Local Mitigation Plans Research Articles

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

The Paris Agreement aims to limit global mean temperature rise this century to well below 2 °C above pre-industrial levels. This target has wide-ranging implications for Europe and its cities, which are the source of substantial greenhouse gas emissions. This paper reports the state of local planning for climate change by collecting and analysing information about local climate mitigation and adaptation plans across 885 urban areas of the EU-28. A typology and framework for analysis was developed that classifies local climate plans in terms of their alignment with spatial (local, national and international) and other climate related policies. Out of eight types of local climate plans identified in total we document three types of stand-alone local climate plans classified as type A1 (autonomously produced plans), A2 (plans produced to comply with national regulations) or A3 (plans developed for international climate networks). There is wide variation among countries in the prevalence of local climate plans, with generally more plans developed by central and northern European cities. Approximately 66% of EU cities have a type A1, A2, or A3 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 (i.e. what we classify as A1, A2, A3 plans). Mitigation plans are more numerous than adaptation plans, but planning for mitigation does not always precede planning for adaptation. Our analysis reveals that city size, national legislation, and international networks can influence the development of local climate plans. We found that size does matter as about 80% of the cities with above 500,000 inhabitants have a comprehensive and stand-alone mitigation and/or an adaptation plan (A1). Cities in four countries with national climate legislation (A2), i.e. Denmark, France, Slovakia and the United Kingdom, are nearly twice as likely to produce local mitigation plans, and five times more likely to produce local adaptation plans, compared to cities in countries without such legislation. A1 and A2 mitigation plans are particularly numerous in Denmark, Poland, Germany, and Finland; while A1 and A2 adaptation plans are prevalent in Denmark, Finland, UK and France. The integration of adaptation and mitigation is country-specific and can mainly be observed in two countries where local climate plans are compulsory, i.e. France and the UK. Finally, local climate plans produced for international climate networks (A3) are mostly found in the many countries where autonomous (type A1) plans are less common. This is the most comprehensive analysis of local climate planning to date. The findings are of international importance as they will inform and support decision-making towards climate planning and policy development at national, EU and global level being based on the most comprehensive and up-to-date knowledge of local climate planning available to date.

Analysis of Mitigation Performance Budget in Transportation Sector in Yogyakarta Province

Yogyakarta province is one of the regions with growing concerns towards increasing carbon emission from growing private transportation usage. In response, the provincial government enacted Local Mitigation Plan by the Governor Regulation Number 51 Year 2012, in accordance with the Presidential Decree No. 61 Year 2011 on National Mitigation Plan for Reducing Glass House Gas (GHG) Emission. The plan places energy and transport sector as top priority programs that should be controlled and regulated by the local government. This paper examines the implementation of the plan by looking at the derivation of the local mitigation planning into government budgeting. It employs project sustainability analysis to elaborate the presence of factors affecting the application of the plan into government programs. The study reveals that in general, the government programs reported in the strategic and performance indicators on Government Performance Report (LAKIP) in transportation sector are in accordance with the local mitigation plan. Almost 80% from 25 core activities in the Local Mitigation Plan, can be described in each of the strategic objectives and performance indicators LAKIP. Only five core activities can not be translated into strategic objectives and performance indicators on LAKIP. Meanwhile, for supporting documents, approximately 52% has occurred compatibility between Local Mitigation Plan document with strategic goals and performance indicators in LAKIP. However, it is necessary for the government to make adjustments in a number of activities to improve the quality of planning as well as optimize the effectiveness of the budget.

Earthquake activities along the Indonesian Sunda Margin: a seismicity approach

The earthquake activities along the Indonesian Sunda Margin, which is delineated parallel to the Indonesian Island chain, were statistically investigated. Utilizing the obtained completeness earthquake catalogue, the mapped spatial distributions of the (i) possible maximum magnitude, (ii) return period, and (iii) probability of exceedance of an earthquake of a given magnitude revealed that the Indonesian Island chain could be classified into three different hazard level groups. The highest hazard level was located along the segment of Padang to Jakarta, surrounding Ambon, and northeastern Palu, whereas the southwestern Yogyakarta, southwestern Bajawa, and Dili, were classified as an intermediate hazard level. Although Makassar, southern Praya, southern Bajawa, and southeastern Dili was classified as a relatively low hazard area (compared to the other areas in the Indonesian Island chain), a major earthquake (7.0 Mw) is still likely to occur with 10–20% probabilities in the next 50 years. Therefore, the contribution of suitable local mitigation plans for both seismic and tsunami hazards are strongly recommended for all the different regions within the Indonesian Island chain.

Pets and Evacuation: An Ongoing Challenge in Disasters

AbstractPet ownership may continue to be an impediment to evacuation and sheltering for disasters, despite the passage of the 2006 PETS Act. Many Americans consider pets to be a part of the family, and are hesitant to follow evacuate orders if they cannot bring household pets along. We present findings of qualitative data collected from residents in eastern North Carolina, an area that is susceptible to hurricane storm surge flooding, and other severe weather events. Additionally, analysis of hazard mitigation plans for the state of North Carolina and the four areas in which the data were collected reveal that the state level plan includes significant planning for pets, while the local hazard plans do not dedicate plans to address evacuation and sheltering of companion animals. Implications for future research include clear communication about pet friendly shelters, broader inclusion and protection of vulnerable animals that are tied to the human and environmental well-being, and updating local mitigation plans to include specific plans for including animals in evacuation.

A comparison of local hazard mitigation plan quality in six states, USA

Local hazards mitigation plans can be valuable tools in national policy frameworks for reducing risks from natural hazards. The United States’ Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 requires local governments to adopt plans to remain eligible for certain federal disaster funds. We use seven principles of plan quality to content analyze mitigation plans for 175 jurisdictions in six coastal states. We analyze variation of plan quality based on the seven principles of plan quality and the state contexts of local mitigation planning. Findings indicate that plan quality is low to moderate overall. In addition, state mandates for local comprehensive planning are associated with higher scores on just two plan quality principles, suggesting limited, specific influences of comprehensive planning mandates on hazard mitigation planning. Recommendations are offered for how national, state and local officials can target strategic adjustments to local mitigation planning efforts.

California’s Natural Hazard Zonation Policies for Land-Use Planning and Development

California has established state-level policies that utilize knowledge of where natural hazards are more likely to occur to enhance the effectiveness of landuse planning as a tool for risk mitigation. These policies set minimum standards for local government, and range from State designation of regulatory natural hazard zones to requirements that cities and counties include a Safety Element in their General Plan that evaluates their exposure to earthquakes, wildfires, floods, and other natural hazards, and to prepare a federal Local Mitigation Plan to reduce the risk. Such requirements placed on local government are enforced by potential liability for losses for failure to act, and the potential ineligibility for disaster relief funds should a catastrophic event occur. Building codes have been the primary means of mitigating the impact of natural hazards, but continued growth into high-risk terrain and repetitive losses have focused attention to the merits of avoiding harm’s way by means of prudent land-use decisions. Restricting land use can be difficult under the pressures of growth and development. California code exploits knowledge that the cost to adequately protect public safety can influence the type of development that is feasible when considering occupancy (high/low density residential, manufacturing, parkland, etc.) and critical function, such as the need to maintain essential services (police, fire, hospitals, emergency operation centers, etc.). Experience in California demonstrates that a combination of education, outreach, and mutually supporting policies that are linked to state-designated natural hazard zones can form an effective framework for enhancing the role of land-use planning in reducing future losses from natural disasters.