The Influence of Transnational Municipal Networks in Local Climate
Change Adaptation Policy:
The Case Study of Rotterdam
Master Thesis Political Science: International Relations
Research Project: Transnational Sustainability Governance
Erisilda Guce 11752580
Supervisor: Philip Schleifer
Second Reader: Sebastian Krapohl
31 August 2018
2
Table of Contents
Acknowledgments 4
List of Abbreviations 5
1. Introduction 6
2. Research Question and Relevance 9
2.1 Research Question and Sub-Questions 9
2.2 Academic and Social Relevance 10
3. Literature Review 12
3.1 Climate Change Adaptation Governance 12
3.2 Urban Adaptive Experiments 17
3.3 Climate Change Adaptation Policy through TMNs 18
4. Theoretical Framework 20
4.1 Background of Urban Climate Change Governance 20
4.2 Network Governance in Urban Climate Change 24
4.3 Multi-Level Governance and Climate Change Adaptation 25
4.4 TMNs and their Governing Strategies 27
4.5 TMNs Facilitating Urban Climate Change Adaptation Governance - What Is Missing
33
5. Methods, Data Collection, Case Selection and Limitations 35
5.1 Case Selection 35
5.2 Research Method Tools 37
5.3 Data Collection 37
3
5.5 Limitations 40
6. Case Study 41
6.1 Background 41
6.1.1 Rotterdam’s Vulnerability to Climate Change 41
6.1.2 Rotterdam’s Climate Change Policy Background 43
6.2 How TMNs Have Influenced/Influence Rotterdam’s Climate Change Adaptation Policy?
49 6.3 To What extent Are Rotterdam’s Policies and Strategies Being
Implemented?
53 6.3.1 Implementation of Climate Adaptation Strategies 53
6.3.2 Implementation Barriers 55
6.4 How Effective Are TMNs in Achieving their Goals for Climate Change Adaptation in Rotterdam?
58
7. Discussion 60
8. Conclusions 62
8.1 Final Conclusions 62
8.2 Limitations and Recommendations for Future Research 62
9. References 64
Appendix 1: Semi-Structured Interview Guide 70
Appendix 2: List of Interviewees 71
4
Acknowledgments
This thesis resulted from the research project Transnational Sustainability Governance and I would like to thank my supervisor Philip Schleifer for being patient with me, motivating me and providing me with comments during this period of time. Furthermore, I am thankful to all the interviewees who accepted my request and answered all of my questions. Finally, I would like to thank my lovely parents for their continuous support and belief in me.
5
List of Abbreviations
CAN – Climate Action Network-International CDC – Connecting Delta Cities
CRO – Chief Resilience Officer C2C – City-to-city
C40 – C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group GHG – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
IAB – International Advisory Board
IPCC – Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change KNMI – Koninklijk Nederlands Meteorologisch Instituut NGOs – Non-governmental Organisations
NPOs – Non-profit Organisations RCI – Rotterdam Climate Initiative RCP – Rotterdam Climate Proof
SDGs – Sustainable Development Goals TANs – Transnational Advocacy Networks TMNs – Transnational Municipal Networks UHI – Urban Heat Island
UN – United Nations
UNFCCC – United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change 100RC – 100 Resilient Cities
6
1. Introduction
Large urban centers with a high population contribute to a number of environmental problems, some examples are: global warming, air pollution, water pollution, waste generation. Simultaneously, cities are extremely affected by environmental risks and they also are more vulnerable to climate change and its effects than rural areas (Fünfgeld and McEvoy 2014). More than half of the world’s population lives in cities and by 2050 the number is projected to increase to more than 70% (OECD 2014). More specifically, in Europe three-quarter of the population live in cities, with the numbers to be expected to rise in the future (Keiner and Kim 2007). In addition, urban areas are host to a significant proportion of economic activities and infrastructures. It is estimated that cities produce 75% of global C02 emissions, as a consequence of their activities.
Cities located in the North and also in industrializing countries may be responsible for a bigger proportion of global emissions (Bulkeley 2010). Nevertheless, cities and municipalities have become significant actors in addressing these environmental challenges, as they hold a key role in climate change governance (Bansard et al. 2017). It is suggested that even though they cause environmental problems, they are important players in addressing climate change issues providing the solutions and innovations that are needed (Roman 2009; OECD 2014). In fact, cities are more preferred to deal with climate change problems rather than national states by academics and policy makers (Bansard et al. 2017).
Recently, a great number of local governments have started to engage in climate change adaptation. The focus on approaches, to adapt to the problems caused by climate change, has been neglected for many years, as more emphasis was put on mitigation strategies to reduce C02 emissions (Kern and Alber 2009). Due to the fact that mitigation
processes to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions were slow and ineffective, changes on global climate have become unavoidable (Hamin and Gurran 2009). This means that adaptation to climate change is important. Adaptation is a high complex problem, which requires multi-level approaches of collaboration, and transnational
7 municipal networks (TMNs) can play a key role in addressing it by distributing horizontal information sharing among local municipalities. In addition, it is suggested that partnerships between TMNs and local governments can enhance knowledge and methods that are needed to produce positive adaptation results. However, there are not many studies available assessing the role of TMNs in capacity building for local climate change adaptation policy, its implementation and whether there are effective outcomes (Fünfgeld 2015). Therefore, the aim of the research is to evaluate the influence of TMNs in the adoption and implementation of local climate change adaptation. The research will be based on the theories of the urban climate change governance, network governance, multilevel governance and governing strategies of TMNs. Based on this framework, it will be explored what kind of role TMNs play in local climate change adaptation policy and how TMNs facilitate cities to address their environmental challenges and risks.
To do so, the research will focus on the case of Rotterdam. The city of Rotterdam is interesting case to look at as it is 80% below the sea level and one of the biggest ports in the world (100 Resilient Cities). Rotterdam, being a delta city, , is vulnerable to sea-level rise, flood risks and more frequent heat waves, and so has to cope with these challenges. In fact, Rotterdam identifies climate change adaptation as a priority and has adopted the Rotterdam Climate Proof approach in 2008 and the Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy in 2013 (C40 2016). Rotterdam is a member of many networks, including the C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group (C40) and its sub-network Water & Adaptation Initiative called Connecting Delta Cities (CDC). Moreover, Rotterdam is considered a leading innovative city and the perfect living showcase example for climate change adaptation, whilst being an example for other delta cities (Aerts et al. 2012). Taking into considerations these factors, Rotterdam is an important case to evaluate the influence and impact of TMNs on its strategies and initiatives. Consequently, the following research question is formulated:
8
“How have TMNs contributed to the adoption and implementation of climate change adaptation policy in Rotterdam?”
