A multi-scale urban integrated assessment framework for climate change studies: A flooding application
In: Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, Band 75, S. 229-243
In: Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, Band 75, S. 229-243
In: Journal of transport and land use: JTLU, Band 11, Heft 1
ISSN: 1938-7849
The adoption of the Paris Agreement has committed the world to limiting anthropogenic climate change to 2°C above preindustrial levels, adapting to climate risks, and fostering climate resilience. Given the high proportion of global emissions released by cities and the concentration of people living in urban areas, this will require an unprecedented reduction in greenhouse gas emissions and transformation of the built environment on a yet unparalleled timescale. This poses substantial challenges for urban land-use and transport planning and for the use of land-use transport models (LUTM), which have historically been developed to test incremental changes rather than the rapid transformations implied by the Paris Agreement.
This paper sets out the need for a new generation of tools to support the planning of a transition toward a low-carbon and resilient future, arguing that land-use and transport modeling tools are crucial to support this process. Recent developments in urban integrated assessment that link models of land-use and transport with other environmental models of greenhouse gas emissions and climate hazards show promise as platforms to assess the potential of urban policies in achieving the goals set out in the Paris Agreement.
The paper concludes by defining challenges for the LUTM community if it is to achieve these goals. Crucial will be the adoption of new modeling approaches to better represent rapid social and technological change and to concurrently assess the resilience and sustainability implications of different land-use and transport policies. Simple models to explore multiple scenarios of change must be integrated with more sophisticated models for detailed design. Collaborative approaches will be necessary to allow multiple stakeholders to use these tools to explore urban futures and design radical urban transitions across multiple and interdependent urban sectors.
In: Risk analysis: an international journal, Band 37, Heft 11, S. 2164-2181
ISSN: 1539-6924
AbstractFuture development in cities needs to manage increasing populations, climate‐related risks, and sustainable development objectives such as reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Planners therefore face a challenge of multidimensional, spatial optimization in order to balance potential tradeoffs and maximize synergies between risks and other objectives. To address this, a spatial optimization framework has been developed. This uses a spatially implemented genetic algorithm to generate a set of Pareto‐optimal results that provide planners with the best set of trade‐off spatial plans for six risk and sustainability objectives: (i) minimize heat risks, (ii) minimize flooding risks, (iii) minimize transport travel costs to minimize associated emissions, (iv) maximize brownfield development, (v) minimize urban sprawl, and (vi) prevent development of greenspace. The framework is applied to Greater London (U.K.) and shown to generate spatial development strategies that are optimal for specific objectives and differ significantly from the existing development strategies. In addition, the analysis reveals tradeoffs between different risks as well as between risk and sustainability objectives. While increases in heat or flood risk can be avoided, there are no strategies that do not increase at least one of these. Tradeoffs between risk and other sustainability objectives can be more severe, for example, minimizing heat risk is only possible if future development is allowed to sprawl significantly. The results highlight the importance of spatial structure in modulating risks and other sustainability objectives. However, not all planning objectives are suited to quantified optimization and so the results should form part of an evidence base to improve the delivery of risk and sustainability management in future urban development.
In: Journal of Australian political economy, Heft 60, S. 73-97
ISSN: 0156-5826
In: Environmental management: an international journal for decision makers, scientists, and environmental auditors, Band 37, Heft 4, S. 540-552
ISSN: 1432-1009
In: Environmental science & policy, Band 8, Heft 2, S. 153-160
ISSN: 1462-9011
In: PS: political science & politics, Band 11, Heft 1, S. 14-19
ISSN: 1537-5935
In: Midwest journal of political science: publication of the Midwest Political Science Association, Band 15, Heft 1, S. 154
In: American political science review, Band 63, Heft 3, S. 931-932
ISSN: 1537-5943
In: Midwest journal of political science: publication of the Midwest Political Science Association, Band 9, Heft 2, S. 194
In: The journal of politics: JOP, Band 25, S. 265-289
ISSN: 0022-3816
In: The journal of politics: JOP, Band 25, Heft 2, S. 265-289
ISSN: 1468-2508
In: JEMA-D-23-19769
SSRN