Multi-level Governance, Policy Networks and the Integration of Mitigation and Adaptation in the Land Use Sector: Evidence from Indonesia

Abstract

This paper explores the political opportunities and challenges associated with facilitating integration of climate change mitigation and adaptation in land use policy processes across levels of governance in Indonesia. Since the 2nd IPCC assessment report it has been recognized that mitigation and adaptation display important synergies in the land use sector (Klein et al. 2005, Nabuurs et al. 2007). While previous research has proposed various ways to integrate adaptation and mitigation activities (Murdiyarso et al. 2005), we know little about what is needed to effectively integrate policy decision-making processes and policy objectives across levels of governance (Locatelli et al. 2015, Doherty and Schroeder 2011, Ravikumar 2015). We understand multi-level governance as ‘the existence of overlapping competencies among multiple level of governments and the interaction of policy actors across those level’, which result in ‘multi-level policy networks’ (Marks et al. 1996: 41-2) and reflect a multi-actor polycentric polity structure (Mayntz 1994, Ostrom 2010). Mechanisms that determine the structure of cross-level interactions – whether they result in dominance, separation, merger, negotiated agreement or systems change – are determined by: i) authority and power differentials; ii) level and limits of decentralization; iii) contrasting discourse; iv) cognitive transitions; and v) blocking - or supporting - policy coalitions (Young 2006). This paper investigates multi-level governance processes within the sub- domains of climate change mitigation and adaptation in the land use sector. It focuses in particular on assessing the differences and the level of integration among these two sub-domains across national and sub-national governance levels. It does so by investigating the role of policy coalitions and of central policy actors in facilitating interactions across national, province and district levels in Indonesia. It adopts an institutional approach and social network analysis approach (Scott 2000, Young 2006). The study is based on fieldwork undertaken between 2014 and 2015 in Indonesia. It is based on 120 interviews with policy actors across the national level and in one province (West Kalimantan) and in one district level (Kapuas Hulu).