Suchergebnisse

Considering the current emerging demographic, urbanization and climatic trends, integrating sustainability and resilience principles into urban development becomes a key priority for decision-makers worldwide. Local and national governments, project developers and other urban stakeholders dealing with the complexities of urban development need projects with clear structure and outcomes in order to inform decision-making and ensure sources of financing. The need for developing an integrated assessment methodology that would capture and quantify multiple urban sustainability and resilience benefits of projects in one common framework and eventually lead to verifiable sustainability and resilience outcomes is immense and challenging at the same time. The main objective of this paper is to present the development of a methodological approach that aims to integrate sustainability and resilience benefits, derived from the implementation of green growth urban projects, into a unified framework of criteria addressing environmental, social, economic and institutional perspectives. The proposed sustainability and resilience benefits assessment (SRBA) methodology is a combination of top down and bottom up approaches, including GIS-based scenario building. The different types of sustainability and resilience benefits of urban green growth projects are also identified at different levels (i.e., individual, neighborhood, city and global). Moreover, the proposed methodology creates scenarios that can be illustrated by a map-based approach to enable a better illustration and visualization of benefits. It demonstrates how a map-based approach can assess not only the extent of sustainability and resilience benefits accrued (how much is benefitted), but also their spatial distribution (who is benefitted). The main methodological challenges and issues on developing an integrated sustainability and resilience benefits assessment are identified and discussed.

Purpose: Evaluation of energy and climate policy interactions is a complex issue, whereas stakeholders' preferences incorporation has not been addressed systematically. The purpose of this paper is to present an integrated weighting methodology that has been developed in order to incorporate weighting preferences into an ex ante evaluation of climate and energy policy interactions. Design/methodology/approach: A multi-criteria analysis (MCA) weighting methodology which combines pair-wise comparisons and ratio importance weighting methods has been elaborated. It initially introduces the users to the evaluation process through a warming up holistic approach for an initial rank of the criteria and then facilitates them to express their ratio relative importance in pair-wise comparisons of criteria by providing them an interactive mean with verbal, numerical and visual representation of their preferences. Moreover, it provides a ranking consistency test where users can see the degree of (in)consistency of their preferences. Findings: Stakeholders and experts in the energy policy field who tested the methodology stated their approval and satisfaction for the combination of both ranking and pair-wise comparison techniques, since it allows the gradual approach to the evaluation problem. In addition, main difficulties in MCA weights elicitation processes were overcome. Research limitations/implications: The methodology is tested by a small sample of stakeholders, whereas a larger sample, a broader range of stakeholders and applications on different climate policy evaluation cases merit further research. Originality/value: The novel aspect of the developed methodology consists of the combination of ranking and pair-wise comparison techniques for the elicitation of stakeholders' preferences. © Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Dhaka is one of the world's largest megacities with a high rate of urbanization. Due to the setting of greater Dhaka in a deltaic plain, it is extremely prone to detrimental flooding. Risks associated with flood are expected to increase in the coming years because of the global climate change impacts as well as the high rate of urbanization the city is facing. The low lying part of Dhaka (Dhaka East) faces most severe risk of flooding. Traditionally, this part has been efficiently storing the excess water caused by excessive rainfall and the canals connected to the rivers gradually drained the water to the rivers. But the alarmingly increasing population of Dhaka is leading towards the encroachment of these water retention areas because of the land scarcity. The natural drainage for the city is not performing well and the area is still unprotected from flooding, which causes major threats to its inhabitants. This situation increases the urgency to effectively adapt to current floods caused by climate variability and to the impacts of future climate changes. The government is planning several adaptive measures to protect the area whereas a systematic framework to analyze and assess them is lacking. The objective of the paper is to develop an integrated framework for the assessment of various (current and potential) adaptation measures aimed at protecting vulnerable areas from flooding. The study firstly assesses current and future risks from flooding in the most sensitive region of the city. Subsequently, the study identifies, analyses and assesses adaptive initiatives and measures to address flood risks in the Eastern fringe area. Adaptation assessment is conducted within the framework of Multi Criteria Analysis methodology which allows both normative judgment and technical expertise in the assessment process. Based on the assessment and analysis, adaptive measures are prioritized to enable more effective action. Such a participatory integrated assessment of adaptation options is a new approach in flood management in least developed countries and in Bangladesh in particular. A framework for prioritization of adaptation measures is lacking in the decision making process in Bangladesh which could immensely assist in informed and structured decisions while developing adaptation strategies.

