Editing IPCC:AR6/WGII/Chapter-12 (section)

== 12.6 Case Studies ==

<div id="12.6.1" class="h2-container"></div>

<span id="nature-based-solutions-in-quito-ecuador"></span>
=== 12.6.1 Nature-based Solutions in Quito, Ecuador ===

<div id="h2-21-siblings" class="h2-siblings"></div>

NbS are related to the maintenance, enhancement and restoration of biodiversity and ecosystems as a means of addressing multiple concerns simultaneously ( [[#Kabisch--2016|Kabisch et al., 2016]] ). NbS can trigger sustainability transitions. For example, the conservation and restoration of natural ecosystems are prone to promote synergy between mitigation, adaptation and sustainable development. EbA can be seen as a type of NbS deployed in response to climate-change vulnerability and risk ( [[#Greenwalt--2018|Greenwalt et al., 2018]] ), combining the objectives of reducing the vulnerability of human systems and increasing the resilience of natural systems ( [[#IPCC--2014|IPCC, 2014]] ).

The Municipal Quito District in Ecuador covers 4235 km 2 of mountainous territory that ranges from 500 to 5000 MASL. That territory has followed a pattern of urbanisation common in Latin America: its population has increased from around 500,000 people in the 1970s to nearly 3 million inhabitants by 2020, of which 80% live in urban areas ( [[#Municipio%20del%20Distrito%20Metropolitano%20de%20Quito--2016|Municipio del Distrito Metropolitano de Quito, 2016]] ). A massive inflow of people immigrated in the early 1970s due to various causes, including the search for the rents created as a result of the oil boom in the Ecuadorian Amazon, better working conditions, health, education and cultural services, in comparison with the rural areas or in mid-sized cities. As a result, the city underwent exponential growth, claiming valuable agricultural and forestry areas, as well as natural ecosystems, in the peripheries. Many of the new neighbourhoods were established through land invasions or informal markets, in many cases over steep slopes, in water sources and agricultural or conservation areas ( ''high confidence'' ) ( [[#Cuvi--2015|Cuvi, 2015]] ; [[#Gómez%20Salazar--2016|Gómez Salazar and Cuvi, 2016]] ). That exponential population growth, coupled with urban sprawl, poses many challenges to the city, including those related to climate change.

Mean air temperature and annual rainfall (measured by instruments since 1891 and inferred through historical records of rogation ceremonies since 1600), are increasing, combined with an increase in seasonality (i.e., longer periods of drought) and extreme weather events, particularly higher levels of precipitation ( [[#Serrano%20Vincenti--2017|Serrano Vincenti et al., 2017]] ; Domínguez- [[#Castro--2018|Castro et al., 2018]] ). Two impacts related to warmer air conditions are the displacement of the freezing line currently placed at 5100 MASL ( [[#Basantes-Serrano--2016|Basantes-Serrano et al., 2016]] ), followed by glacier retreat and the upward displacement of mountainous ecosystems ( ''very high confidence'' ) ( [[#Vuille--2018|Vuille et al., 2018]] ; [[#Cuesta--2019|Cuesta et al., 2019]] ). The key ecosystem that regulates water provision for the city is the paramo, and only about 5% of this process is related to glaciers, so the combined effects of climate change on both systems, coupled with land use change and fires, can reduce the availability of water for agriculture, human consumption and hydropower. Other important climatic hazards and impacts are the increase of solar radiation, the heat island effect and fires ( ''high confidence'' ) ( [[#Anderson--2011|Anderson et al., 2011]] ; [[#Armenteras--2020|Armenteras et al., 2020]] ; [[#Ranasinghe--2021|Ranasinghe et al., 2021]] ). On almost half of the days of each year, Quito’s population is exposed to levels of UV radiation above 11 according to the World Health Organization scale ( [[#Municipio%20del%20Distrito%20Metropolitano%20de%20Quito--2016|Municipio del Distrito Metropolitano de Quito, 2016]] ).

