Urban Environmental Problems: Climate Change

This is a summary and a very brief reflection on assigned readings that deal with the complexity of climate change actions -- mitigation and adaptation planning-- at the institutional level. “Climate change appears to be inevitable” even if mitigation actions are effectively put forth (Quay, 2010). In this context, “planners should use forward-looking climate data” and “scenarios to anticipate the range of global climate changes” (Quay, 2010). To be effective in this endeavor, planners “must embrace new methods that explore uncertainty” (Quay, 2010). These methods for climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies should be “created at the local and regional levels” (Bedsworth & Hanak, 2010). However, the combination of “uncertainty and interdependency makes climate change a wicked problem” (Crane & Landis, 2010). In addition, “planners are relatively uninformed about whether and how particular climate change mitigation and adaptation responses are likely to work” (Crane & Landis, 2010). To manage uncertainty, planners use scenarios “to anticipate the range of global climate changes that may impact communities” and also science, network, and policies (Bedsworth & Hanak, 2010). As for climate change mitigation actions, planners should consider a cap-and-trade system from certifiable credits from forestland and tree planting and retention (Daniels, 2010). The success of these climate action plans depends on “the existence of local political will and leadership” (Basset & Shandas, 2010). The issue of how to deal with climate change and its effects is divided into mitigation and adaptation. Mitigation plans have to do with the efforts that reduce the emissions of Greenhouse Gases (GHG) into the atmosphere. Adaptation plans cover initiatives that prepare a community -- resiliency and recovery -- to the inevitable slow and fast impacts deriving from expected environmental changes in temperature and precipitation. Mitigation plans are divided into the reduction and sequestration of carbon emissions. GHG mitigation plans depend on the joint effort of public and private sectors to provide regulatory enforcement and assist technological innovation to companies and consumers. By ensuring fair competition and providing incentives for research and development, governments and companies foster creativity and scale up best practices. The same partnership between public and private sectors is seen in the sequestration plans of GHG. As farmers and companies receive fiscal incentives to re-plant or keep forests standing, governments increase the number of green areas and create a market for GHG. As the impacts of climate change are increasingly felt, communities started investing in adaptation. Before a decision is made, however, decision makers use scenarios and data to assess the strategic investments needed for short-and long-term risks. The conceptual problem of scenarios is that they only include few variables of the actual reality and the issue with climate change data is that “forward-looking climate data” are uncertain and so, not as precise as past figures and analyses. In this uncertain context, the difficulty is deciding how much should be invested in resiliency considering economic and political risks and what is the “tipping point” for structural and social investments so that communities are able to respond and recover quickly and by themselves to fast and slow onset crisis. Another important issue related to climate adaptation plans is capacity building. The federal and state governments are responsible to provide training and technical assistance to mayors so that they are able to develop disaster risk reduction plans that meet the requirements and standards of national and international guidelines. The economic argument for this institutional investment is that the risks and costs of not adapting to climate changes are significantly higher -- economically and politically -- than the short-term costs of developing networks, state-of-the-art infrastructure, and regulatory systems. References Bassett, E.; Shandas, V. “Innovation and Climate Actions Planning”, Journal of American Planning Association, vl. 76, n. 4, 2010. Bedsworth, L.; Hanak, E. “Adaptation to Climate Change”, Journal of American Planning Association, vl. 76, n. 4, 2010. Crane, R.; Landis, J. “Planning for Climate Change: Assessing Progress and Challenges”, Journal of American Planning Association, vl. 76, n. 4, 2010. Daniels, T. “Integrating Forest Carbon Sequestration Into a Cap-and-Trade Program to Reduce Net CO2 Emissions”, Journal of the American Planning Association, vl. 76, n. 4, 2010. Quay, R. “Anticipatory Governance”, Journal of American Planning Association, vl. 76, n. 4, 2010.