The outline of the thesis is structured as follows. First, the research question of the research will be introduced in the second chapter along with some sub-questions that will organise the process of the research better, narrowing the focus even more. The third chapter introduces a literature review on the climate change adaptation policy and the role of TMNs on local climate change policy. Then, the theoretical framework will be presented in the fourth chapter including theories of urban climate change policy, network governance, multi-level governance and the governing mechanisms that TMNs deploy among their city-members in order to promote adaptation plans. This is followed by the methodology and research design of the research. In the next chapter, the empirical findings of the case study will be presented and analysed. The seventh chapter consists of a discussion regarding the main findings of the research. Finally, the last chapter provides the final conclusions while identifying the limitations of the research and suggesting recommendations for future research.
9
2. Research Question and Relevance
This chapter aims at presenting the main research question that motivates this thesis and its three sub-questions that were designed in order to make the research applicable and easier to carry it out. Moreover, in this chapter the academic and the societal relevance of the research itself are explained.
2.1 Research Question and Sub-Questions
As discussed in the introduction, cities play a significant role in developing the required policy in order to adapt to the expected risks of climate change. As adaptation is a difficult task to be grasped, many cities have become members of TMNs in order to gain the capacities needed to develop adaptation plans. However, due to the fact that climate change adaptation has been lagged behind mitigation and is still in the early stages of its development, it has been under-researched. Without a clear understanding, it is interesting to look at the role of TMNs in the development of urban adaptation strategies. By doing so, the research aims at bridging this research gap and contributing to the literature. Therefore, using the city of Rotterdam and its adaptation strategy as the case study the question that motivates the research is the following:
“How have TMNs contributed to the adoption and implementation of climate change adaptation policy in Rotterdam?”
This formulated question is broad and complicated to answer on its own. For this reason, in order to answer the research question some additional sub-questions will be asked. In this way, the research is more manageable and has a clearer and narrowed focus. Moreover, the three additional sub-questions will be analysed and answered step by step. Hence, the research question will be answered in the end. The three additional sub-questions are the following:
1. “How TMNs have influenced/influence Rotterdam’s climate change adaptation
10 2. “To what extent are Rotterdam’s policies and strategies being implemented?”
3. “How effective are TMNs in achieving their goals for climate change adaptation in
Rotterdam?”
2.2 Academic and Social Relevance
The research question has academic relevance because of the lack of sufficient studies evaluating the impact of TMNs regarding climate change adaptation. The vast majority of existing studies focuses on processes of climate change mitigation policy. Despite the availability of studies regarding mitigation policy, there are still mixed views among the scholars about the role and impact of TMNs in local climate change policy. In addition, even though there are some studies that assess the climate change adaptation policy, they are either focusing on countries and cities of the Global South or their primary focus is not the collaboration between local governments and TMNs. The role and the impact of TMNs are not the driving force of these studies and in some cases are only mentioned briefly and sporadically throughout their findings. Thus, the academic relevance of the thesis is its aim to bridge and contribute to this literature gap by looking at Rotterdam’s climate adaptation policy.
In regard to the social relevance of the research, the research can be found socially relevant in the awareness of climate change threats to cities and in the outcomes that it will provide as well. The impacts of climate change are severe and cities need to adapt, because they are highly affected by them. Cities are vulnerable to flood risks, and especially coastal cities to sea-rise level, to warmer temperatures because of the Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect, and finally to the spread of diseases due to the aforementioned risks. (Mees & Driessen 2011). In a world that the majority of people lives in cities, the importance of adjustment to urban vulnerability due to climate change cannot be undervalued. Thus, the societal relevance of the research question is evident as well, as cities have to take measures and adapt to climate change in order to avoid the expected consequences as much as possible. Moreover, the findings of this research can be processed and examined by cities and local governments that face environmental issues
11 similar to those of Rotterdam and be an inspiration to help them deal with them. The findings will provide information regarding the potential benefits of being a member of TMNs. Finally, policy makers can benefit from the research as well with valuable information regarding the adaptive strategy that Rotterdam is carrying out.
12
3. Literature Review
This chapter will be used as an introduction to the academic literature with regard to urban climate adaptation responses. Previous studies on urban climate adaptive policy will be discussed by recognizing and identifying similarities and differences. Moving forward, the literature gap about the collaboration between local municipalities and TMNs for urban adaptation capacity building will be determined, which is the driving factor of this research.
3.1 Climate Change Adaptation Governance
When the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issued the Fifth Assessment Report in 2014, climate change adaptation was defined as “the process of adjustment to actual or expected climate and its effects” (IPCC 2014, p. 5). The definition emphasizes that through adaptation the goal is to protect humans by controlling to an extent or avoiding future harm due to climate change risks (IPCC 2014). Moreover, in the definition is stated the importance to seek and to leverage any possible opportunities that may turn out beneficial (IPCC 2014). It is highly possible that the deployment of adaptation plans and strategies will contribute to the adjustment of expected risks and effects of climate change (IPCC 2014). However, this definition is considered in the literature as quite broad as it does not provide specific instructions that are needed in order to develop policies and plans for climate change adaptation ((Fünfgeld and McEvoy 2014).
Over the past two decades, climate change adaptation has emerged as a new domain of policy making in both developing and developed countries (Fünfgeld and McEvoy 2014). The reasons behind this development are the growing concerns and consequences of climate change. Even though many attempts were initiated to mitigate climate change and its risks on an international, national and local level, there is still a quite significant part of climate change that is unavoidable. As a result, adaptation has received more attention worldwide (Albers et al. 2015). As a consequence, many scholars have
13 directed their interest in looking at how adaptation policy has been framed and developed.