Various policies, programmes and projects have been created for the promotion of urban green spaces, protected areas, water source and watershed monitoring, conservation and ecosystem restoration, air pollution monitoring and control and urban agriculture. Among those actions, three recent ones are commonly highlighted. The first is the FONAG, established in 2000 with funds from national and international organisations to promote the protection of the water basins that supply most of the drinking water. It is a PES scheme enabled through a public–private escrow. The projects include conservation, ecological restoration and environmental education for a new culture of water, in a context opposed to the commodification of natural resources ( [[#Kauffman--2014|Kauffman, 2014]] ; [[#Bremer--2016|Bremer et al., 2016]] ; Coronel T, 2019). FONAG was innovative in the use of trust funds in a voluntary, decentralised mechanism and has inspired more than 21 other water funds in the region; nevertheless, its narrative of success has also been said to oversimplify and misrepresent some complex interactions between stakeholders as well as within communities and their land management practices ( [[#Joslin--2019|Joslin, 2019]] ).

The second highlighted initiative is the AGRUPAR (Participatory Urban Agriculture) programme, launched as a public initiative in 2002 initially with international cooperation funds. It was aimed at providing assistance to poorer urban and peri-urban populations, to initiate and manage orchards as well as domestic animals such as chickens and guinea pigs, with the goal of promoting self-sustenance and commerce. AGRUPAR provides and finances training, seeds and seedlings, greenhouses, certifications and marketing support and spaces where farmers can sell directly their products to consumers. In 2016, AGRUPAR gave assistance to more than 4000 farmers managing orchards of various scales that combined produce, more than 500 tonnes annually. The programme has direct impacts on nutrition, generation of work for women, production of healthy food, reduction of runoff, recycling of organic waste and social cohesion, among others ( ''very high confidence)'' ( [[#Thomas--2014|Thomas, 2014]] ; [[#Cuvi--2015|Cuvi, 2015]] ; [[#Rodríguez-Dueñas--2016|Rodríguez-Dueñas and Rivera, 2016]] ; [[#Clavijo%20Palacios--2017|Clavijo Palacios and Cuvi, 2017]] ).

A third initiative is the creation of a municipal system of protected areas, locally named Áreas de Conservación y Uso Sustentable (ACUS). This system covers an area of 1320 km², nearly a third of the Municipal Quito District. Half of this landscape (680 km 2 ) is covered by montane forests and paramos ( [[#Torres--2019|Torres and Peralvo, 2019]] ). These forests provide direct water, food and fibres for about 20,000 people and indirectly a rural landscape for a growing number of urban citizens and foreign tourists that practice ecotourism and look for fresh and healthy food. During the last three decades, this area has witnessed a high density of public and private conservation and restoration efforts that aim to regain ecological integrity and improve human well-being in deforested and degraded landscapes ( [[#Mansourian--2017|Mansourian, 2017]] ; [[#Zalles--2018|Zalles, 2018]] ; [[#Wiegant--2020|Wiegant et al., 2020]] ). Quito’s system of protected areas constitutes a primary strategy for fostering links between urban and rural citizens as a means of understanding the ecological dependence of urban metropolises to their surrounding natural landscapes. Along the same lines, these areas constitute a key element to increase the adaptive capacity of rural livelihoods and contribute to mitigating climate change through landscape restoration, sustainable production and forest conservation ( ''high confidence'' ).

Other NbS actions include the restoration of small basins, locally called quebradas, under different schemes of management and participation ( ''medium evidence, very high agreement'' ) ( [[#da%20Cruz%20e%20Sousa--2018|da Cruz e Sousa and Ríos-Touma, 2018]] ) and the transformation since 2013 of a large portion of the old Quito airport into an urban park. Nevertheless, Quito city continues to face challenges in the social, economic, infrastructural and environmental spheres. A major pending environmental issue is air pollution; a high level of pollutants affects the city in general and especially the most vulnerable groups ( ''high confidence'' ) ( [[#Zalakeviciute--2018|Zalakeviciute et al., 2018]] ; [[#Alvarez-Mendoza--2019|Alvarez-Mendoza et al., 2019]] ; [[#Estrella--2019|Estrella et al., 2019]] ; [[#Hernandez--2019|Hernandez et al., 2019]] ; [[#Rodríguez-Guerra--2019|Rodríguez-Guerra and Cuvi, 2019]] ). Another major issue is the continuous sprawl of new neighbourhoods, mainly through informal processes, that diminish urban resilience because of the destruction of conservation and food production areas, sources of water and the dispersion of settlements without primary services, among other consequences ( [[#Gómez%20Salazar--2016|Gómez Salazar and Cuvi, 2016]] ).

