Abstract

Although there is broad consensus that more inclusive approaches are needed in climate adaptation planning, it is unclear how cities should redesign rules, institutions, and decision-making processes to produce more equitable forms of participation and engagement. This paper evaluates different planning procedures and institutional arrangements across twenty-five U.S. cities. Although arrangements are context-specific, institutional designs fall into three categories: consultative partnerships, strategic collaborations, and expansive co-governance arrangements. Each institutional design leads to different kinds of inclusion outcomes. Our results empiricize how cities can pursue more inclusive climate adaptation planning and highlight opportunities to advance and implement broader procedural equity goals.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.