In the existing literature, many scholars associate adaptation policy with bottom-up approaches. When addressing climate change mitigation, it is common for a top-down and global approach to be preferred (Fünfgeld and McEvoy 2014). This means that national states have undertaken the role to set specific regulation in order to reduce the GHG emissions on an international or national scale (Fünfgeld and McEvoy 2014). This is not the case with climate change adaptation policy. It is stated in the literature that effective development of actions towards protecting people and building resilience is determined by local adaptation (Lampis 2013). Moreover, bottom-up approaches are preferred for climate change adaptation because every city is different. In this way, bottom-up adaptation approaches are more fruitful and provide more benefits. As Carter (2011) states, climate change has different impact on each city and so each city faces different challenges and risks. Therefore, different adaptation plans are required on each situation (Carter 2011). This highlights the important role that cities play in climate change adaptation governance. Local governments need to develop tailored adaptation plans that match and are required for their own specific circumstances (Carter 2011). As a consequence, local climate adaptation responses have started to emerge and grow in number. Some examples include city initiatives in Europe, such as the adaptation strategies of Madrid and Manchester (Carter 2011). Furthermore, local climate adaptation measures other than being more efficient than initiatives led by national governments, they also give to local governments incentives in order to develop them (Anguelowski and Carmin 2011). Indeed, the literature points out that local adaptive responses are more driven by internal than external factors. For example, some cities took adaptive measures due to the awareness of a threat and limit potential risks or because of their desire to be a leader and build an adaptive image (Anguelowski and Carmin 2011). Gremellion (2011) claims that adaptation policies developed at a local level can provide the city with beneficial outcomes as opposed to mitigation policies, such as the reduction of GHG emissions, which may not necessarily provide a
14 local benefit. Also, local adaptation policies can aid mitigation processes as many times they coordinate with one another (Reckien et al. 2013). Adaptation and mitigation policies go hand in hand and cities most of the times have both adaptation and mitigation plans (Reckien et al. 2013). However, adaptation plans and initiatives still are less advanced and are less in number than mitigation activities, as a study assessment in the UK suggests (Heidrich et al. 2013).
The literature has explored the ways in which locally focused adaptation response strategies can be developed. Addressing climate change risks and challenges on a local level requires “…fundamental institutional restructuring of local government activities” (Roberts 2010, p. 412). Urban adaptive responses should be perceived as intersecting activities between different parts of a city’s infrastructure, such as spatial planning, water management, transportation and energy (Aylett 2015). This calls for a broad collaboration between different stakeholders and actors (Aylett 2015).
The literature highlights that, even though external actors frequently are the ones to promote urban adaptive planning, adaptation measures require robust political leadership, department engagement and continuous available resources (Anguelowski et al 2014). The effective outcome of these intersecting actions can be either restricted by the complex nature of institutional structures that a local government created for adaptation planning or fortified by creative synergies (Aylett 2015). Through the process of urban adaptation planning, some cities rely on the leadership of a local champion or on a directing department, who are working towards connecting different actors and ultimately adopt a strategy (Carmin et al. 2012). Other cities focus on connecting with international organizations, such as United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), in order to gain funding (Ayers 2009).
Despite climate change adaptation policy having expanded and having a more profound role in climate change governance, it is still not quite extensively developed. The existing literature suggests that relatively few cities have developed adaptations plans or have carried out their plans (Berrang-Ford 2011). In addition, there is a difference of local
15 adaptive plans between developed and developing countries (Berrang-Ford 2011). States with a high income are most likely to engage with and incorporate adaptation to their agenda than low income countries (Berrang-Ford 2011). Moreover, it is suggested that the areas that are the most affected by the threats of climate change are less likely to adopt adaptive measures (Berrang-Ford 2011). On a same note, Carter (2011) argues that city responses to climate change adaptation are still at a marginal level. In Europe, for instance, the lack of political will, the policy-barriers and the complex nature of institutions act as reasons that slow the development of climate change adaptation policy (Carter 2011). Carter concludes that a creation of stakeholder network is necessary to develop a more inclusive adaptation policy approach (Carter 2011).
The claim that climate adaptation is still on an early stage is supported by a more recent global study. Araos et al. (2016) assessed extensively climate adaptation policies of local governments in big urban areas by making use of their reporting mechanisms and online available data. More specifically, they assessed 401 local governments in urban areas on a global scale with a population of less than 1 million. Their main finding is that only 61 cities (15%) report climate change adaptation initiatives, whilst 73 cities (18%) report future plans on adaptation policy. Based on adaptation reporting, they categorize cities in four different stages. First, they categorized cities as extensive adaptors which refer to big cities with a high-income that are located in North America, Europe and Oceania and are implementing adaptation policies about specific risks and impacts. Second, moderate adaptors are cities located in both developed and developing countries and have a less accurate target as they develop strategies for general issues and risks. Third, early stage adaptors are the cities that do not report any adaptations initiatives but they plan to do so in the future. And, lastly, the cities that do not report any initiatives or future plans are referred to as non-reporting. These findings suggest that the vast majority of cities do not report any climate adaptation policy and planning, even though there are local governments that initiate adaptation policies in spite of their economic status and institutional barriers. (Araos et al. 2016).
16 Then the literature continues to explore further the reasons why cities struggle to implement adaptation plans. Cultural and institutional barriers are also contributing factors that set a limitation to the development of climate change adaptation strategies. Harries and Penning-Rowsell (2010) looked at the flood risks in the UK by researching the development of flood risk management strategy. Their research suggests that institutions, that have been assigned the role to address climate change and protect citizens from environmental risks, are not quite effective. The problem is that the character, beliefs and identity that they have created are not paralleled with the environmental context and its risks. They claim that this is a direct consequence of the government decentralization, which has weakened and limited the powers of national governments. (Harries and Penning-Rowsell 2010). A study in Norway regarding municipal institutional adaptation strategy for flood management does not align with the aforementioned claim. It suggests that adaptive institutional planning is less effective when the institutional framework is centralized (Naess et al. 2005). This is mainly affected by the belief that the implementation of flood measures should not be managed at a municipal level but at a state level. (Naess et al. 2005). Moreover, another study conducted in Norwegian municipalities with the purpose to look at adaptive measures that they had taken on, found that adaptation initiatives are mostly developed when local governments had experience with extreme weather conditions, which means that their responses were reactive and not proactive (Amundsen et al. 2010). Additionally, this study after its analysis identifies the four key barriers that impede adaptation activity at local level. First is the lack of familiarity with existing data about the impacts of climate change. Second barrier is the lack of concrete data on how climate change affects the local community. Third is the local constrained expertise to deal with problems of climate change. And fourth is that the local government does not have a clear role when working with adaptive measures and policies. (Amundsen et al. 2010).