<div id="12.6.2" class="h2-container"></div>

<span id="anthropogenic-soils-an-option-for-mitigation-and-adaptation-to-climate-change-in-central-and-south-america.-learning-from-the-terras-pretas-de-índio-in-the-amazon"></span>
=== 12.6.2 Anthropogenic Soils, an Option for Mitigation and Adaptation to Climate Change in Central and South America. Learning from the “Terras Pretas de Índio” in the Amazon ===

<div id="h2-22-siblings" class="h2-siblings"></div>

Amazonian dark earths (ADEs), also known as Terras Pretas de Índio, are anthropogenic soils derived from the activities associated with the settlements and agricultural practices of pre-Hispanic societies in the Amazon (Woods and McCann, 1999; [[#Lehmann--2003|Lehmann et al., 2003]] ; [[#Sombroek--2003|Sombroek et al., 2003]] ). Most of the ADEs identified so far are 500 to 2500 years old ( [[#de%20Souza--2019|de Souza et al., 2019]] ). According to [[#Maezumi--2018a|Maezumi et al. (2018a)]] , polyculture agroforestry allowed for the development of complex societies in the eastern Amazon around 4500 years ago. Agroforestry was combined with the cultivation of multiple crops and the active and progressive increase in the proportion of edible plant species in the forest, along with hunting and fishing. The formation of ADEs as a result of these activities served as the basis for a food production system that supported a growing human population in the area ( [[#Maezumi--2018a|Maezumi et al., 2018a]] ).

ADEs are the result of the accumulation and incomplete combustion of waste materials such as ceramic artefacts and organic residues from harvesting, weeding, food processing (including cooking) and other activities ( [[#Lima--2002|Lima et al., 2002]] ; [[#Hecht--2003|Hecht, 2003]] ; [[#Kämpf--2003|Kämpf et al., 2003]] ). ADEs are characterised by their increased fertility in relation to adjacent soils, with high contents of organic carbon (C) (mainly as charcoal) as well as inorganic nutrients, especially phosphorus (P) and calcium (Ca) and high carbon/nitrogen ratios ( ''high confidence'' ) (Moline and Coutinho, 2015; [[#Alho--2019|Alho et al., 2019]] ; [[#Barbosa--2020|Barbosa et al., 2020]] ; [[#Pandey--2020|Pandey et al., 2020]] ; [[#Soares--2021|Soares et al., 2021]] ; [[#Zhang--2021|Zhang et al., 2021]] ). They also exhibit a high cation exchange capacity and moisture retention, among other properties ( [[#Hecht--2003|Hecht, 2003]] ; [[#Kämpf--2003|Kämpf et al., 2003]] ; [[#Falcão--2009|Falcão et al., 2009]] ). Charcoal content is a key indicator of pre-Hispanic fire activity and sedentary occupation, which is evidence of the anthropic origin of these soils ( ''high confidence'' ) ( [[#Hecht--2017|Hecht, 2017]] ; [[#Maezumi--2018b|Maezumi et al., 2018b]] ; [[#Alho--2019|Alho et al., 2019]] ; [[#Barbosa--2020|Barbosa et al., 2020]] ; [[#Iriarte--2020|Iriarte et al., 2020]] ; [[#Montoya--2020|Montoya et al., 2020]] ; [[#Shepard--2020|Shepard et al., 2020]] ).

