Harmonizing Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation in Transportation and Land-Use Planning in California Cities

Abstract: Recent extreme weather events in California—wildfires, drought, and flooding—make abundantly clear the need to plan effective responses to both the causes and the consequences of climate change. A central challenge for climate planning efforts has been identifying transportation and land-use (TLU) strategies that simultaneously reduce greenhouse gas emissions (“mitigation”) and adapt communities so that they will be less affected by the adverse impacts of climate change (“adaptation”). Sets of policies that collectively address both mitigation and adaptation are known as “integrated actions.” This study explores municipal climate planning in California to determine whether cities incorporate integrated actions into their plans, assess the potential drivers of conflict between mitigation and adaptation in municipal plans, and identify ways the State of California can help cities more effectively incorporate integrated actions. The study methods consisted of a detailed analysis of climate planning documents from 23 California cities with particularly long histories of climate planning, plus interviews with 25 local, regional, and state officials who work on municipal climate planning. The authors found that some cities did adopt packages of integrated actions, and, promisingly, two cities with recently updated climate plans explicitly focused on the need for integrated actions. However, most cities addressed climate mitigation and adaptation in separate efforts, potentially reducing synergies between the two types of action and even creating conflicts. Since the first generation of climate action plans focused primarily on mitigation of greenhouse gases (GHGs), adaptation strategies have not yet been effectively or fully combined into mitigation plans in many cities. Also, a cross-comparison of plan content and interview data suggests that cities often had sets of policies that could potentially create conflicts—mitigation policies that would undermine adaptation capacity, and vice versa. In addition, where a city did adopt integrated actions, these efforts are typically not labeled as such, nor do the policies appear within the same policy document. The study findings suggest promising steps that both municipal and state governments can take to support integrated TLU actions at the local level. For example, cities can proactively link the content in climate mitigation and adaptation plans—a process that will require building the capacity for cross-collaboration between the various departments in charge of developing, implementing, and monitoring climate-related plans. As for the state government, it can provide funding specifically for planning and implementing integrated actions, offer technical support to help municipalities adopt programs and projects that produce integrated mitigation and adaptation benefits, and fund research in the area of integrated actions

Scientific knowledge and scientific uncertainty in bushfire and flood risk mitigation: literature review

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Scientific Diversity, Scientific Uncertainty and Risk Mitigation Policy and Planning (RMPP) project aims to investigate the diversity and uncertainty of bushfire and flood science, and its contribution to risk mitigation policy and planning. The project investigates how policy makers, practitioners, courts, inquiries and the community differentiate, understand and use scientific knowledge in relation to bushfire and flood risk. It uses qualitative social science methods and case studies to analyse how diverse types of knowledge are ordered and judged as salient, credible and authoritative, and the pragmatic meaning this holds for emergency management across the PPRR spectrum. This research report is the second literature review of the RMPP project and was written before any of the case studies had been completed. It synthesises approximately 250 academic sources on bushfire and flood risk science, including research on hazard modelling, prescribed burning, hydrological engineering, development planning, meteorology, climatology and evacuation planning. The report also incorporates theoretical insights from the fields of risk studies and science and technology studies (STS), as well as indicative research regarding the public understandings of science, risk communication and deliberative planning. This report outlines the key scientific practices (methods and knowledge) and scientific uncertainties in bushfire and flood risk mitigation in Australia. Scientific uncertainties are those ‘known unknowns’ and ‘unknown unknowns’ that emerge from the development and utilisation of scientific knowledge. Risk mitigation involves those processes through which agencies attempt to limit the vulnerability of assets and values to a given hazard. The focus of this report is the uncertainties encountered and managed by risk mitigation professionals in regards to these two hazards, though literature regarding natural sciences and the scientific method more generally are also included where appropriate. It is important to note that while this report excludes professional experience and local knowledge from its consideration of uncertainties and knowledge, these are also very important aspects of risk mitigation which will be addressed in the RMPP project’s case studies. Key findings of this report include: Risk and scientific knowledge are both constructed categories, indicating that attempts to understand any individual instance of risk or scientific knowledge should be understood in light of the social, political, economic, and ecological context in which they emerge. Uncertainty is a necessary element of scientific methods, and as such risk mitigation practitioners and researchers alike should seek to ‘embrace uncertainty’ (Moore et al., 2005) as part of navigating bushfire and flood risk mitigation

