How are cities planning to respond to climate change? Assessment of local climate plans from 885 cities in the EU-28

In recent years, the number of large subtropical and tropical cities with defined climate plans has increased as a result of the initiatives of local governments, multi-bilateral development aid and development banks. Surveys carried out to date on climate planning consider the overall cities, at times by continent, without underscoring those that present planning deficiencies. For instance, we have no idea whether the cities that are most affected by hydro-meteorological and climatic disasters have plans, nor if their climate plans are ready to be implemented. Clarifying these aspects would strengthen the foundation of the current discussion on the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals 2016-2030. Hence, the objective of this chapter is to ascertain the relevance and quality of climate planning in large subtropical and tropical cities populated by over 1 million inhabitants. Our survey found 344 large cities in the two climate zones concerned, and 82 of these have mitigation, adaptation, resilience or emergency plans, strategies or policies. We verified the relevance of these tools for the climate zones concerned, the type of economy and the frequency of hydro-meteorological and climate-related disasters. The quality of plans was assessed, ensuring that they had taken climate characterisation into account, that every measure was managed by a designated agency or office, and that funds were secured for implementing measures, as well as a monitoring and reporting sytem was defined. The analysis of collected information underscores considerable differences between large cities in terms of per capita greenhouse gas emissions (which were double in the subtropics relative to the tropics) and exposure to hazards (which were greater in the subtropical zone). Emergency and mitigation plans were the most common, while adaptation plans and resilience strategies were more unusual. The relevance of plans is still weak, given that barely 1/4 of the large cities had a plan. Plans were unquestionably more common in the subtropics, especially in OECD countries and in the BRICS, while they were absent in the Least Developed Countries (LDCs), despite the presence of large cities that have been repeatedly affected by hydro-meteorological and climate-related disasters. Planning quality was good for 30% of cities only. In the remaining 70% of cities, climate characterisation was briefly defined; the planning process was fully funded by multi-bilateral development aid; measures were without a clear manager; cost, funds and monitoring of measures were not specified. Thus the indication being that local plans were still scarcely action-oriented. Hence, the fact that two sustainable development goals (# 11 and 13) address human settlements and climate change, respectively, especially through assistance to LCDs, seems justified.

Urban areas are pivotal to global adaptation and mitigation efforts. But how do cities actually perform in terms of climate change response? This study sheds light on the state of urban climate change adaptation and mitigation planning across Europe. Europe is an excellent test case given its advanced environmental policies and high urbanization. We performed a detailed analysis of 200 large and medium-sized cities across 11 European countries and analysed the cities’ climate change adaptation and mitigation plans. We investigate the regional distribution of plans, adaptation and mitigation foci and the extent to which planned greenhouse gas (GHG) reductions contribute to national and international climate objectives. To our knowledge, it is the first study of its kind as it does not rely on self-assessment (questionnaires or social surveys). Our results show that 35 % of European cities studied have no dedicated mitigation plan and 72 % have no adaptation plan. No city has an adaptation plan without a mitigation plan. One quarter of the cities have both an adaptation and a mitigation plan and set quantitative GHG reduction targets, but those vary extensively in scope and ambition. Furthermore, we show that if the planned actions within cities are nationally representative the 11 countries investigated would achieve a 37 % reduction in GHG emissions by 2050, translating into a 27 % reduction in GHG emissions for the EU as a whole. However, the actions would often be insufficient to reach national targets and fall short of the 80 % reduction in GHG emissions recommended to avoid global mean temperature rising by 2 °C above pre-industrial levels.

In 2018 across 885 urban areas of the EU-28 only 66% of EU cities have, according to Reckien et al. classification a A1 (autonomously produced plans), A2 (plans produced to comply with national regulations) or A3(plans developed for international climate net- works) mitigation plan, 26% an adaptation plan, and 17% a joint adaptation and mitigation plan, while about 33% lack any form of stand-alone local climate plan [1]. Local climate plans are a new emerging field of application for urban planning and, in this sector appropriate geovisualization techniques could be useful tool in supporting make decisions about actions for local energy and climate plans. Geovisualization can help decision makers or researchers to transfer information to stakeholders and people. In this work we discuss geovisualization approach for energy consumptions and renovation scenarios for private and public buildings delivered in a specific case study: Potenza Municipality. This tool allows to visualize energy consumptions at urban scale thorough a geo- database including individual buildings information with several functions: i.e. to identify urban areas where take action with higher priority. The application to case study of Potenza Municipality is a component of a wider process of developing the Sustainable Energy and Climate Action Plan (SECAP). It shows the potential of geovisualization as a tool to support decisions making and monitoring of actions to be included in the plan.