Accumulation of organic residues and low-intensity fire management are recognised key elements in ADE formation. ADEs originating around settlements show a relatively high density of ceramic artefacts and are called terras pretas ''.'' They present a higher content of calcium and phosphorus than those originating from agricultural activities, which are known as ''terras mulatas'' ( [[#Hecht--2003|Hecht, 2003]] ).

There is a robust and growing body of research from various disciplines that assigns a high relevance to ADEs in the region. It has been shown through archaeological and palaeoclimatic data that Amazonian societies that based their agricultural management on Terras Pretas de Índio were more resilient to the changing climate due to increased soil fertility and water retention capacity ( [[#de%20Souza--2019|de Souza et al., 2019]] ). Additionally, low organic carbon degradability over long time periods, associated with high contents of charcoal or pyrogenic carbon, makes these soils an important C sink ( ''medium confidence'' : ''robust evidence, medium agreement'' ) ( [[#Lehmann--2003|Lehmann et al., 2003]] ; [[#Guo--2016|Guo, 2016]] ; [[#Trujillo--2020|Trujillo et al., 2020]] ), which is particularly relevant in an area like the Amazon, that could change from a net carbon sink to a net carbon source as a consequence of anthropogenic climate change ( [[#Maezumi--2018b|Maezumi et al., 2018b]] ).

The Indigenous agricultural practices that led to ADEs are thought to be associated with a more sedentary agricultural model than the current slash-and-burn and shifting cultivation practices. Although this is a controversial topic, as the precise definitions of slash and burn and shifting cultivation are presently under discussion ( [[#Hecht--2003|Hecht, 2003]] ), several present-day local and Indigenous agricultural practices, including in-field burning and nutrient additions from food processing and residue management, have been recognised as promoting high organic carbon and nutrient soil contents similar to those found in ADEs ( [[#Hecht--2003|Hecht, 2003]] ; Winklerprins, 2009).

At present, ADEs are estimated to cover up to 3.2% of the Amazon basin and are highly valued for their persistent fertility, and they have become a key resource for sustainable agriculture for Amazon communities in a climate-change context ( [[#Altieri--2013|Altieri and Nicholls, 2013]] ; [[#Maezumi--2018a|Maezumi et al., 2018a]] ; [[#de%20Souza--2019|de Souza et al., 2019]] ). Based on the lessons learned from the Terras Pretas de Índio, some researchers have proposed the development of technologies to promote a new generation of anthropogenic soils (e.g., Kern et al. 2009; Lehmann 2009; Schmidt et al. 2014; Bezerra et al. 2016; Kern et al. 2019). Among the technologies based on ADE findings, biochar, obtained by the slow pyrolysis of agricultural residues, is the most explored application found in the literature ( [[#Mohan--2018|Mohan et al., 2018]] ; [[#Matoso--2019|Matoso et al., 2019]] ; [[#Amoah-Antwi--2020|Amoah-Antwi et al., 2020]] ). The dual purpose of increased soil fertility and carbon sequestration is considered an important goal in connection with developing sustainable agriculture in a climate-change context ( [[#Kern--2019|Kern et al., 2019]] ).

Preservation of the practices and knowledge associated with these soils is vital for sustainable agriculture in a climate-change scenario in the Amazon. It will greatly contribute to the preservation of valuable IK as well as the contribution to the development of new adaptation and mitigation technologies, among other unexplored solutions.

