school of the built environment globalisation, climate change and urban governance: balancing the...
TRANSCRIPT
School of the Built Environment
Globalisation, climate change and urban
governance: balancing the scales for both
efficient and pro-poor urban futures
May 18/19, 2010
Climate change and adaptation planning
Dr. Jake Piper
School of the Built Environment
Overview
• Comparison UK : Brazil
• National attributes of relevance to CC exposure & adaptation
• Climate change
• Adapting to climate change
• Phases experienced
• Future phases: Barriers and barrier busters
School of the Built Environment
Comparing populations (= pressure on environment)
UK: 59 millionEngland: 49 million – 383/km2SE England: 8 million – 421/km2
England = 54% size of SP state ( UK approx. size of SP state)
• Brazil – 186 million – 22/km2• Sao Paulo state – 38 million – 160/km2
School of the Built Environment
National attributes of relevance to CC exposure & adaptation
UK BrazilTemperate to boreal climate Temperate to tropical climates
Geophysical stable, long exploited land; v little natural environment
Exploited for less time, larger proportion of “natural” environment
“Mature” economy Fast growing developing economy
Politically stable - ? Has become politically stable
Short of space (pressures) Land rich, but pressures in urban areas
Relatively wealthy (£ and choices) Greater diversity of wealth and choices
Resource poor? Resource rich
Ageing population (median age 39) Young population (median age 29)
Participation in D-making? ?
Established spatial planning system ?
Etc., etc
School of the Built Environment
Comparison of cities by size….largest seven
London 7.2 million
Birmingham 992 000
Leeds 720 000
Glasgow 560 000
Sheffield 512 000
Bradford 467 000
Edinburgh 450 000
Sao Paolo 11.0 m Rio de Janeiro 6.2 m Salvador 3.0 m Brasilia 2.6 mFortaleza 2.5 m Belo Horizonte 2.5 m Curitiba 1.9 m
(43 cities larger than Edinburgh)
School of the Built Environment
Climate change projections: Brazil (Marengo, undated – CREAS project)
School of the Built Environment
Climate change and the UK
School of the Built Environment
•Warmer wetter winters•Hotter drier summers•Unpredictable weather•Rainfall more intense•Risk of more storms•Sea level rise
School of the Built Environment
Developing response to CC
• Awareness of CC
Impact assessment
Mitigation (emissions reduction) Adaptation
-health/comfort-economy, transport-biodiversity
1960-1980
Science evolves EU heatwave (2003)
drought UK 2004/6Floods UK
2007
Whilst recent weather events are not proof of climate change, it is very likely that once climate change is fully apparent it will be accompanied by extreme events.
C capture.. Geo-engg.
School of the Built Environment
Adaptation process
• Climate projections
• Identify impacts of changed climates for receptors
• Identify cumulative and interacting effects
• What measures would alleviate adverse effects or enhance desirable effects?
• What policies would help bring in these measures?
• Monitoring
• Risk assessment
• Enhance projections
(Research: impacts, risks, responses)
Policy development – Policy implementation (Re-evaluate)
School of the Built Environment
Planning for climate change, building resilience
• Early warning systems• “Room for rivers” to reduce flood impacts• Protection of coastline / realignment• Be aware of urban : rural interdependence
(e.g. Retain & extend forests for M & A)• Re-settle people away from coastal and other
hazardous areas e.g. slopes• Protect vulnerable/fragile areas• Enable rainfall to infiltrate / sink in (Rural
washlands; Urban green infrastructure)• Assess location of vital infrastructure, inc.
transport, energy & emergency infrastructure • Community planning• Urban Design, e.g. areas for shade, water for
cooling, buildings with high thermal capacity
• Early warning systems• Provision of shelters• Preparation (food, water,
blankets)• Cool rooms for heat• Focus on poor
School of the Built Environment
Pro-poor issues
School of the Built Environment
Factors contributing to appropriate adaptation
• Knowledge of changes (identification, measurement, understanding)
• Knowledge of environment ( “” “” “”)
• Assessment of impacts (severity, direction)
• International treaty as support/authority
• Political cohesion – acceptance of need to adapt
• Authority and levers for control / participation
• Financial strength
• Economic diversity
• Awareness across society and government
• (hierarchies, institutions, cities & rural areas)
• Research strength
• Good communications across all media
Science
Politics
Economics
Education/society
School of the Built Environment
Motives & motivators for adaptation
• Economic and financial reasons
• Security
• Health
• Environmental and ethical reasons
Barriers to adaptation• Agreement between parties about issues and way forward
• Knowledge
• Technology
• Economic barriers
• Social barriers
• Political barriers
(Trudgill – Barriers to a better environment)
School of the Built Environment
What is needed - barrier busters: policies, tools, etc.
• Adaptation policies
• Government CC policy by sector and cross-cutting
• Spatial planning policy at all levels
• Incorporation of CC into sectoral policies
• Assessment tools (financial, environmental, health impact , risk…)
• Information – e.g. national and LCLIP
• Also:
• Mitigation policies
• Carbon capture plans
School of the Built Environment
Five “policy options” to be explored by sector (framework suggested by on-going EC policy work)
• Regulation / legislation
• Markets: market-based instruments
• “Soft” actions (communications, governance, collective action)
• Insurance schemes
• R&D
Taking care to avoid maladaptation, i.e. Inefficient use of resources Measures which displace vulnerability Ineffective measures (i.e. designed for risks that do not subsequently occur)
School of the Built Environment
What constrains us
• Uncertainties (science, planning, responses)• Skills shortages• Resources• Authority to require changes• Political time horizons• Boundaries – e.g. to sectors, admin. units, etc.• Public support?
