3.8 Article

Stakeholder mapping and analysis for climate change adaptation in Greece

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s41207-022-00317-3

关键词

Stakeholder mapping; Multicriteria analysis; Climate change adaptation; Weighting factors; Priority index

资金

  1. European Union's (EU) LIFE program [LIFE17 IPC/GR/000006]
  2. Green Fund of Greece

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Stakeholder mapping and analysis is crucial in climate change adaptation projects to assess the importance and needs of relevant stakeholders. In Greece, the cooperation of diverse stakeholder groups is essential for implementing climate change actions. This study used multicriteria analysis to map the stakeholders involved in adaptation planning and implementation in Greece and classified them based on their relative importance and priority.
Stakeholder mapping and analysis is essential in climate change adaptation (CCA) projects to assess and identify the importance and needs of the relevant stakeholders (SHs). The complexity and importance of the implementation of CCA actions depends on the cooperation of diverse groups of stakeholders in line with the policy implementation characteristics which apply in Greece. To map the actors involved in adaptation planning and implementation in Greece, a multicriteria analysis was performed. The SHs involved in CCA in Greece were divided into national- and regional-level stakeholders. The stakeholder analysis was based on the mapping of SHs identified through the organizational charts of relevant institutions and by other projects with a direct or indirect link to CCA. The relative importance of each stakeholder for the purposes of this analysis was assessed by evaluating their power, proximity and urgency with respect to CCA and by assigning specific weighting factors for each criterion to calculate a single priority index. Based on the priority index value, SHs were classified as low, medium or high priority for CCA at both national and regional levels. At the national level, ministerial directorates were classified as high priority, followed by academic and research centers, which were classified as medium priority. At the regional level, high index values were calculated for the Special Directorate of Environment and Spatial Planning. The General Directorate of Civil Protection and the Directorate of European Programs were classified as medium and low priority, respectively.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据