<div id="12.6.3" class="h2-container"></div>

<span id="towards-a-metropolitan-water-related-climate-proof-governance-reconfiguration-the-case-of-lima-peru"></span>
=== 12.6.3 Towards a Metropolitan Water-related Climate Proof Governance (Re)configuration? The case of Lima, Peru ===

<div id="h2-23-siblings" class="h2-siblings"></div>

Lima-Callao Metropolitan Area, capital of Perú, is facing recurrent climate disasters providing lessons on water-related climate-proof governance reconfiguration. The first lesson is that when disasters affect poor and rich populations, dominant actors prioritise the integral city’s resilience and development and coordinate and collaborate within a ''concertation'' framework across institutional levels and geographical scales ( [[#Hommes--2017|Hommes and Boelens, 2017]] ; [[#Miranda%20Sara--2021|Miranda Sara, 2021]] ), even having different ideas, discourses, and power, recognising that no single actor has enough power. Second, water-related climate-change scenarios require comprehensive, transverse, multi-sectoral, multi-scalar, multiple types of actor knowledge (expert, tacit, codified and contextual embedded) ( [[#Pfeffer--2018|Pfeffer, 2018]] ) and transparent information to manage the tensions and even conflicts when some knowledge is not shared or restricted, particularly when lower risk perception and higher risk tolerance are present. Finally, a ''concertative'' (processes involving a variety of actors, which has become mandatory in Peru) strategy to ''localise'' climate-changed-related action shows quicker, more effective and more transparent results ( ''medium confidence, robust evidence, medium agreement'' ) ( [[#Miranda%20Sara--2014|Miranda Sara and Baud, 2014]] ; [[#Pepermans--2016|Pepermans and Maeseele, 2016]] ; [[#Siña--2016|Siña et al., 2016]] ; [[#Miranda%20Sara--2017|Miranda Sara et al., 2017]] ).

As the second driest city in the world, Lima is highly vulnerable to drought and heavy rainfall in the nearby Andean highlands ( [[#Schütze--2019|Schütze et al., 2019]] ). Located on the Pacific coast with more than 10 million inhabitants, it suffers from flooding, mudslide disasters and water stress, and is more frequently affected by heavy rain peak events (1970, 1987, 1998, 2012, 2014, 2015 and 2017) ( ''very high confidence'' ) ( [[#Mesclier--2015|Mesclier et al., 2015]] ; [[#Miranda%20Sara--2016|Miranda Sara et al., 2016]] ; [[#French--2017|French and Mechler, 2017]] ; [[#Vázquez-Rowe--2017|Vázquez-Rowe et al., 2017]] ; [[#Escalante%20Estrada--2020|Escalante Estrada and Miranda, 2020]] ). In addition to unequal water distribution in quantity and pricing, one million inhabitants lack water connections ( [[#Ioris--2016|Ioris, 2016]] ; [[#Miranda%20Sara--2017|Miranda Sara et al., 2017]] ; [[#Vázquez-Rowe--2017|Vázquez-Rowe et al., 2017]] ) as a result of a lack of long-term city planning and lack of integration with water and risk management. Climate-change scenarios were ignored or denied, particularly when budget allocations for preventive actions were necessary ( ''high confidence'' ) ( [[#Miranda%20Sara--2016|Miranda Sara et al., 2016]] ; [[#Allen--2017a|Allen et al., 2017a]] ).

In 2014, the water company (SEDAPAL), together with the Lima Metropolitan Municipality (LMM), National Water Authority (ANA) and other organisations, agreed on a Lima Action Plan for Water ( [[#Schütze--2019|Schütze et al., 2019]] ). The same year, the LMM approved a climate change strategy defining adaptation and mitigation measures ( [[#Miranda%20Sara--2014|Miranda Sara and Baud, 2014]] ) based on technical and scientific action research within interactive and iterative ''concertation'' multi-actor processes.

However, in 2015, municipal elections shifted Lima’s and, later, Peru’s political power to parties associated with climate deniers at a high cost to the people, city infrastructure and housing. In early 2017, buildings along rivers, ravines and slopes suffered from floods, ''huaycos'' (mudslides), and the whole city experienced potable water cuts ( [[#Vázquez-Rowe--2017|Vázquez-Rowe et al., 2017]] ) and vector-borne diseases affecting especially poorer but also richer inhabitants.

