Abstract
The capability approach is increasingly presented as a promising approach to address questions of justice in local climate adaptation. In an attempt to integrate environmental protections into the capability approach, Breena Holland developed the meta-capability Sustainable Ecological Capacity to establish substantive ecological limits. This article, however, empirically demonstrates that defining ecosystem thresholds in co-evolving systems is subject to conflict and continuous negotiation. Taking the Haringvliet dam in the Dutch South-West Delta as an illustrative case, this paper shows how people uphold different views about the Haringvliet’s most desirable ecosystem state. Future shifts in the socio-ecological system, such as decreased fresh water availability and sea-level rise, are expected to uproot today’s compromise about chloride levels in the Haringvliet. This suggests that anticipatory water management should not only address climate impacts, but also prepare for re-negotiations of established ecological thresholds. The associated politics of climate adaptation deals with questions about which functions to protect, at what costs and for whom. Hence, it is critical to integrate procedural justice and attention to political inequalities in capabilities-based adaptation justice frameworks.
Highlights
If the world fails to take sufficient climate action, large parts of the Earth can become uninhabitable [1]
Climate adaptation is defined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) as ‘the process of adjustment to actual or expected climate and its effects, in order to moderate harm or exploit beneficial opportunities’ [5]
Additional pre-conditions for political equality are discussed to improve the relevance of the capability approach to local climate adaptation politics [18,19,20]
Summary
If the world fails to take sufficient climate action, large parts of the Earth can become uninhabitable [1]. Lessons from past controversies about human-induced ecosystem state shifts can help to prepare for the local impacts of human-induced climate change. According to her, prioritizing the protection of ‘Sustainable Ecological Capacity’ as a meta-capability is necessary since healthy ecosystems are preconditions for all other human capabilities [13,14,15,16] This instrumental line of argumentation helps to justify ecological protection and climate action. The objective of this article is to show that establishing a priori ecological limits is insufficient to address controversies in co-evolving ecosystems. Previous and current struggles about shifts in socio-ecological system states, such as the Haringvliet controversy, provide an angle to better understand and anticipate future adaptation conflicts. Additional pre-conditions for political equality are discussed to improve the relevance of the capability approach to local climate adaptation politics [18,19,20]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
