In this paper we ponder this question: what types of institutional principles would help to establish a macroregional climate change adaptation strategy in the Baltic Sea Region? Inspired by a new institutionalism approach, we trace some of the important elements of regulatory and normative institutional functions. We then discuss how top-down and bottom-up government and governance can contribute to a macroregional climate change adaptation strategy, and profile the local, national, and transnational development efforts that are already underway to facilitate coordination and learning about climate change adaptation in the Baltic Sea Region. Finally, we look at the specific role that a macroregional climate change adaptation strategy has in helping to manage institutional complexity inherent in a multilevel governance context.
AbbottK W, 2012, “The transnational regime complex for climate change”Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy30571–590
2.
AlexanderE R, 2005, “Institutional transformation and planning: from institutionalization theory to institutional design”Planning Theory4209–223
3.
AmundsenHBerglundFWestskogH, 2010, “Overcoming barriers to climate change adaptation — a question of multilevel governance?”Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy29276–289
BulkeleyHJordanA, 2012, “Transnational environment governance: new findings and emerging research agendas”Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy30556–570
8.
BulkeleyHAndonovaLBäckstrandKBetsillMCompagnonDDuffyRKolkAHoffmannMLevyDNewellPMilledgeTPatersonMPattbergPVanDeveerS, 2012, “Governing climate change transnationally: assessing the evidence from a database of sixty initiatives”Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy30591–612
9.
CBSS, 2011Council of the Baltic Sea States Strategy on Sustainable Development 2010–2015. Council of the Baltic Sea States, Stockholm
10.
Committee of the Regions, 2010, “Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on ‘Adapting to climate change in Europe—options for EU actions'”Official Journal of the European Union (European Commission Brussels)C5321–24
HilpertKMannkeFSchmidt-ThoméP, 2007Towards Climate Change Adaptation in the Baltic Sea Region. Geological Survey of Finland, Espoo
24.
IPCC, 2007Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge)
25.
KarlssonALindströmBVan WellL, 2009Towards the Third Generation of Regional Policy 2009:2 [Ålands Statistik och utredningsbyrå] (in Swedish, English summary)
26.
KeohaneROstromE, 1995Local Commons and Global Interdependence: Heterogeneity and Cooperation in Two Domains (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA)
27.
KernKBulkeleyH, 2009, “Cities, Europeanization and multi-level governance: governing climate change through transnational municipal networks”Journal of Common Market Studies3309–332
28.
KrasnerS D (Ed.), 1983International Regimes (Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY)
LebelLAndriesM JCampbellBFolkeCHatfields-DoddsSHughesT PWilsonJ, 2006, “Governance and the capacity to manage resilience in regional social-ecological systems”Ecology and Society111–19
31.
MarchJOlsenJ, 1998, “The institutional dynamics of international political orders”International Organization52943–970
32.
MarchJOlsenJ, 2004, “The logic of appropriateness”, WP 04/09, ARENA Centre for European Studies, University of Oslo
33.
MetzgerJSchmittP, 2012, “When soft spaces harden: the EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region”Environment and Planning A44263–280
34.
NorthD, 1990Institutions, Institutional Change, and Economic Performance (Cambridge University Press, New York)
35.
O'BrienR, 2001, “An overview of the methodological approach of action research”, in Theory and Practice of Action Research Ed. RichardsonR (João Pessoa, Brazil) (English version) pp 1–18
36.
OstromE, 1990Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action (Cambridge University Press, New York)
37.
OstromE, 1995, “Designing complexity to govern complexity”, in Property Rights and the Environment: Social and Ecological Issues Eds HannaSMunasingheS M (The Word Bank, Washington, DC) pp 33–46
38.
OstromE, 2005Understanding Institutional Diversity (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ)
39.
OstromE, 2007, “Institutional rational choice: an assessment of the institutional analysis and development framework”, in Theories of the Policy Process Ed. SabatierP A (Westview Press, Boulder, CO) pp 21–64
40.
OstromE, 2009, “A polycentric approach for coping with climate change”, background paper to the 2010 World Development Report, World Bank, Washington, DC Pain R, 2003, “Social geography on action-oriented research”Progress in Human Geography27649–657
41.
Parliament of the Free and Hanseatic City of Hamburg, 2009Hamburger Klimaschutztonzept Hamburg
PeltonenLJuholaS, 2010, “Governance of climate change adaptation: policy review”, available at http://www.baltcica.org
44.
RaustialaKVictorD, 2004, “The regime complex for plant genetic resources volume”International Organization58277–309
45.
ScottW R, 1995Institutions and Organizations (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA)
46.
Tepecik DisAHendrikssonALanglaisR, 2010, “BALTIC 21 draft report: background paper on climate change”, EGB21 1/3/Info 1, Council of the Baltic Sea States Expert Group, Stockholm
47.
UrwinKJordanA, 2008, “Does public policy support or undermine climate change adaptation? Exploring policy interplay across different scales of governance”Global Environmental Change18180–191