Cities are recognised as key players in global adaptation and mitigation efforts because the majority of people live in cities. However, in Europe, which is highly urbanized and one of the most advanced regions in terms of environmental policies, there is considerable diversity in the regional distribution, ambition and scope of climate change responses. This paper explores potential factors contributing to such diversity in 200 large and medium-sized cities across 11 European countries. We statistically investigate institutional, socio-economic, environmental and vulnerability characteristics of cities as potential drivers of or barriers to the development of urban climate change plans. Our results show that factors such as membership of climate networks, population size, GDP per capita and adaptive capacity act as drivers of mitigation and adaptation plans. By contrast, factors such as the unemployment rate, warmer summers, proximity to the coast and projected exposure to future climate impacts act as barriers. We see that, overall, it is predominantly large and prosperous cities that engage in climate planning, while vulnerable cities and those at risk of severe climate impacts in the future are less active. Our analysis suggests that climate change planning in European cities is not proactive, i.e. not significantly influenced by anticipated future impacts. Instead, we found that the current adaptive capacity of a city significantly relates to climate planning. Along with the need to further explore these relations, we see a need for more economic and institutional support for smaller and less resourceful cities and those at high risk from climate change impacts in the future.

: Recent extreme weather events in California—wildfires, drought, and flooding—make abundantly clear the need to plan effective responses to both the causes and the consequences of climate change. A central challenge for climate planning efforts has been identifying transportation and land-use (TLU) strategies that simultaneously reduce greenhouse gas emissions ("mitigation") and adapt communities so that they will be less affected by the adverse impacts of climate change ("adaptation"). Sets of policies that collectively address both mitigation and adaptation are known as "integrated actions." This study explores municipal climate planning in California to determine whether cities incorporate integrated actions into their plans, assess the potential drivers of conflict between mitigation and adaptation in municipal plans, and identify ways the State of California can help cities more effectively incorporate integrated actions.

Cities are increasingly aware of the need to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to changes in weather patterns leading to the production of urban climate change plans. The few existing systematic studies of these plans have focused on either adaptation or mitigation issues, and are typically based on surveys completed by city officials rather than analysis of documented evidence. To gain insight into the status of adaptation and mitigation action across the UK, climate change documents from 30 urban areas (representing ~28 % of the UK’s population) were analysed. An Urban Climate Change Preparedness Score, which could be applied to other urban areas outside the UK, has been devised for comparative analysis. This analysis characterizes progress against (i) Assessment, (ii) Planning, (iii) Action, and (iv) Monitoring, for both adaptation and mitigation. The Preparedness Score allows a quantitative comparison of climate change strategies across the urban areas analysed. This methodology can be transferred to other countries and makes an international comparison of urban areas and their climate change adaptation and mitigation plans possible. We found that all areas acknowledge climate change being a threat and that adaptation and mitigation planning and action is required. However, two urban areas did not have official adaptation or mitigation plans. Typically, mitigation activities across all cities were more advanced than adaptation plans. Emissions reduction targets ranged from 10 %–80 % with differing baselines, timeframes and scopes, for defining and meeting these targets. Similar variability was observed across adaptation plans. Several reasons for these differences are considered, but particularly notable is that a combination of incentives and regulation seem to stimulate more comprehensive strategies and action in many urban areas.