The main objective of this article is to assess the priorities of local governments (LGs) in Europe regarding climate change mitigation technologies evaluation in the electricity sector and to provide important insights for energy policy design. The study applies a hybrid weighting methodology to elicit LGs' preferences in a constructive and iterative way regarding the evaluation criteria of low-carbon energy technologies. Furthermore, the study employs three data collection and preference elicitation methods, namely: survey, workshop, and webinar. The study was conducted across thirty one (31) European LGs that were categorized according to three variables: population size, geographical region and gross domestic product (GDP) per capita. The analysis shows that "CO2 emissions" is the most important criterion among European LGs, followed by "mortality and morbidity" and "ecosystem damages". The results illustrate the potential synergies of climate and energy policies for addressing both CO2 emissions and air pollution. It was also found, based on a correlation analysis, that LGs with higher GDP per capita tend to provide higher weights to criteria related to security of energy supply and technological innovation. The current study provides insights on the actual LGs' priorities that are important to consider during low-carbon energy technologies evaluation and energy policy design. Interestingly, the results of the European LGs' preferences clearly show that the EU climate policy objectives have reached different levels of governance-and at this particular case, the local level. Furthermore, the developed methodology could be applied at different geographical regions to map other regions' LG priorities, but also at a group decision making context to elicit relevant stakeholders' preferences regarding low-carbon energy technologies and policy objectives.

Cities are gaining prominence committing to respond to the threat of climate change, e.g., by developing local climate plans or strategies. However, little is known regarding the approaches and processes of plan development and implementation, or the success and effectiveness of proposed measures. Mainstreaming is regarded as one approach associated with (implementation) success, but the extent of integration of local climate policies and plans in ongoing sectoral and/or development planning is unclear. This paper analyses 885 cities across the 28 European countries to create a first reference baseline on the degree of climate mainstreaming in local climate plans. This will help to compare the benefits of mainstreaming versus dedicated climate plans, looking at policy effectiveness and ultimately delivery of much needed climate change efforts at the city level. All core cities of the European Urban Audit sample were analyzed, and their local climate plans classified as dedicated or mainstreamed in other local policy initiatives. It was found that the degree of mainstreaming is low for mitigation (9% of reviewed cities; 12% of the identified plans) and somewhat higher for adaptation (10% of cities; 29% of plans). In particular horizontal mainstreaming is a major effort for local authorities; an effort that does not necessarily pay off in terms of success of action implementation. This study concludes that climate change issues in local municipalities are best tackled by either, developing a dedicated local climate plan in parallel to a mainstreamed plan or by subsequently developing first the dedicated and later a mainstreaming plan (joint or subsequent "dual track approach"). Cities that currently provide dedicated local climate plans (66% of cities for mitigation; 26% of cities for adaptation) may follow-up with a mainstreaming approach. This promises effective implementation of tangible climate actions as well as subsequent diffusion of climate issues into other local sector policies. The development of only broad sustainability or resilience strategies is seen as critical. ; We thank the many council representatives that supported the datacollection. Special thanks to Birgit Georgi who helped in setting up this large net work of researchers across the EU-28. We also thank the EU COST Action TU 0902 (ledbyRichardDawson) that established the core research network and the positive engagement and interaction of th emembers of this group. OH is Fellow of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research and was funded by the UK EPSRC LC Transforms: Low Carbon Transitions of Fleet Operations in Metropolitan Sites Project (grant number EP/N010612/1). EKL was supported by the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports, Czechia, within the National Sustainability Program I (NPU I) (grant number LO1415). DG ac-knowledges support by the Ministry of Education, University and Research (MIUR), Italy ("Departments of Excellence" grant L. 232/2016). HO was supported by the Ministry of Education and Research, Estonia (grantnumberIUT34-17). MO acknowledges funding from the Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (MINECO), Spain (grant number IJCI-2016-28835). SS acknowledges that CENSE's research is partially funded by the Science Foundation, Portugal (grant number UID/AMB/04085/2019). The paper reflects only the views of the authors. The European Union, the European Environment Agency or other supporting bodies are not liable for any use that may be made of the information that is provided in this manuscript.

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.