A so-called coastal El Niño affected the whole country, and as a consequence, in 2018 the Peruvian government passed the Framework Law for Climate Change, Law No. 30754, a unique political decision, to assure the integration of climate-change concerns in public policies and investment projects. The law defines local government mandates on local climate action plans. The 2019 municipal elections brought new local authorities to Lima, and by 2020, 19 district municipalities had developed adaptation measures, adopting the metropolitan climate change strategy with support from Cities for Life Foro and GIZ ( [[#Foro%20Ciudades%20Para%20la%20Vida--2021|Foro Ciudades Para la Vida, 2021]] ). In 2021, LMM approved its local climate change plan (LCCP), and 10 (out of 51 with Callao) more municipalities finalised their LCCP with the support of the Global Covenant of Mayors for Climate &amp; Energy and the European Union.

The institutionalised culture of participation in Peru did lead to a broader concept of concertation, wherein practices of collaborative planning were developed to allow actors to build up socially supported agreements and decisions and take action without losing sight of their principles. These processes have been applied to reduce risks, to adapt and to anticipate uncertain and unknown futures; they also introduced climate-change concerns within a complex political and institutional environment surrounded by corruption scandals ( [[#Vergara--2018|Vergara, 2018]] ; [[#Durand--2019|Durand, 2019]] ) and growing political polarisation.

Several processes have been set in motion to engage citizen participation and promote climate action planning. First, the LMM with Climate Action Plan processes reopened the Climate Change Technical Group of the Municipal Environmental Commission, whose work ended in the approval of the Lima Local Action Plan of Climate Change ( [[#MML--2021|MML, 2021]] ). Second, the River Basin Council is developing the River Basin Management Plan led by the National Water Authority.Finally, the Metropolitan Lima Urban Development Plan is finalising a citizen consultation, with the support of a high-level consultation group.

Such processes include heated discussions, conflicts and the recognition of other discourses and types of knowledge so as to build up scenarios that ‘visualise’ and anticipate what might happen. These processes require democratic, transparent and decentralised institutions, providing clear mandates and strong political will to support them, so that the poor and vulnerable can make their views known and are able to make themselves heard, even if their power remains limited ( [[#Chu--2016|Chu et al., 2016]] ). Opportunities for the reconfiguration of sociopolitical and technological water governance are emerging based on socially supported agreements ( [[#Miranda%20Sara--2014|Miranda Sara and Baud, 2014]] ; [[#Miranda%20Sara--2021|Miranda Sara, 2021]] ). However, the water governance configuration faces the paradox that the current water demands of all users combined may no longer be feasible within ecological limits and future climate-change consequences ( [[#Miranda%20Sara--2016|Miranda Sara et al., 2016]] ; [[#Schütze--2019|Schütze et al., 2019]] ).

<div id="12.6.4" class="h2-container"></div>

<span id="strengthening-water-governance-for-adaptation-to-climate-change-managing-scarcity-and-excess-of-water-in-the-pacific-coastal-area-of-guatemala"></span>
=== 12.6.4 Strengthening Water Governance for Adaptation to Climate Change: Managing Scarcity and Excess of Water in the Pacific Coastal Area of Guatemala ===

<div id="h2-24-siblings" class="h2-siblings"></div>

Guatemala experiences high climate interannual variability, now increased from the effect of climate change ( [[#INSIVUMEH--2018|INSIVUMEH, 2018]] ; [[#Bardales--2019|Bardales et al., 2019]] ). Impacts on human settlements, agriculture and ecosystems result from both excess and reduced precipitation ( ''high confidence'' ) ( [[#12.3.1.4|Section 12.3.1.4]] ). [[#Guerra--2016|Guerra (2016)]] argues that deficient IWRM in the country is the main reason for those impacts. A case in point is that of the Madre Vieja and Achiguate rivers, where an intense El Niño event triggered dryer conditions and, in turn, a crisis and conflict that reached national proportions. Progress in local water governance helped to solve that crisis and helped tackle challenges posed by reduced precipitation and flood risk in southern Guatemala.