The year 1950 has been a tipping point for Europe, as most of the European population became more urban than rural. Since that moment such a transition never stopped, and, projections say that by 2050, the number of urban inhabitants will approximately reach 75% of the total population in Europe, likely imposing further urban sprawl in one of the already most urbanized regions worldwide. As cities are responsible for 75% of the global carbon dioxide emissions, a questionabout how cities are dealing with climate change raises. Climate change threatens cities in numerous ways and at different scales. For instance, urbanization entails local increase in urban temperature, compared to the rural environs, known as Urban HeatIsland (UHI) effect. Both big and small-sized European cities are experiencing UHI. Previous research shows that in Paris, Rome and Barcelona, the UHI is as high as 8, 5 and 8.2 °C, respectively. In addition to urban and microscale temperature surges, anthropogenicclimate change has amplifiedthe intensity and frequency of mesoscale warming phenomena: heat waves. Particularly relevant have been the heat waves recorded in 2003, 2006, 2007, 2010, 2014, 2015 and 2017. In Europe, from June to August 2003, the heat wave caused about 35000 deaths. In 2018, persistent high temperature anomalies were recorded in Europe, and in particular in Scandinavia and Northern Europe. Most important, estimates show that mesoscale warming phenomena will become more frequent in the coming years. On top of these warming phenomena, global land-ocean temperatures are continuing increasing in the last decades. In 2017 the global surface temperature resulted being 0.9 °C higher than the average global surface temperature relative to 1951-1980. The increase in global temperature entails the ice cap melting which causes sea level rise. At present, globally, sea level is 89.7 mm (±0.80 mm) higher than in 1993. In particular, in Europe, both northern European countries and Mediterraneanones, have experienced, in the last 45 years a sea level rise ranging from 0.5 to 3 and from 0.5 to 4 mmper year, respectively. Projections show that, in the coming years, both Northern and Southern European countries will be affected by an increase in the sea level ranging from 0.1 to >0.4 m. As sea level is projected to rise in the coming years, coastal cities—which represent 90% of urban areas globally—will likely be threatened by flooding. Without adaptation strategies, the number of people in Europe annually affected by coastal flooding will be about 0.05 -0.13% of the 27 EU population in 2010. In particular, the Netherlands is ranked among the 20 most exposed countries worldwideto flooding, with potential economic loss of approximately US $1670 billion. Although climate change is a well-known phenomenon—already in 1988 Dr. James Hansen predicted that the increase in greenhouse gases would have led in 2017 to an increase in global temperature of about 1.03 °C compared to the average temperature recorded from 1950 until1980—the global greenhouse gas emissions continue rising, showing that climate negotiations are either still gridlocked or not sufficient to decrease climate altering emissions. If, on the one handinternational negotiations are slow,on the other hand, cities, especially in the last years, are proactivelyimplementingadaptationand mitigation plans. 66% of the European cities have adopted adaptation or mitigation plans. In the list of the top 5 countries with the highest percentage of cities with mitigation or adaptation plans there are Poland, Germany, Ireland, Finland, and Sweden. However, such plans are compulsory just in a minority of countries (i.e., Denmark, France, Slovakia and the UK). As international climate change negotiations fail in addressing climate urgency, as demonstrated by COP24 held in Katowice (Poland) on December 2018, cities, which are among the major causes and the main victims of climate change, have demonstratedto own the right political agility to put in place efficient mitigation and adaptation urban plans. However, as isolated actions would not lead to any measurable global effect, just coordinated efforts, harmonized either at upper scales or among municipalities globally, can provide global mitigation benefits.

Adaptation planning offers a promising approach for identifying and devising solutions to address local climate change impacts. Yet there is little empirical understanding of the content and quality of these plans. We use content analysis to evaluate 44 local adaptation plans in the United States and multivariate regression to examine how plan quality varies across communities. We find that plans draw on multiple data sources to analyse future climate impacts and include a breadth of strategies. Most plans, however, fail to prioritize impacts and strategies or provide detailed implementation processes, raising concerns about whether adaptation plans will translate into on-the-ground reductions in vulnerability. Our analysis also finds that plans authored by the planning department and those that engaged elected officials in the planning process were of higher quality. The results provide important insights for practitioners, policymakers and scientists wanting to improve local climate adaptation planning and action. Adaptation plans are an increasingly important part of US communities’ responses to climate change, but little is known about their content. Analysis of 44 plans shows that most fail to prioritize impacts or provide detailed implementation processes.

Cross-level differences and similarities in coastal climate change adaptation planning

본 연구는 환경부가 선정한 8개 기후변화 시범도시들의 기후변화 대응계획들을 완화와 적응의 측면에서 분석하여 기후변화 대응계획의 주요한 특징들을 도출하고 시사점을 제안하는데 있다. 기후변화 대응계획들을 다음의 세 가지의 측면에서 비교 분석하였고 연구의 주요 결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 기후변화 대응계획이 구성되는 방식을 두 가지의 유형으로 구분하였다. 비전과 목표, 추진전략과 함께 주요과제들을 제시한 후 부문별 실행조치로 이루어진 유형과 비전, 부문별 목표를 제시하고 실행조치로 구성된 유형이었다. 둘째, 비전과 목표, 추진전략에서 나타난 완화의 주요키워드는 저탄소, 온실가스, 녹색도시와 에너지, 녹색성장의 순이었다. 적응계획의 상위 구성체계에서 가장 빈번히 나타난 단어는 적응, 생태, 건강과 안전 및 재난이었다. 셋째, 기후변화 완화계획에서의 중점분야는 수송과 공통분야였으며, 기후변화 적응계획에서는 물관리와 산림분야에 많은 비중을 두고 있는 것으로 나타났다. 도출한 결과를 바탕으로 국내 기후변화 시범도시들의 완화계획과 적응계획의 주요 특징을 정리하였으며 시사점과 개선방향을 간단히 제시하였다. The purpose of this paper is to draw main characteristics of local climate change plans of 8 pilot cities through a serious of comparative analyses. The results of the analyses on the mitigation plans and the adaptation plans are the followings; Firstly, climate change plans have two types of distinctive frameworks. Secondly, vision, objectives, and main strategies are composed of main key words. The key words of mitigation plans are low carbon, GHG, green city, energy, and green growth. Adaptation, ecosystem, healthy, safe, disaster, water are the key words that frequently shown in adaptation plan. Thirdly, the mitigation plans tend to place emphasis on transportation and common area. The adaptation plans tend to weigh on water control and forestry. The main characteristics of both mitigation plans and adaptation plans of 8 pilot cities are summarized and policy implications are suggested.