Considerations for Mitigating VehicleMiles Traveled under SB 743

Pursuant to Senate Bill 743 (Steinberg, 2013), which reformed the process for California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review of transportation impacts to align with greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research identified vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as the key metric to measure transportation impacts of new developments under CEQA.As a result, project developers will now have to reduce VMT to mitigate significant transportation impacts. While methods for reducing VMT impacts are well understood, implementing VMT reduction measures thatare directly linked or near to individual developments may be difficult in some situations. As a result, broader and more flexible approaches to VMT mitigation may be necessary, such as VMT mitigation “banks” or “exchanges.” In a mitigation bank, developers would commit funds instead of undertaking specific on-site mitigation projects, and then a local or regional authority could aggregate funds and deploy them to top-priority projects throughout the jurisdiction. Similarly, in amitigation exchange, developers would be permitted to select from a list of pre-approved mitigation projects throughout the jurisdiction (or propose their own), without needing to mitigate their transportation impacts on-site.To understand how VMT banks or exchanges could be implemented in California, researchers from UC Berkeley assessed the structural and legal considerations of VMT banks and exchanges to determine which approach and scope would be most appropriate for each implementing jurisdiction (i.e., city, county, region, state). Key research findings are presented in this brief

Perencanaan Tataruang Pesisir Kota Agung Berbasis Analsis Risiko Bencana Tsunami

Gradually, the land that can be cultivated or used will lessen, moreover in a city that is growing rapidly. The situation has forced local government to plan the use of any land conscientiously. Formerly, local government plans the land just for beautifulness of a city and for practicality of transportation system without consideration of natural disaster mitigation. Natural disasters have damaged social and economic infrastructure and also killed people of many regions. The long term consequences of natural disasters are especially severe for developing countries and hamper the achievement of their sustainable development. Spatial planning that based on disaster mitigation has been done in The Coast of Kota Agung. The planning has been made through evaluation of the existing city planning by comparing it with the result of tsunami risk analysis. From the tsunami risk analysis, it has been known the volume of potential losses of threatened object per area units in the Coast of Kota Agung. By knowing their vulnerability and the level of risk, we have improved the existing city planning. It is hoped that the city planning that based on disaster risk analysis would make Kota Agung to be a city that will develop properly and safer from tsunami threatening

Climate change and the economics of targeted mitigation in sectors with long-lived capital stock

Mitigation investments in long-lived capital stock (LLKS) differ from other types of mitigation investments in that, once established, LLKS can lock-in a stream of emissions for extended periods of time. Moreover, historical examples from industrial countries suggest that investments in LLKS projects or networks tend to be lumpy, and tend to generate significant indirect and induced emissions besides direct emissions. Looking forward, urbanization and rapid economic growth suggest that similar decisions about LLKS are being or will soon be made in many developing countries. In their current form, carbon markets do not provide correct incentives for mitigation investments in LLKS because the constraint on carbon extends only to 2012, and does not extend to many developing countries. Targeted mitigation programs in regions and sectors in which LLKS is being built at rapid rate are thus necessary to avoid getting locked into highly carbon-intensive LLKS. Even if the carbon markets were extended (geographically, sectorally, and over time), public intervention would still be required, for three main reasons. First, to ensure that indirect and induced emissions associated with LLKS are taken into account in investor’s financial cost-benefit analysis. Second, to facilitate project or network financing to bridge the gap between carbon revenues that accrue over time as the project/network unfolds and the capital needed upfront to finance lumpy investments. Third, to internalize other non-carbon externalities (e.g., local pollution) and/or to lift barriers (e.g., lack of capacity to handle new technologies) that penalize the low-carbon alternatives relative to the high-carbon ones.Transport Economics Policy&Planning,Climate Change Mitigation and Green House Gases,Climate Change Economics,Energy Production and Transportation,Energy and Environment

On the use of satellite Sentinel 2 data for automatic mapping of burnt areas and burn severity