School of the Built Environment
Green rooftops
Urban tree planting
Increased farmland irrigation
Forest pest control
Sea wall defence
New desalination plants
Large dams
Wind turbines
Low-till cultivation
Afforestation
Biofuels
Improved building insulation
Ex-situ conservation
Win-Win-Win
Lose-Win-Win
Win-Lose-Win
Flood control infrastructure
Species translocation
Win-Lose-Lose
Lose-Win-Lose
Win-Win-Lose
Positive
Forest conservation
NegativeEffect on biodiversity
Source: Paterson, Berry, Araujo, Piper and Rounsevell, 2008 Conservation biology
Mitigation –adaptation - biodiversity
Develop to show efffects on poor?
School of the Built Environment
School of the Built Environment
Market-based instruments (preserve and extend choice)
• Biodiversity offsets, habitat banking• Providing incentives or removing disincentives or perverse
incentives• Reduce “market friction” via subsidy of renewable energy
generation with biodiversity component (e.g. small hydro)• Fiscal/price disincentives (e.g. on sale of land with habitat
value)• “Revolving funds” for properties with high nature conservation
value
School of the Built Environment
Soft actions – governance, guidance, communications
• Codes for biodiversity (e.g. via Codes for Sustainable Homes, and Green Building Council)
• Codes for low energy use – add biodiversity issues?• Recognition/awards (European Green Capital + upgrade)• Skills development (GIS, taxonomy….)• Raising awareness: Natuurkalender, Springwatch• Subsidy for renewable energy use – to include biodiversity-related criteria?• Community engagement e.g. via residents’ groups, wildlife groups, business
and CSR
School of the Built Environment
Local Climate Impacts Profile
• Why do an LCLIP?
• To gather information about current vulnerability to weather and climate as a catalyst to further awareness and action.
• The creation of a Local Climate Impacts Profile (LCLIP) has proved to be effective tool for organisations at developing this understanding.
• For local authorities, doing an LCLIP is one way to meet the requirements of NI188, Level 1. See information about the national policy context here.
• Demonstrates not only the potential impacts of climate change but also the extent to which an authority, community or organisation is prepared and able to respond now (i.e. to deal with current weather events). One LCLIP uncovered unplanned costs to a local authority from weather events of £16.4 million over the previous decade (in emergency provisions, insurance claims and road repairs).
School of the Built Environment
Case study: Oxfordshire LCLIP• Aims were (in line with signing of the Nottingham Declaration),
• to assess the likely impacts of climate change on council services and also • To encourage adaptation in the wider community.
• Approach:• Media search• Interviews with council officers (15)• 3 month period, database created of 260 weather related incidents from a 10 year
period, such as:• Flooding on the road networks• Flooding of properties• Crop fires exacerbated by high summer temperatures
• Results: • raised awareness of adaptation internally • gathered substantial evidence that the council was vulnerable to a number of
weather related impacts.• lent weight to adaptation agenda• Identified that the cost associated with weather incidents over a decade was
estimated to be £16.4 million. ( extensively quoted in local press, though often misrepresented as the “cost of climate change”. ) But taken to be an underestimate.
School of the Built Environment
Climate change projections: UK Key findings for South East England, 2050s, medium emissions scenario. Probabilities of change
The wider range is defined as the range from the lowest to highest value of change for all emissions scenarios and all three (10, 50, and 90%) probability levels for each 30-year time period.
• Under medium emissions, the central estimate of increase in winter mean temperature is 2.2ºC; it is very unlikely to be less than 1.1ºC and is very unlikely to be more than 3.4ºC. A wider range of uncertainty is from 0.9ºC to 3.8ºC.
•Under medium emissions, the central estimate of increase in summer mean temperature is 2.8ºC; it is very unlikely to be less than 1.3ºC and is very unlikely to be more than 4.6ºC. A wider range of uncertainty is from 1.1ºC to 5.2ºC.
•Under medium emissions, the central estimate of change in annual mean precipitation is 0%; it is very unlikely to be less than –5% and is very unlikely to be more than 6%. A wider range of uncertainty is from –6% to 6%.
•Under medium emissions, the central estimate of change in winter mean precipitation is 16%; it is very unlikely to be less than 2% and is very unlikely to be more than 36%. A wider range of uncertainty is from 1% to 40%.
•Under medium emissions, the central estimate of change in summer mean precipitation is –19%; it is very unlikely to be less than –41% and is very unlikely to be more than 7%. A wider range of uncertainty is from –43% to 16%.
• (25 km grid squares)
School of the Built Environment
Who must adapt?• Hierarchies of government and other institutions (providing vision and
policy, legislation, regulation, research)• National, regional, local
• Spatial planners: set regional/local policy, bring in spatial plans that control relevant activities – location and design of development, transport, retrofitting of city areas
• Public and private institutions• Sectors (e.g. tourism, manufacturing, health)• Professionals: architects, engineers, etc.• Cities and communities• Individuals
Some general research needs• How we are affected, how our environment is affected• How we exacerbate climate change by our processes (e.g.
procurement, energy use, etc. )• Interactions with other drivers, e.g. population and consumption growth• Effectiveness of potential responses
Consensus?