Urban climate change mitigation and adaptation planning: Are Italian cities ready?

More than 50% of the world's trade happens via seaborne line. The sustainability of the ports is crucial as it boosts economic growth. However, climate change and its effects have disturbed the port's activities. This paper highlighted the possibility of climate change effects threatening some ports worldwide. A systematic literature review has been conducted, and 11 resources have been used to summarize their impact on port activities. The climate change effects encountered by the ports and their authorities' adaptation measures are underlined. Ports worldwide are considered. As a result, sea level rise (SLR), storm surges, and flooding are some threats that can affect port activities. Adaptation and mitigation plans can be more successfully implemented with excellent knowledge of the factors leading to increased exposure. From the port expansion to creating a new location of ports, the other mitigation and adaptation plan towards the sustainable ports is by providing an accurate topographic map, a good simulation software, and good resilience infrastructures and adaptation framework. The related ports have suggested and implemented adaptation and mitigation approaches to resolve the problem and sustain their ports and harbour activities. Adaptation and mitigation measures taken will respond to the effects of climate change.

Is heat becoming a major threat to cities? Following the heat wave in Europe in 2003, which is estimated to have caused the deaths of 70,000 people, municipal authorities began to develop adaptation and mitigation plans and programs. Legal obligations to consider climate change within various development projects have been defined, e.g. by the latest amendment of the EU EIA (Environmental Impact Assessment) Directive (2014/52/EU) and the Federal Building Code (BauGB §1a (5)). However, urban heat hazards have not yet received as much attention as, for example, carbon dioxide emissions as drivers of global warming. Dense urban structures, high buildings, dark surfaces, and high population densities trigger urban heat effects. With about 3/4 of Europeans living in cities, measures to reduce heat-related impacts are needed. This paper evaluates how German cities have implemented measures towards climate change adaptation. The results show that 24 out of 30 cities have developed mitigation and/or adaptation plans, with a majority focusing on mitigating CO 2, indicating less awareness of urban heat hazards. Moreover, we found elaborate and comprehensive examples which might serve as blue-prints for adaptation strategies. Based on the inhomogeneous scope of the different plans and programs, there remains a need for guidance and more knowledge exchange among the cities on mitigation/adaptation options and preferably information on their effectiveness, to further assist cities in tackling heat stress.

Cities with a Mediterranean-type climate (Med-cities) are particularly susceptible to health risks from climate change since they are located in biogeographical hot-spots that experience some of the strongest effects of the changing climate. The study aims to highlight health impacts of climate change in Med-cities, analyze local climate adaptation plans and make adaptation policy recommendations for the Med-city level. We identified five Med-cities with a climate change adaptation plan: Adelaide, Barcelona, Cape Town, Los Angeles and Santiago. Beyond their similar Med-climate features (although Santiago’s are slightly different), the cities have different socio-economic characteristics in various aspects. We analyzed each plan according to how it addresses climate change-related drivers of health impacts among city dwellers. For each driver, we identified the types of policy adaptation tools that address it in the urban climate adaptation plans. The surveyed cities address most of the fundamental climate change-related drivers of risks to human health, including rising temperatures, flooding and drought, but the policy measures to reduce negative impacts vary across cities. We suggest recommendations for Med-cities in various aspects, depending on their local needs and vulnerability challenges: assessment of health risks, extreme events management and long-term adaptation, among others.

While European regions face a range of different climate hazards, little is known about how these differences affect local climate adaptation planning. We present an analytical framework for evaluating local climate adaptation plans (LCAPs) and apply it to 327 cities in 28 countries across different European regions. To do this, we use statistical methods to identify regional clusters based on overall plan quality, impacts, vulnerable population groups, and sectors addressed by LCAPs. By comparing both geographic and statistical clusters, we found (1) significant spatial heterogeneity across European cities but (2) higher average plan quality scores and more consistent strategies across cities in Central and Eastern Europe. Notably, we found no regional differences regarding (a) the climate impacts and vulnerable communities identified in plans: (b) the most commonly addressed impacts, which were urban temperature and changing precipitation patterns; and (c) the residents that cities identified as most vulnerable, namely older people, women, infants, and the sick. Our study provides a spatial analysis of European LCAPs to uncover regional policy perspectives on local climate adaptation issues. Such approaches can effectively inform broader EU, national and regional strategies that aim to support local adaptation planning in a context of multi-level governance.