The ENSO event that started in November 2014 and ended in July 2016 ( [[#CIIFEN--2016|CIIFEN, 2016]] ) was the most intense since records commenced in 1950 ( [[#NOAA--2019|NOAA, 2019]] ). Its effects were felt in different parts of the world, and Guatemala and the rest of CA experienced intense water scarcity due to a significant reduction in rainfall ( ''high confidence'' ) ( [[#IICA--2015|IICA, 2015]] ; [[#Scientific%20American--2015|Scientific American, 2015]] ). River flow in the dry months is related to precipitation levels in the previous rainy season, so ENSO has an effect on river flow rates. Two of the main rivers in the Pacific coast of Guatemala, Madre Vieja and Achiguate, dried out completely at the beginning of 2016, triggering a nearly violent local conflict that caught the attention of national leaders ( [[#Guerra--2016|Guerra, 2016]] ; Gobernación de Escuintla et al., 2017). In addition to the severe drought, the rivers dried because of overextraction by multiple users (60 in the case of Madre Vieja). This had happened before to a lesser extent in the last 20 years during the critical months of the dry season. A lack of regulation, coordination mechanisms, information and other elements of water governance was the root cause of the problem, exacerbated by the drier conditions during the intense El Niño event, resulting in the intensification of an existing conflict ( ''high confidence'' ) ( [[#Guerra--2016|Guerra, 2016]] ).

Roundtables were set up to foster dialogue between numerous stakeholders, including communities, agri-export companies, governmental organisations and municipalities, all led by the local governor (Gobernación de Escuintla et al., 2017). Agreements included keeping a minimum river flow all the way to the sea, setting up a monitoring and verification system for levels of river flow and restoring riparian forests. A system was set up to monitor river flow at different points along the rivers on a daily basis in the dry season using a simple WhatsApp-based system to communicate the warnings and monitor compliance. Four years on, the rivers had not dried out and conflict was kept to a minimum. Rural communities can use rivers for recreational purposes and for fishing all year round, while plantations (large and small) can use water for irrigation (rationally) and keep producing. Similar schemes and interactions started happening in other rivers in the Pacific coast of Guatemala, with positive results, in particular, rivers kept flowing all through the dry season, as can be seen in the report of river flows for the years 2017, 2018 and 2019 ( [[#ICC--2019b|ICC, 2019b]] ).

A key actor in the improvement of water governance has been the private Institute for Climate Change Research (ICC). This is a unique initiative that was created in 2010 and is funded primarily by the private sector of Guatemala to help the country advance in climate-change mitigation and adaptation ( [[#Guerra--2014|Guerra, 2014]] ). The institute works alongside local governments, communities and private companies in several areas besides integrated water management. Its role is merely technical-scientific: it oversees the water monitoring system, generating data on weather and hydrology and providing support to other stakeholders.

Local governance was also essential for the implementation of flood risk management actions ( ''high confidence'' ). [[#Guerra--2017|Guerra et al. (2017)]] explained how impacts were significantly reduced in the Coyolate River watershed, as well as on the Pacific coast of Guatemala, thanks to flood protection that was designed and implemented in a technical and integrated manner. This was a result of the strong and active participation of local communities, companies and the local municipality, which demanded that the central government invest effectively. The stakeholders provided some resources (financial and in-kind) and inspected the works. Some flat areas of the lower Coyolate watershed used to flood annually, causing economic damage in communities. The areas covered by flood risk measures have not flooded and so have avoided losses and created conditions that attract investment and create jobs, improving living conditions for the locals. Other processes of participation and interaction between the authorities, the private sector and communities have taken place in other watersheds for planning, action and investment in connection with flood risk management. The ICC has played a role by studying flood-prone areas, building capacities in communities, fostering public–private coordination mechanisms and providing much needed technical assistance to local governments ( [[#ICC--2019a|ICC, 2019a]] ).

Although some may argue that water governance is in the realm of development, it has made contributions in reducing direct and indirect impacts of climate events and, therefore, can be seen as a key element for climate adaptation ( ''high confidenc'' e).

<div id="12.7" class="h1-container"></div>

<span id="knowledge-gaps"></span>