Adaptive urban governance: new challenges for the second generation of urban adaptation strategies to climate change

Abstract

The task of adapting cities to the impacts of climate change is of great importance-urban areas are hotspots of high risk given their concentrations of population and infrastructure; their key roles for larger economic, political and social processes; and their inherent instabilities and vulnerabilities. Yet, the discourse on urban climate change adaptation has only recently gained momentum in the political and scientific arena. This paper reviews the recent climate change adaptation strategies of nine selected cities and analyzes them in terms of overall vision and goals, baseline information used, direct and indirect impacts, proposed structural and non-structural measures, and involvement of formal and informal actors. Against this background, adaptation strategies and challenges in two Vietnamese cities are analyzed in detail, namely Ho Chi Minh City and Can Tho. The paper thereby combines a review of formalized city-scale adaptation strategies with an empirical analysis of actual adaptation measures and constraints at household level. By means of this interlinked and comparative analysis approach, the paper explores the achievements, as well as the shortcomings, in current adaptation approaches, and generates core issues and key questions for future initiatives in the four sub-categories of: (1) knowledge, perspectives, uncertainties and key threats; (2) characteristics of concrete adaptation measures and processes; (3) interactions and conflicts between different strategies and measures; (4) limits of adaptation and tipping points. In conclusion, the paper calls for new forms of adaptive urban governance that go beyond the conventional notions of urban (adaptation) planning. The proposed concept underlines the need for a paradigm shift to move from the dominant focus on the adjustment of physical structures towards the improvement of planning tools and governance processes and structures themselves. It addresses in particular the necessity to link different temporal and spatial scales in adaptation strategies, to acknowledge and to mediate between different types of knowledge (expert and local knowledge), and to achieve improved integration of different types of measures, tools and norm systems (in particular between formal and informal approaches).

A Blue Urban Agenda: Adapting to Climate Change in the Coastal Cities of Caribbean and Pacific Small Island Developing States

“…Urban adaptation strategies should "consider the inter-linkages between formal and informal action in adaptation; the integration of different knowledge types (scientific and social); assessments of cross-scale secondary effects of specific measures; the identification of potential conflicts between specific adaptation strategies; the integration of urban climate change adaptation with wider sustainable development; and limits and tipping points with respect to adaptation options" (Birkmann, Garschagen, Kraas, et al, 2010).…”

“…For example, in Georgetown, Guyana, households have elevated their lots and built drains to quickly carry away floodwaters, but in so doing, they have caused flooding elsewhere (Mycoo, 2014a). Less attention has been paid to responses to climate change that occur outside formal policy channels, which are likely to be those that are common among the poor.Urban adaptation strategies should "consider the inter-linkages between formal and informal action in adaptation; the integration of different knowledge types (scientific and social); assessments of cross-scale secondary effects of specific measures; the identification of potential conflicts between specific adaptation strategies; the integration of urban climate change adaptation with wider sustainable development; and limits and tipping points with respect to adaptation options" (Birkmann, Garschagen, Kraas, et al, 2010).chapter 6 …”

Ethical implications of co-benefits rationale within climate change mitigation strategy

“…This is particularly relevant for the cobenefits rationale because not all positive outcomes are theoretically predictable, and also because newer climate change mitigation strategies are being devised and enacted every year (Biesbroek and others 2010;Birkmann, Garschagen, Kraas, & Quang 2010;Moss and others 2010).…”

Blending adaptive governance and institutional theory to explore urban resilience and sustainability strategies in the Rome metropolitan area, Italy

“…Folke et al (2005) and Birkmann et al (2010) outline their interpretations of emerging governance discourses in relation to the environment and urban planning systems. The former refer to nested, polycentric institutional arrangements involving multi-scale actors with quasiautonomous decision-making capacity, finding a balance between decentralised and centralised control.…”