Adding to this literature debate, Carmin et al. (2012) argue that local actors play a significant role in the implementation of climate change initiatives and that special
17 institutions are not necessary to address climate change adaptation. By researching two cities in the Global South – Durban in South Africa and Quito in Ecuador – they came to the conclusion that, even though institutions did not exist in Durban and in Quito and guidelines were not available, these cities were able to incorporate adaptation within existing policies in order to create new measures and initiatives. They call this type of activity “a process of bricolage” (Carmin et al. 2012, p. 29), which means that something new and innovative can be created by using old materials. However, they stress the fact that the cases of Durban and Quito cannot be applicable broadly to other cities, and that other cities on different settings can approach adaptation policy based on their needs, limitations and capacities (Carmin et al. 2012).
3.2 Urban Adaptive Experiments
Due to the lack of clear instructions combined with the fact that adaptation policy is a new domain, cities have developed different approaches to adopt and implement adaptation strategies. In the literature, climate change adaptation is frequently linked with policy experiments. Local governments have been experimenting with testing new ideas and concepts (Anguelowski and Carmin 2011). Bulkeley et al. (2013) explored urban climate change experiments by assessing 627 experiments (both mitigation and adaptation experiments) in 100 global cities. They found out that urban experiments are a recent phenomenon, concentrated mostly in Europe, Asia and Latin America. Despite that, most adaptation experiments were located in the area of North America, in cities such as Vancouver, Toronto and New York. Asian cities were also implementing adaptation initiatives. Especially, Asian coastal cities that had experienced in the past disasters, such as Tokyo, were more likely to engage in urban adaptation experiments. (Bulkeley et al. 2013).
Chu (2016) assessed how three cities in India framed, adopted and then implemented climate change adaptation experiments. After evaluating six climate change adaptation experiments in Bhubaneswar, Indore and Surat, he found that adaptation experiments are beneficial to local governments, because cities are able to evaluate which
18 adaptation policies fit better into their existing development structure. He further adds to the existing literature by suggesting that cities need to engage in more holistic plans that consists of “climate adaptation and development needs of the most environmentally and socio-economically vulnerable sections of society” (Chu 2016, p. 449) in order to increase the effectiveness of urban adaptation strategies.
3.3 Climate Change Adaptation Policy through TMNs
Many cities have started over the past decade to engage with TMNs and leverage their resources and capacities in order to address climate change impacts more efficiently (Fünfgeld 2015). The tools that TMNs provide to local governments will be discussed in the next chapter. Academic studies up until to this point, as the above mentioned literature review showed, have focused on identifying urban climate change adaptation policy. There are many studies that have explored the ways in which climate adaptation policy has been developed at a local level, the motives that lie beneath its adoption and the changes that need to be made in different sectors of a city in order to implement it. Moreover, the literature points out that urban adaptation policy still is at an early stage and, then, it explores the various barriers and constraints that hinder its development and implementation. Some of the slowing factors include institutional barriers. There is an ongoing debate with regard to whether institutions for urban climate adaptive planning should be centralized or decentralized. Moreover, other scholars claim that special and new institutions are not required to be developed as there are examples of local municipalities that have succeeded to adopt adaptation strategies by incorporating them to existing policies and using existing resources. Finally, the literature has steered towards assessing new and innovative ideas and initiatives that many cities have deployed due to the marginal and complex nature of adaptation policy.
However, research on the role that TMNs play in and on what extent they can facilitate the adoption and implementation of climate adaptation responses by local governments is scarce (Fünfgeld 2015). Indeed, no study was found regarding this matter. For this reason, this thesis attempts to fill this research gap. To do so, the research will examine
19 the climate adaptation policy of the city of Rotterdam and analyze to what extent TMNs were/are involved in the adoption and implementation of adaptive initiatives, and thus the main research question and three sub-questions will be answered.
20
4. Theoretical Framework
This chapter introduces the theoretical framework that the research is based on and that is needed in order to do the analysis. The theoretical framework is consisted of the theories of multi-level governance and TMNs. First, this chapter explores the literature of urban climate change governance by providing a background history of urban climate change governance along with illustrating its transition from government to governance, its motives and goals with a focus particularly given on adaptation, which is a core element of this research. Next, the theoretical framework continues with an overview of network governance, a toll which helps understand how cities shape relations with other cities or actor in order to address the issue of climate change. This is followed by the introduction of multi-level governance. The emergence of multi-level governance is being presented as well as its connection to the urban climate change governance is being analysed. Then, it explains what TMNs are as well as what are their established goals, and it further indicates the different strategies that TMNs deploy in order to govern in climate change policy through local governments. Finally, the following theoretical section illustrates how TMNs can facilitate urban adaptation governance and provides the theoretical tools that are required in order to answer the sub-questions and ultimately the main question of this research.
4.1 Background of Urban Climate Change Governance
Global climate change is closely connected with local governments, since cities produce a high percentage of GHG emissions as a result of their industrial activity and their high concentrated urban population (Newell et al. 2012), while the consequences of climate change threaten the wellbeing of cities as well as their future, and so they need to mitigate and adapt to these risks (Kern and Albern 2009). Cities and urban regions are affected by heat waves and sea level rising due to global warming and melting glaciers (Sippel and Jenssen 2009). Cities have to protect their citizens, preserve the natural environment and maintain their infrastructure strong. Urban climate change governance refers to the means that public, private and civil actors use to cope with the
21 impacts of climate change by exercising their power to influence, build institutions and manage urban climate responses (Anguelovski and Carmin 2011).
In fact, addressing environmental problems has been linked for many years with local governments. The Brundtland Report of the Brundtland Commission (formerly known as World Commission on Environment and Development) in 1987 stressed the important role that cities need to have in sustainable development due to the fact that most of the world’s population will live in cities (Betsill and Bulkeley 2006). The Agenda 21 of the Rio United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in 1992 then was a driving factor of local initiatives, as it called for its establishment on a local level by promoting the participation of cities as well as the adoption of mechanisms which would lead to the collaboration among them (Betsill and Bulkeley 2006). The unsuccessful negotiations on an international level in the 2009 COP15 in Copenhagen have been considered as a turning point for climate change governance, giving to the actions leaded by cities the recognition of possible solutions (Castán Broto 2017). More recently, after the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) were set by the United Nations (UN) urban action has been acknowledged once more as a focus for tackling climate change threats while implementing sustainable development (Barnett and Parnell 2016). A campaign called the Urban SDG is advocating successfully for local and regional mobilization in order to contribute to the implementation of the SDGs (Barnett and Parnell 2016).
