Best practices and key challenges

Through the mapping and comparison of national adaptation policy, a wide range of best practices and main challenges emerge, some of which are common for all countries and some of which are unique to individual countries. The identification and analysis of best practices and main challenges is in part based on how adaptation has been evaluated within each country as well as by the interviewees. In the table below, we have prioritized those issues that are relevant for two or more of the Nordic countries. For issues that are unique to individual countries, please refer to the report.

We have synthesized best practices and main challenges across three interrelated themes:

Policies, systems, and tools
Responsibility, coordination, and collaboration
Integration

Policies, systems, and tools
Best practices	All Nordic countries have official steering documents (laws, White Papers, strategies etc.) that guide the work on adaptation and provide a common reference point for collaboration and strategic action. All Nordic countries have well-established scientific communities that can provide the scientific basis for risks, vulnerabilities and adaptation needs. All Nordic countries have well-developed platforms and websites for easy access to adaptation-related information.
Main challenges	A majority of the Nordic countries lack mechanisms for systematic knowledge generation on climate change related risks and vulnerabilities, including the socio-economic costs and benefits of action and inaction. Most Nordic countries lack systems for monitoring, reporting and evaluation (MRE) and all lack appropriate indicators for how to measure progress and results. Most Nordic countries lack a clearly articulated policy cycle where planning documents, knowledge generation, and MRE procedures are situated in relation to one another and support the continuous development of adaptation work nationally and sub-nationally. All Nordic countries lack appropriate indicators and measures to account for compounding, cascading and cross-border risks. All Nordic countries lack sufficient economic measures to incentivise adaptation, resulting in a growing gap between adaptation needs and available finances. All Nordic countries lack adaptation funding that meets the actual adaptation needs. Most of the Nordic countries struggle with translating knowledge on risks and vulnerabilities to local adaptation measures.
Responsibility, coordination, and collaboration
Best practices	Some Nordic countries have an official government body (e.g., ministry, council etc.) with the official responsibility for coordinating climate change adaptation at the national level. Some Nordic countries have cross-ministerial working groups that focus on cooperation and collaboration on issues pertaining to adaptation. Most Nordic countries have a clearly articulated role for municipalities in developing and adopting adaptation measures at the local level. In most Nordic countries, municipalities are highly proactive in identifying needs for and developing measures to adapt to climate change.
Main challenges	Most Nordic countries lack a political mandate within the leading government body and the cross-sectoral working groups to put adaptation on the domestic political agenda. The lack of a political mandate further challenges their ability to assume responsibility and be held accountable to local-level actors, as well as accept risk ownership and ensure that all risks are accounted for in both planning and execution. In all Nordic countries, public administration is marked by a "silo" structure, which prevents effective cooperation and synergies across sectors and authorities. In most Nordic countries, a lack of coordination and collaboration between adaptation and mitigation leads to missed opportunities for synergies and enhancing the risk of goal conflicts. In most Nordic countries, there is a lack of clarity concerning the responsibility of property owners to ensure appropriate adaptation of their property.

Table 2. Synthesis of best practices and main challenges

Integration
Best practices	All Nordic countries take a mainstreaming approach to adaptation, which means that all public authorities engage with adaptation to some degree. The interviewees in all Nordic countries are aware of the benefits of taking an integrative approach and seek to create synergies between their work and that of others. In some Nordic countries, adaptation at the municipal and county level is approached in relation to mitigation through integrated plans. In all the Nordic countries, approaches such as Nature-based Solutions (NbS) are becoming more prominent (at least in theory), enabling adaptation to be integrated with other related societal challenges.
Main challenges	In all Nordic countries, there are concerns that a mainstreaming approach can lead to a situation where no one is responsibility and adaptation is lost within the existing work of public authorities. All Nordic countries lack knowledge about how to take an integrative approach to adaptation, e.g., how to align adaptation with goals for mitigation and the SDGs in a way that benefits from synergies and mitigates conflicts. All Nordic countries lack appropriate indicators for measuring societal impact from adaptation measures beyond reducing immediate risks (e.g., wellbeing, empowerment, and dignity). According to interviewees in some Nordic countries, the prioritization of economic growth and quantitative criteria undermines the potential of adaptation to consider and integrate social and ecological concerns for the benefit of people and planet in a long-term perspective.