Integrating Climate Change Adaptation Policy in Switzerland

As the impacts of climate change cut across several policy domains, the principle of climate change adaptation policy integration (CAPI) has been widely acknowledged as a key pillar of climate change adaptation policy. While CAPI is broadly discussed in conceptual proposals, empirical studies on how CAPI is adopted in practice are still scant. Applying categorizations developed in the Environmental Policy Integration (EPI) literature, this paper first reviews the different concepts and approaches of CAPI. Based on this review, a framework for the empirical analysis of CAPI as a governing process is developed. Subsequently, its applicability is illustrated by analyzing how CAPI was approached during the development of the Swiss National Adaptation Strategy (NAS) and what levels of integration have resulted. The analysis reveals that in Switzerland, CAPI has been achieved at either a weak or medium level. The medium level mainly results from substantial coordination across the involved sectors during the NAS process. This is expressed through a standardized procedure for identifying key vulnerabilities and possible fields of action for the participating sectors and a consistent identification of interfaces as potential sources for synergies and conflicts. However, on the sectoral level, adaptation is considered especially when it overlaps with primary sectoral objectives. Some sectors even consider climate change adaptation as an integral part of their agenda, but for thus far lack backing by organizational and procedural measures. New instruments are discussed only on a conceptual level. Adjustments of existing instruments occasionally take place but are barely coordinated across sectors. The consideration of potential contradictions or negative effects seems to express particular sectors’ concerns and demands rather than conclusions from cross-sectoral deliberation. From an organizational perspective, adaptation is strongly concentrated in the Federal Office for the Environment rather than being integrated among different offices and departments. Overall, the analysis suggests a similar pattern for CAPI as for EPI: While policy frameworks such as strategies are adopted rather easily, a move towards more binding measures that interfere with sectoral policy-making and the existing institutional structure and eventually resulting in more substantial levels of integration is much more challenging. However, in contrast to EPI, the greater potential fit of sectoral and adaptation objectives suggests a more optimistic outlook for CAPI, though a major challenge involves the coordination of measures in order to avoid severe negative effects across sectors.