Many are those, such as academics and policy makers, who argue that cities can address climate change problems more effectively than national states (Bansard et al. 2017). Some of the reasons that explain why cities are more important than states to deal with climate change are the following. First, national states can develop guidance in general for adaptation preparation and planning, but as actual risks, including drought, storms, flooding and heat waves, will affect particular places, resolution and effective managements can be located at the local level (Gremellion 2011). Second, cities can manage and influence sectors such as energy supply, transport, waste management,
22 land use planning and building regulations, and, thus, deal with issues of high importance such as energy consumption and waste production (Betsill and Bulkeley 2006). Third, on the local level can be found expertise that creates tailored actions, which fit the city’s needs best (Lutsey and Sperling 2008). Fourth, within cities are located scientists, businesses and professionals, who can stimulate and contribute to technological innovations, such as effective ways to reduce energy consumption and fight against heat stress (Lutsey and Jenssen 2008). Finally, it is stated in the literature that cities by building partnerships with different actors, promoting public participation and influencing national governments can enhance climate change actions (Betsill and Bulkeley 2006).
Since cities are considered major players in climate change governance, many of them have developed and adopted climate change plans and initiatives. The first wave of urban governance on climate change started on the late 1980s and included voluntary activities, as such it can be referred to as municipal voluntarism (Newell et al. 2012). In the recent second wave occurring in 2000s, cities have a more global impact as they are collaborating with global cities networks, for example the C40, which they share urban best practices for climate change strategies (Newell et al. 2012). The second wave of urban governance can be identified as strategic urbanism and it is more “...central to economic development, urban planning, and infrastructural investment” (Bulkeley 2015, p. 1406). Urban governance for climate change begins with the development of policies, regulations and programs, and then with the institutionalization of implementation processes by coordinating activities and sectors, and/or building new departments (Anguelovski and Carmin 2011).
Even though mitigation of climate change was the main focus for quite some time, adaptation to climate change has gained popularity and now both mitigation and adaptation measures are included in local policies (Kern and Albern 2009). In the literature it is stated that adaptation and mitigation activities must go hand in hand. Mitigation policy aims at reducing current and future GHG emissions, whereas
23 adaptation policy focuses on addressing negative impacts of climate change in order to adjust to them (Hamin and Gurran 2009). More recently, another goal has gained popularity in local policy domains, that of resilience. According to IPCC (2007), resilience can be described as the ability to be flexible and adapt to external threats through learning by them whilst being able to maintain the same identity (IPCC 2007). As far as adaptation policy is concerned, local governments focus more on the following adaptation strategies and measures after the assessment of expected climate change risks: eliminating risks, protection of citizens, strengthening infrastructure, building and promoting resilience, and transformation (Birkmann et al. 2010). Vulnerability to the effects of climate change is a key motivator for the adoption of urban climate change policies along with cities’ interest for smart growth (Sippel and Jenssen 2008). Each city has different goals and priorities, as such climate adaptation agenda differs per city. This means that cities adopt adaptation strategies that focus on specific sectors and threats, for example some cities are giving attention to coastal management, others to prevention of natural disasters or giving priority to citizens’ health and wellbeing (Anguelovski and Carmin 2011).
However, the fight against climate change risks is not an easy task for cities, as many of them encounter challenges. More specifically, for the implementation of adaptation activities many local governments struggle with financial resources, lack of human resources, and do not have access to the required special knowledge, information and capacities (Sippel and Jenssen 2008). Additionally, very important for successful adaptation strategies is strong political leadership who can “…maintain the agenda across political administrations, address substantive and technical issues, and stimulate a culture of innovation and cooperation” (Anguelovski and Carmin 2011, p. 172), which most of the times is constrained (Sippel and Jenssen 2008). As a result, cities do not act alone against the fight of climate change. They cooperate with one another and this has been often described in the literature as city diplomacy. They have joined numerous of national networks, such as the Mayors Climate Protection Agreement in the US, and TMNs, such as C40 Cities (Kern and Albern 2009), which has resulted in agreements,
24 collaborations, and institution and capacity building (Acuto and Rayner 2016). Moreover, networks are providing cities with benefits such as funds, knowledge and the possibility of networking and sharing experiences with other cities (Kern and Albern 2009).
4.2 Network Governance in Urban Climate Change
As mentioned earlier, one of the most effective ways to develop urban governance in order to address environmental and social problems is for cities to network (Keiner and Kim 2007). The basic and common understanding of networks is a set of relationships that are interdependent and non-hierarchical among many actors, who have mutual interests with regard to a certain policy, such as adaptation to climate change (Börzel 1998). Network refers to as the dependence that cities develop because of their need to co-operate with different non state actors in order to handle common problems and, thus, increase civil society’s capacities and improve decision making processes across many scales (Juhola and Westerhoff 2011). Through networking, cities exchange knowledge, information and sustainable innovations, which are important tools that contribute to mutual learning processes among them (Keiner and Kim 2007). The exchange of ideas, support and resources among cities that have the same interests is perceived as the best way to effectively achieve common goals (Börzel 1998). As a result, the practice of networking facilitates cities to overcome the problem of national governments not providing them the required knowledge (Keiner and Kim 2007).
In the literature there are identified three forms of network governance: self-regulation, lead organisation form and network administrative organisation form. This theoretical framework will focus on the first form of self-regulation. This form of network governance is characterized by a diffusion of decision-making power among the participant actors who define and manage governance activities themselves (Molin and Masella 2015). As a consequence network actors manage both internal and external relationships and take action collectively, as such decision-making power is symmetrical (Molin and Masella 2015).
25 In the context of urban climate change action, the relationships and interactions between local governments are referred to as city-to-city (C2C) cooperation. Cities form domestic, regional, global and multilateral C2C cooperation (Lee and Jung 2018). This theoretical framework will focus on multilateral C2C cooperation, which refers to partnership and learning among more than two cities. Examples for this kind of networks in climate change action are US Mayor Climate Protection Agreement, C40 and its sub-network Connecting Delta Cities. Multilateral C2C networks are initiated by cities and the foundation of their cooperation is the learning and sharing across cities all over the world (Lee and Jung 2018). There are, however, C2C networks that are initiated from non-profit organizations (NPOs) or non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and are referred to as institution-led cooperation, for example the ICLEI and its Cities for Climate Protection program (Betsill and Bulkeley 2004; Lee and Jung 2018). Functions of such networks will be discussed later on the theoretical framework (Section 4.4).