In this paper, we present and discuss the preliminary tools we devised for the automatic recognition of burnt areas and burn severity developed in the framework of the EU-funded SERV_FORFIRE project. The project is focused on the set up of operational services for fire monitoring and mitigation specifically devised for decision-makers and planning authorities. The main objectives of SERV_FORFIRE are: (i) to create a bridge between observations, model development, operational products, information translation and user uptake; and (ii) to contribute to creating an international collaborative community made up of researchers and decision-makers and planning authorities. For the purpose of this study, investigations into a fire burnt area were conducted in the south of Italy from a fire that occurred on 10 August 2017, affecting both the protected natural site of Pignola (Potenza, South of Italy) and agricultural lands. Sentinel 2 data were processed to identify and map different burnt areas and burn severity levels. Local Index for Statistical Analyses LISA were used to overcome the limits of fixed threshold values and to devise an automatic approach that is easier to re-apply to diverse ecosystems and geographic regions. The validation was assessed using 15 random plots selected from in situ analyses performed extensively in the investigated burnt area. The field survey showed a success rate of around 95%, whereas the commission and omission errors were around 3% of and 2%, respectively. Overall, our findings indicate that the use of Sentinel 2 data allows the development of standardized burn severity maps to evaluate fire effects and address post-fire management activities that support planning, decision-making, and mitigation strategies.Fil: Lasaponara, Rosa. Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche; ItaliaFil: Tucci, Biagio. Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche; ItaliaFil: Ghermandi, Luciana. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Patagonia Norte. Instituto de Investigaciones en Biodiversidad y Medioambiente. Universidad Nacional del Comahue. Centro Regional Universidad Bariloche. Instituto de Investigaciones en Biodiversidad y Medioambiente; Argentina. Universidad Nacional del Comahue. Centro Regional Universitario Bariloche. Laboratorio de Ecotono; Argentin

EVALUATION OF DIFFERENT BIOLOGICAL WASTE TREATMENT STRATEGIES

Biological treatment of organic waste by aerobic composting and anaerobic digestion (biogas production) was compared with respect to a number of environmental effects and sustainability criterias including energy balance, nutrient recycling, global warming mitigation potential, emission of xenobiotic compounds and economy. The parameters were assessed based on case studies in the literature as well as our own research. Assessment of energy balance, nutrient recycling and global warming came out in favour of biogas production, but especially the results regarding estimation of global warming mitigation differ according to the assumptions made. Our calculations showed that a fugitive loss of approx. 14% of the biogas produced by anaerobic digestion will turn the scale in favour of composting regarding global warming mitigation. In Europe actual biogas losses from 3.5 to 8.4% are reported but this may be exceeded in developing countries. Regarding emission of xenobiotic compounds composting is much in favour, as recent experiments show that a number of organic micro-pollutants are rapidly degraded during composting as opposed to anaerobic treatment. In most cases, composting is more cost-effective compared to biogas production but estimations of actual costs differ considerably. Published results of Life Cycle Assessment of organic waste management using the ORWARE model generally showed biogas production to have less environmental impact than composting, but it was demonstrated that changes in, e.g. system boundaries or functional units can result in substantial differences on the conclusions as well. In conclusion, the optimum waste planning strategy may be the implementation of an integrated waste treatment system operating with different scales of composting and anaerobic treatment, depending on local conditions

Dedicated versus mainstreaming approaches in local climate plans in Europe

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

Governing carbon mitigation and climate change within local councils: a case study of Adelaide, South Australia

There is growing concern about climate change impacts on local government areas. In Australia, the federal carbon tax (from 1 July 2012) will also increase costs for local councils. This paper evaluates what carbon mitigation (i.e. energy, water, and waste management) actions have been implemented by metropolitan Adelaide councils (n=14) and why (or why not). A survey of environmental officers profiled carbon mitigation actions, emissions auditing, and motives for emissions reduction by Adelaide councils. The main reasons for adopting carbon actions were a climate change plan, climate leadership, and cost savings. Internal council governance of climate change actions was also evaluated. A climate governance framework based on adaptive management, communication, and reflective practice (Nursey-Bray 2010) was applied to assess climate mitigation by Adelaide councils

Working as one: a road map to disaster resilience for Australia

This report offers a roadmap for enhancing Australia’s disaster resilience, building on the 2011 National Strategy for Disaster Resilience. It includes a snapshot of relevant issues and current resilience efforts in Australia, outlining key challenges and opportunities. Overview Natural disasters cause widespread disruption, costing the Australian economy $6.3 billion per year, and those costs are projected to rise incrementally to$23 billion by 2050. With more frequent natural disasters with greater consequences, Australian communities need the ability to prepare and plan for them, absorb and recover from them, and adapt more successfully to their effects. Enhancing Australian resilience will allow us to better anticipate disasters and assist in planning to reduce losses, rather than just waiting for the next king hit and paying for it afterwards. This report offers a roadmap for enhancing Australia’s disaster resilience, building on the 2011 National Strategy for Disaster Resilience. It includes a snapshot of relevant issues and current resilience efforts in Australia, outlining key challenges and opportunities. The report sets out 11 recommendations to help guide Australia towards increasing national resilience, from individuals and local communities through to state and federal agencies