrospect, the transition conditions and transition patterns explain the outcomes of RftR and, vice versa, the outcomes explain the conditions and patterns. For example, ‘structural tension’ (condition) from existing policy that hampered IFRM, required new policy development that will remain in force after RftR (outcome) and explains a transition pattern of ‘adaptation’. The analysis of the outcomes
Understanding the transition to integrated flood risk management in the Netherlands
137
was conducted simultaneously with the analysis of conditions and patterns and they were mutually supportive to help understand the transition path. Hence, the MPA can be enriched by analysing outcomes of various single elements (events, policies or projects) in a wider societal transition. Here, this is done for the regime level project RftR, but it should also be applicable to single micro scale experiments or macro scale landscape developments, following the multi-level perspective by Geels and Schot (2007) based on work of (Rip and Kemp, 1998). For example, the Plan Ooievaar has been analysed as a niche constellation (Van der Brugge, 2009, p. 125). Its outcomes generated pressure on the regime by proposing an alternative, integrated approach, as a response to stress generated by a sectoral approach.
As argued above, conditions, as well as outcomes have been found to be mutually interdependent in this case study. This is not necessarily a flaw in the MPA, but rather a relevant observation for those analysing and comparing transition paths. We contend that describing all transition conditions, rather than trying to combine them, supports deeper understanding of a societal transition. There is no single understanding of a transition that avoids ambiguity (De Haan and Rotmans, 2011). Section 6.3 explicitly stressed where and why the researchers have had difficulties classifying a transition condition, pattern, or path. Similarly, it has proven difficult to distinguish when a pattern begins or ends and thus to classify pattern or chain. The proposers of the MPA (ibid) argue that the choice of beginning and end point of a transition analysis are to a certain degree arbitrary and dependent on the analyst’s choice. The arbitrariness on beginning and end point has shifted from pathways, when using the multi-level perspective or multi- phase concept, to shorter patterns when using the MPA. We argue that different interpretations of the timing of multiple patterns by a single or various analysts can actually enrich the analysis of a transition. The transition patterns as described in this paper are related and one could argue that they partly overlap, or neatly follow each other, or are in fact the same pattern A detailed analysis as provided in this paper that separates rather than combines the patterns was instrumental in explaining the outcomes of RftR and their contribution to the transition. The demarcation in time horizons of system states and transition patterns was influenced by the focus of this research on the case study RftR. Allowing for discussions about different interpretations of transition conditions, patterns and paths is a potential strength of the MPA. MPA gives a dynamic perspective to transitions and a higher level of detail with shorter time horizons (this research focused on a single programme that has run for a decade).
138
This research shows that project outcomes can be related to transition conditions and can be instrumental to a regime change. Project outcomes such as new policies, that have an impact beyond the scope of the project and are sustained after the delivery, provide a potential lever for policy makers and project managers to contribute to a transition. It was not the initial objective of this research to contribute to theories on transition management as put forward by Rotmans (2001) and enriched by many (e.g. Loorbach, 2010, Raven et al., 2010). However, the empirical data from this case study have been exploited for this purpose and some of the findings have been presented here. Loorbach (2010) provides a prescriptive governance framework in which he highlights that successful and iconic projects at the operational level can be repeated and scaled up to contribute to a transition. It is difficult to see RftR as a transition experiment at the micro- level because of its size and importance to the functioning of the flood system, but its components might. Moreover, experiments and large-scale projects can be deliberately managed alike for outcomes to address transition conditions. RftR has not adhered explicitly to objectives or models of transition management. An interviewee indicated that it was not politically viable to have an explicit objective or budget to contribute to a transition: ¨Public investment assessments of the planning
bureau did not include non-flood safety-related benefits of RftR, such as spatial quality, increased public support (and thus potentially reducing progress hindrance), let alone the benefit of contributing to a transition.¨
In RftR the generated outcomes were instrumental to RftR’s delivery. E.g. Practical guidelines were first and foremost targeted at application within the RftR community and policy change had to enable delivery of new river widening measures as these ran into incompatible e.g. environmental, soil and other regulations. These outcomes were not foreseen beforehand to be necessary for project delivery, nor to be supportive of a transition. However, some lessons can be distilled from the case study on the governance arrangements that supported the generation of outcomes. The outcomes have arisen as a consequence from working and learning together that was stimulated from the outset by the programme’s double objective of flood safety and spatial quality and the related collaborative governance approach (Rijke et al., 2012b; and Van Herk et al., 2013c). Specific governance arrangements that have contributed to learning are: cultivating a culture of learning; audits and evaluations; community building; and training programmes (ibid). Learning by doing is central to most adaptive management and transition management literature (an overview is presented by Armitage et al., 2008).
Also common threads in the scaling up of lessons and dissemination of outcomes were observed in RftR. Barriers and opportunities emerged at the level of
Understanding the transition to integrated flood risk management in the Netherlands
139
individual projects and were signalled by the Programme Directorate through its project control systematics and through the stakeholder managers it had assigned to monitor and facilitate individual projects (Rijke et al, 2012b). The Programme Directorate monitored developments in terms of new policy and regulation through periodic meetings with the Ministries involved and informal contacts with parliament. Important national developments and recurrent issues in projects were scaled up to the Programme Directorate. They had the status, competences and contacts at national level to be a counterpart in discussions on national policy and regulation and to develop practical guidelines. They carefully designed shadow processes, parallel to the overall programme and project progress, to resolve these issues. Outcomes and lessons were disseminated actively to support other projects within the programme. The size of the RftR Programme, its collaborative nature, its multi-level organisation and programmed approach enabled the generation of outcomes and implicitly the management thereof.