4.3 Multi-Level Governance and Climate Change Adaptation
The theoretical approach of multi-level governance has been often linked with local climate change due to the complex nature of climate change governance. Over the last decades, there has been a shift of government to governance, where different non state actors, such as public, private and voluntary actors, have been engaging in (Betsill and Bulkeley 2006). Multi-level governance theory suggests that decisions and climate change policy goals can be shaped at different levels of governance through different forms of regulation, influence and sanction (Bulkeley and Moser 2007). The need to develop collective policies to govern complex problems has minimized the role of national states and, as a result, decision making is being practiced “…at subnational, national and supranational levels of governance” (Bulkeley et al. 2010, p. 238).
There exist two different types of multi-level governance: type I focuses on different levels, where governance takes place between administrative units, while national state remains as a central authority, and type II recognizes forms of multi-level governance in which networks between public and private actors have a key role (Betsill and Bulkeley
26 2007). More specifically, type I highlights the change of national state power towards a vertical form of different levels of government (Román 2009). However, there are still levels of communications between national, local and also, international units, creating a system of a hierarchy between different levels of governance. An example of this form of multi-level governance is the formation of transnational municipal networks in Europe by non-state actors in order to integrate policies (Betsill and Bulkeley 2006). By contrast, type II of multi-level governance suggests that there are no hierarchies between different public or private actors and institutions, but instead they cooperate at a horizontal level of governance. According to this type, TMNs can be considered “…as new political space or sphere of authority” (Bulkeley et al. 2010, p. 240), who often interact with the governing systems of type I. However, as Gustavsson (2009) argues, these two types of multi-level governance do not necessarily differentiate from one another, but they can frequently overlap.
This theoretical framework will focus more on the type II of multi-level governance, because TMNs fit into this type better. Marks and Hooghe (2004) identify type II of multi-level governance as being more task-oriented jurisdictions with intersecting membership, where jurisdictions have many levels that overlap and have no clear boundaries as they are flexibly designed, as opposed to type I. Type II is also characterized by a wide collaboration between public and private actors, something that is located in type I as well, and is based on voluntary participation. Additionally, type II is more widespread at the local level. (Marks and Hooghe 2004). In the next section of the theoretical framework, the notion that TMNs fall in the type II of multi-level governance is explained better.
27
Table 1: Types of multi-level governance
Source: Marks and Hooghe (2004, p. 17)
Multi-level governance has been seen as a fruitful solution for climate change problems. In fact, in the literature it is argued that in order to tackle climate change efficiently, the focus should shift from individual level of political authority to different levels of political authorities, where new cross-scale structures and new networks are being shaped (Bulkeley 2005; Gustavsson et al. 2009). Since adaptation policy is a complex task, it requires all levels of governance (Amundsen et al. 2010). In other words, the multidimensional nature of adaptation to climate change includes a large number of actors, actions, sectors and levels of governance that shape connections, and within these connections a circulation of information, energy and materials is being supported (Leck and Simon 2012). TMNs, including C40, ICLEI and Climate Alliance among others, can facilitate these connections as they have created a foundation of joined efforts and collaborations at a city level (Corfee-Morlot et al. 2011).
4.4 TMNs and their Governing Strategies
The first wave of city responses to climate change occurred in the early 1990s. Cities in North America and in Europe began to engage with the issue on an individual level. The Chapter 28 of Agenda 21 facilitated the development of TMNs, as it called for the establishment of processes in order to “…increase the exchange of information, experience and mutual technical assistance among local authorities” (Bulkeley 2005, p.
28 876). Indeed, after the UN conference in Rio in 1992, three different TMNs were formed: The International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (now known as ICLEI Local Governments for Sustainability), which later established the Cities for Climate Protection network, Climate Alliance and Energie-Cites (Energy Cities). A second wave of municipal response emerged in the early 2000s. The new generation of municipal networks differs from the previous one in three ways: the networks are organised nationally, they operate alongside state and private actors, and they have a more clearer urban focus. (Bulkeley 2010).
In the field of international relations there are three distinctive types of transnational networks that TMNs have been linked with often by the literature. The first type of transnational networks is called epistemic community and is defined as a “professional group that believes in the same cause and effects relationships, truth tests to assess them, and shares common values” (Betsill and Bulkeley 2004, p. 474). More specifically, this type of TMNs is made up of experts who share a common appreciation of a scientific and political issue, and as a network is able to foster policy learning through creating fact-based consensual knowledge (Betsill and Bulkeley 2004). In epistemic communities, it is argued that the knowledge regarding environmental issues is blended with the framing and interpretation of interests (Betsill and Bulkeley 2004). The International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is suggested by some in the literature that can be considered as an epistemic community (Betsill and Bulkeley 2006). The second type of transnational networks is Transnational Advocacy Networks (TANs), which is consisted of “relevant actors working internationally on an issue, who are bound together by shared values, a common discourse, and dense exchanges of information and services” (Bulkeley 2005, p.880). TANs operate within both national and international political spheres and most frequently engage in issue areas where there are clearly distinguishable positions (Betsill and Bulkeley 2004). This type of networks includes both organizations and individuals, and their structure is voluntary, reciprocal and horizontal, which is supported by the spreading of information and mutual values (Betsill and Bulkeley 2004). Since TANs cannot have power over the states in a
29 traditional way (Betsill and Bulkeley 2004), they make use of their information, ideas and strategies in order to change states’ institutional policy (Betsill and Bulkeley 2006). An example of TANs that focuses on the issue of climate change is the Climate Action Network – International (CAN). In both epistemic communities and TANs, the power of transnational networks is based on the network’s ability to influence states through the spreading and framing of information. (Betsill and Bulkeley 2006). Finally, the third type of transnational networks is labeled as global civil societies. Global civil societies create a diffusion of governance in climate change issues, which includes multiple actors and operate not nationally but on a local and global scale (Betsill and Bulkeley 2004). However, it is argued that TMNs cannot fit perfectly into one of these three types of transnational networks as they have different kind of characteristics and a complex nature with multiple aspects and actors (Betsill and Bulkeley 2006). This claim supports the linkage between the TMNs and their multi-level governance roots.
