Adaptation task

Understanding cases
You are here: Home / Pathfinder / Identifying adaptation measures / Public / Collective / Institutional analysis

Understanding cases

An important question is to what extent findings on case studies can be generalized. Generalizing causal relationships beyond a case study is challenged because it depends on location and historically specific processes. Generalising to other cases without understanding the causal processes may lead to flawed interventions and maladaptation. Results from the associated approaches can thus only inform with some confidence adaptation policy development for the particular case analysed.
After finishing this step, you should return to the Adaptation Pathfinder's entry point.
To main entry point selector

AP interactive decision tree - click any node to select it

Mosse (2006) in a case study of water management institutions in southern India finds that collective action is correlated with the presence of ceremony and rituals surrounding village water tanks. He argues that the causal mechanism behind this relationship can only be understood through understanding the meaning and symbolism of local institutions, which requires in-depth anthropological methods. Such an understanding of causal relationships is not generalisable beyond the case study because it depends on location and historically specific processes. Based on these findings, Mosse criticises the social capital approach (e.g. Putnam 1994), which relates quantitative measures of institutions, e.g. the number of associations in a study unit, to levels of collective action. Although such a relationship may hold in a particular case, in fact it would in the villages Mosse has studied, generalising to other cases without understanding the causal processes may lead to flawed interventions and maladaptation. Results from these approaches can thus only inform adaptation policy development for the particular case analysed.

Question addressed

Explaining the emergence of governance systems which enables adaptation

Conditions of applicability

Climate change impacts, adaptation and vulnerability are a result of many actors interacting and making many interrelated decisions.

Theoretical assumptions

Attributing an outcome to an institution is only possible on a case by case basis.

Steps taken

1. Select potential explanatory variables based on literature 2. Collect data 3. Apply of cause-effect reasoning

Results achieved

Recommendations on a case by case basis.

Issues involved

[text to be added]

Example cases from literature

Pelling et al. (2008) address the question of which social and institutional factors have led to the emergence of informal networks in public organisations. Active informal networks are assumed to be beneficial for adaptation. They look at integrated environmental policy making across different sectors in Wales. They find evidence for factors which have promoted the emergence of the shadow network, such as the promotion of the "Team Wales" identity, and the tendency for long careers with little out migration fostering long-term relationships.

  • Pathfinder overview diagram
References AP home Glossary

This section is based on the UNEP PROVIA guidance document

Criteria checklist

1. You want to identify adaptation measures.
2. Your focus is on public actors and on collective actions.
3. The interdepencence is two-way.
4. There is no coordination solution.
5. It is not sufficient to describe actors and institutions.
6. Outcomes of institutional arrangements can not be predicted.
7. Governance emergence explanation has been addressed.
8. It is assumed that one can not generalise beyond single cases.