Within most TMNs there are three groups of actors that can be identified (Kern and Bulkeley 2009). First there is an international secretariat, which includes a secretary or managing director and staff, and who assumes the role of organizing and managing the network internally on day-to-day activities and is in charge of external relations as well. The second group includes the president, vice-presidents and board members, who are responsible for general decision making with regard to the broader goals of the network. The third group of actors is the member cities, which some of them are founders of the network and they either engage actively in meetings and in knowledge building or they are merely passive members. (Kern and Bulkeley 2009). In Figure 1 the structure made of these three groups of actors is illustrated into a web network.
30
Figure 1: Structure of Transnational Municipal Networks
Source: Kern and Bulkeley (2009, p. 315)
As stated in the work of Kern and Bulkeley (2009), TMNs have the three following characteristics. First, the city-members are autonomous and are free to join or leave. Second, TMNs are a form of self-governance due to being non-hierarchical, horizontal and polycentric. Finally, decisions are implemented directly by the city-members. (Kern and Bulkeley 2009). These three characteristics reveal now even clearer the reason that TMNs fall better at the type II of multi-level, as their membership is voluntary and they function at a horizontal level. The goals of TMNs are to promote: 1. learning (e.g. sharing of knowledge, experiences, innovations) through meeting, publication of journals and electronic media, 2. lobbying, and 3. branding (e.g. cities can gain an environment-friendly image) (Keiner and Kim 2007; Carmin et al. 2009).
Learning and knowledge sharing of best practices of other cities are considered as to stimulate sustainable innovative practices and thus resulting in economic, social and environmental benefits (Keiner and Kim 2007). Distribution of best practices is a very
31 important tool, which has the power to multiply the adoption of new policies among city members. This is due to the fact that cities tend to include to their agenda policies that have been already tested by other cities (Rashidi and Patt 2017). This horizontal diffusion of ideas and best practices means that if a new policy is implemented by one city and is proved to be successful, then it is highly possible that other cities will adopt it as well.
The table following in the next page provides information about some of the largest TMNs, including their established goals, their geographic reach and the overall number of their members. Most of them share the mutual goal to assist local governments in taking actions against the challenges of climate change in various ways. For example, as already discussed, they provide knowledge, information, resources and tools in order to facilitate capacity building. The ultimate goal is for cities to become physically, socially and economically resilient to current and future climate change risks.
32
Table 2: Goals and membership of the most noticeable Transnational Municipal Networks
Source: Fünfgeld (2015, p. 68) According to Kern and Bulkeley (2009) TMNs have developed different forms of governing in order to influence climate change policies. TMNs employ a form of internal governing, which is a form of self-regulation, aiming at the attraction of new members and, thus, achieving goals and targets through them. Specifically, TMNs make use of three specific strategies of internal governing. First, TMNs deploy strategies of information and communication, which are very important, because TMNs have as a purpose to share best practices among theirs members, something that motivates the membership. Second, they make use of strategies regarding project funding and co-operation, which aim at the collaboration between city-members and at providing funds to members so that they can achieve their goals. The third strategy that they employ is recognition, benchmarking and certification. Recognition refers to different awards that members receive as an example when they implement good practices, something that
33 creates competition among the city-members. Through benchmarking members can benefit from comparing policies from all participants and thus leading to improvement. Finally, certification strategy provides municipalities with a label, such as “energy city”, which helps promote the city’s branding. (Kern and Bulkeley 2009). However, Betsill and Bulkeley (2004) claim that even though exchanging knowledge and information is an important factor to determine and attract membership, cities are more intrigued by the financial and political resources that the networks have to offer.
Table 3: Internal governing strategies of TMNs and their aim
Strategies Aim
1. Information and communication Dissemination of best practices
2. Project funding and cooperation Collaboration, reaching targets through funds
3. Recognition, benchmarking and certification
Improvement through policy comparison, awards and certifications
4.5 TMNs Facilitating Urban Climate Change Adaptation Governance – What Is Missing?
Bulkeley et al. (2010) suggest that TMNs are multilevel governance forms which can play a significant role in promoting local governance and informing, and shape EU policies with regard to sustainability issues. Since adaptation has a complex nature, as discussed in the literature review, new forms of governance are needed to address climate change adaptation. TMNs have already been active in supporting local governments to dealing with adaptation issues. Local governments are benefited from knowledge exchange, benchmarking, partnerships and are able to experiment and innovate. (Fünfgeld 2015). More specifically, TMNs open the way to collaborations among cities by giving them the possibility to find the right partners to join forces with in capacity building (Rashidi and Patt 2017). Other than that, TMNs stimulate competition among their city members through the dissemination of best practices and policies, which can be proven as a
34 powerful tool to influence and pressure other city members, who are lagging behind, to go along with the established goals (Kern and Bulkeley 2009). In addition, TMNs foster multi-sectoral collaborations between local government and the private sector (Bäckstrand 2008).
As discussed briefly in the literature review chapter, academic scholarship has not extensively explored TMNs influence with regard to climate adaptation policy, but has mainly focused on mitigation policy (Betsill & Bulkeley 2007; Fünfgeld 2015). This is mainly due to the fact that adaptation as a new policy domain has been only recently included in the agenda of TMNs. Therefore, this thesis aims at addressing this research gap by deploying the aforementioned theoretical framework in order to analyse the impact and effectiveness of TMNs in Rotterdam’s climate adaptation policy. More specifically, this research by using the theoretical tools of urban climate change governance, network governance, multi-level governance and, more importantly, TMNs strategies is going to examine the role that TMNs played in the adoption of Rotterdam’s climate adaptation policy, how TMNs are fostering the implementation process of Rotterdam’s strategy and finally to what extent TMNs achieve their own goals through their contribution to Rotterdam’s strategy. Hence, this analysis will answer the framed sub-questions and research question. A next step will be to critically discuss to what extent the findings of the research can be broadly generalized about other city members of TMNs.
35
5. Methods, Data Collection, Case Selection and Limitations
The focus of this chapter is on the research strategy chosen to answer the research question. First, it deals with the case selection. Next, it explains the research method tools that were used in order to do the analysis. This is followed by a detailed overview with regard to the data collection process. Thereafter, the chapter discusses the research criteria of reliability, validity and generalizability. Finally, this chapter acknowledges some limitations that the research faces.
5.1 Case Selection
For the purpose of this thesis, the case of Rotterdam is selected, which makes the research a single case study analysis. Single case study analysis aims “…to generate an intensive examination of a single case” (Bryman 2012, p. 71), which will provide enriched findings. The reason behind the selection of Rotterdam as a case is due to the fact that there are not studies in the literature, which link and evaluate Rotterdam’s climate change adaptation strategies and TMNs’ role. Not only the focus of the literature is climate change mitigation policies, but the few studies which actually did research on climate change adaptation, are vastly about cities in the Global South (see Carmin et al. 2009); Roberts 2010; Lampis 2013; Archer et al. 2014). Nevertheless, these studies do not correlate the influence of TMNs and climate change adaptation policy. Even though the literature on TMNs suggests that more studies should be conducted on the Global South, this suggestion in the literature is linked with more research on climate change concerning mitigation actions (Betsill and Bulkeley 2007). The majority of studies have researched mitigation responses in Northern countries and thus this produced the suggestion for more studies in the Global South, as there was a research gap. However, as discussed in the literature review, climate change adaptation is a new policy domain and therefore has not been researched extensively. Consequently, in order to bridge this gap in the literature, this thesis aims at looking into a northern located city that is active on developing climate adaptation strategies and collaborating
36 with TMNs. Moving forward, the research will examine the role of TMNs in order to answer the research question.
The city of Rotterdam, as a northern located city, is selected due to its activities on climate change adaptation. Rotterdam is considered a leading innovative city and the perfect living showcase example for climate change adaptation, whilst being an example for other delta cities (Aerts et al. 2012). ). Rotterdam is a member of various TMNs, including C40 and its sub-network Water & Adaptation Initiative called Connecting Delta Cities (CDC), which Rotterdam initiated, ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability and 100 Resilient Cities (100RC). The case study of Rotterdam will provide fruitful outcomes as it is a frontrunner in climate change adaptation strategies and an active member of many TMNs. It is logical to examine a city with rich policy and activity that can lead to rich outcomes, rather than selecting a city with low activity and thus leading to poor and insufficient findings.
The city of Rotterdam, being a delta city, is vulnerable and has to cope with the environmental challenges, such as sea-level rise, heavy rainfalls, flood risks, UHI effect and drought. These risks are very severe as they threaten Rotterdam’s economic development and its citizens’ health and well-being. They also threaten Rotterdam’s urban infrastructure, for example buildings in case of flooding. (Albers et al. 2015). In fact, Rotterdam identifies climate change adaptation as a priority and has adopted the Rotterdam Climate Proof approach in 2008 and the Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy in 2013 (C40 2016). The Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy aims at making the city climate proof by 2025 (City of Rotterdam 2013).
To conclude, taking into considerations these factors, Rotterdam is an important case to evaluate the influence and impact of TMNs on its strategies and initiatives, whilst providing useful insights for other cities who are dealing with the same climate change adaptations issues.
37
5.2 Research Method Tools
The methodology of the research is primarily qualitative. The main research methods that are linked with qualitative research are the following: ethnography / participant observation, qualitative interviewing, focus groups, discourse analysis and conversation analysis, and analysis of texts and documents (Bryman 2012, p. 383). This research made use of two research methods, qualitative interviewing and analysis of texts and documents. Moreover, the process of the research was conducted with a deductive approach. Deductive theory links theory and the hypotheses derived from it with the process of data collection in order to test them (Bryman 2012, p. 24). This aims at reaching to conclusions from the findings of the research. However, the inductive theory, which is the opposite of deductive, is also a necessary tool in this process in order to show how the findings are associated with the theory. This means that from the findings the research goes back to the theory in an attempt to formulate new generalized theories (Bryman 2012, p. 25). As the theoretical framework formulated a theory as forwarded by the literature on how TMNs can facilitate local governments in the process of climate change adaptation policy, the approach of deduction will guide the research to explore the case of Rotterdam in regard to this.
5.3 Data Collection
First, the research will deploy the method of text and document analysis and in particular the approach of content analysis. Content analysis refers to the examination of texts and aims to “…quantify content in terms of predetermined categories and in a systematic and replicable manner” (Bryman 2012, p. 290). Formal policy documents from the city of Rotterdam were used in order collect data and then process them in order to extract information with regard to the engagement within the municipality with TMNs. The selection of the policy documents was made under the criterion that the policy documents were dealing with climate change related issues and in particular adaptation. Additionally, this research used adaptation reports published by various TMNS. (see Appendix 3, page72)
38 Second, the research will use the method of interviewing. More specifically, semi-structured interviews were conducted with involved stakeholders - such as city administrators, policy makers, but, also, with individuals who are familiar with the topic, e.g. professors - in order to collect more data. Semi structure interview consists of a set of questions with regard to a specific topic that the researcher wants to cover (Bryman 2012, p. 471). This set of questions refers to as an interview guide. The fact that the interview is called semi-structured means that questions may not be asked as they were outlined on the interview guide, while new questions may be asked that are not included in it (Bryman 2012, p. 471). This gives the researcher the advantage to pick up “… on things said by the interviewees” (Bryman 2012, p. 471). This makes the semi-structured interview to be conducted in a flexible process.
An interview guide was formed prior to the interviews by creating a general set of questions, leaving room for some follow-up questions that might occur during the interviews (the interview guide can be seen in the Appendix 1, page 70). The questions were formulated in such a way that would allow the research to answer the research question, without, however, being too specific (Bryman 2012, p. 473). Some questions were adjusted in accordance to each participant’s job position and background. The interview guide was sent to every participant beforehand in order to ensure that they would be able to answer at least some of the questions. In total six interviews were conducted and five of them were audio recorded in order to process them in depth later on. Three of them were conducted in person, whilst the other two were conducted via a Skype meeting and a phone call meeting. Additionally, one interview was conducted via email correspondence. The duration of the interviews ranged from 33 to 54 minutes. The protocol of the interview is to protect the interviewees and their personal information. Anonymity of the interviewees is respected and they are only identified in the list of the interviewees by their job titles (Appendix 2, page 71). Disclosing the interviewees’ job position is important in order to contextualize and interpret their answers (Bryman 2012, p. 473). The information collected from the interviews will enrich the research, since examining and assessing the development and progress of
