* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Engaging Science and Managing Scientific Uncertainty in Urban
2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference wikipedia , lookup
Instrumental temperature record wikipedia , lookup
Myron Ebell wikipedia , lookup
German Climate Action Plan 2050 wikipedia , lookup
Soon and Baliunas controversy wikipedia , lookup
Global warming controversy wikipedia , lookup
Climate change feedback wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on human health wikipedia , lookup
Global warming wikipedia , lookup
Michael E. Mann wikipedia , lookup
ExxonMobil climate change controversy wikipedia , lookup
Heaven and Earth (book) wikipedia , lookup
Climate sensitivity wikipedia , lookup
General circulation model wikipedia , lookup
Politics of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Fred Singer wikipedia , lookup
Climate engineering wikipedia , lookup
Climatic Research Unit email controversy wikipedia , lookup
Climate change denial wikipedia , lookup
Climate resilience wikipedia , lookup
Global Energy and Water Cycle Experiment wikipedia , lookup
Citizens' Climate Lobby wikipedia , lookup
Attribution of recent climate change wikipedia , lookup
Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Climate governance wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in the United States wikipedia , lookup
Solar radiation management wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in Tuvalu wikipedia , lookup
Economics of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Climatic Research Unit documents wikipedia , lookup
Climate change and agriculture wikipedia , lookup
Public opinion on global warming wikipedia , lookup
Media coverage of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on humans wikipedia , lookup
Scientific opinion on climate change wikipedia , lookup
Climate change, industry and society wikipedia , lookup
IPCC Fourth Assessment Report wikipedia , lookup
Climate change and poverty wikipedia , lookup
Surveys of scientists' views on climate change wikipedia , lookup
13 Engaging science and managing scientific uncertainty in urban climate adaptation planning JoAnn Carmin and David Dodman Introduction As climate change intensifies, it is expected that urban areas will need to navigate a host of challenges associated with greater variability in temperature and precipitation as well as increases in the intensity of storms and incidence of natural disasters. Conditions such as these have the potential to overwhelm infrastructure, threaten urban plant and animal life, alter the habitability of many buildings, and stress existing infrastructure, emergency services, social services, and management systems in urban areas (Adger et al. 2003; Satterthwaite et al. 2007; Dodman and Satterthwaite 2008; Gasper et al. 2011). Already, more than half of the global population is living in urban areas and, between 2011 and 2050, the number of people residing in cities is expected to increase from 3.6 to approximately 6.3 billion (UN 2012). This means that, as climate conditions change over time, most of the world’s population will be at risk from climate impacts with the most vulnerable populations encountering the greatest housing, health, and livelihood hardships (Satterthwaite et al. 2007; Dodman and Satterthwaite 2008). Minimizing the impacts that climate change will have on cities and their inhabitants requires that urban municipalities take steps to address the risks they face. To manage the threats associated with climate change, a widely held view is that urban adaptation planning and action should be predicated on locally conducted assessments rooted in scientific evidence. However, there is also widespread recognition that climate science cannot provide certainty about future conditions and that the best way to plan for climate impacts and identify appropriate measures is still an emerging area of knowledge (Morgan and Carnegie Mellon 2011; Yohe and Oppenheimer 2011; NRC 2010a,b). These challenges are not unique to the arena of climate change adaptation. Many policy decisions at urban and national levels have to be taken based on uncertain knowledge (Christensen 1985; Hallegatte 2009). Nonetheless, dealing with uncertainty is of particular importance to urban adaptation given the emerging awareness that climate change will be a major force shaping the economies and societies within cities in coming decades (Brugmann 2012). Despite the importance of preparing for climate impacts, urban adaptation is a new and emerging domain of policy action, one in which the initiatives in Book 1.indb 220 08/02/2013 11:37 Science and uncertainty in urban adaptation 221 most cities are still in the early phases of development (Carmin et al. 2012b). Since our knowledge of urban adaptation is evolving and cities are rapidly changing, particularly in Africa and Asia, we do not apply a definition of success to initiatives, either in general or with regard to specific aspects of planning and implementation. Instead, we take an inductive approach and draw on the results of focus groups held with individuals leading adaptation planning and related initiatives in cities around the world in order to identify attributes of success. Specifically, we assess how these individuals use scientific data, manage the inherent uncertainty of this data while seeking to achieve urban resilience, and balance science and uncertainty in the selection of particular adaptation strategies and action. The findings from the focus groups suggest that cities moving forward with adaptation appreciate the fluid nature of scientific inquiry and use the best science as a basis for political and policy decisions as well as to guide the adoption of specific adaptation measures. In other words, cities that successfully engage climate change science are not immobilized by the lack of certainty. Instead, they take advantage of the data that are available and, at the same time, they are cautious, often taking incremental action that limits financial expenditures and the potential of significant mistakes. They also recognize that the reduction of vulnerability may require broader interventions to reduce the sensitivity and increase the adaptive capacity of individuals, households and communities, actions that are less reliant on detailed knowledge of future climate impacts. This requires that cities view adaptation as an opportunity for strategic planning and for experimentation and innovation. Cities, climate science, and uncertainty Climate science attempts to understand and predict the changes that will take place as a result of increased greenhouse gas emissions. At a minimum, this includes projections of changes in temperature and precipitation, patterns and rates of glacial melt, and variations in sea level (IPCC 2007). Increasingly, these projections are being downscaled to the regional level. While some cities use more generalized scenarios (Birkmann et al. 2010), many use these regional scenarios to understand what types of changes they can expect will take place and how these changes will affect municipal service provision, the built environment, ecosystems and biodiversity, economic stability, and quality of life for residents in their urban areas. For instance, higher temperatures can damage buildings and infrastructure and reduce air quality. Increases in precipitation can disrupt transport and lead to flooding and mudslides, while decreases in precipitation can result in water shortages for households and businesses (Wilbanks et al. 2007; UN Habitat 2011). Taken together, these and other climate impacts can result in significant challenges and expenditures for local governments and populations (Parry et al. 2009). Preparing for the impacts of climate change requires that cities develop plans and implement adaptation programs. However, since urban adaptation is a nascent policy domain, there are an increasing number of programs and guidebooks but Book 1.indb 221 08/02/2013 11:37 222 JoAnn Carmin and David Dodman no established best practices or norms for planning and implementation they can follow (Anguelovski and Carmin 2011). Nonetheless, some cities have begun to acknowledge the importance of preparing for climate impacts and initiated planning, either for the entire urban area or for specific departments or sectors (Preston et al. 2010; Carmin et al. 2012b). For some cities, it is the realization of being vulnerable that compels them to take action, while, for others, it is the recognition that adaptation is a means to advancing local goals and priorities, such as sustainability or economic development (Carmin et al. 2012a). The prevailing view of many scholars and international organizations providing advice to cities is that achieving success in adaptation requires rooting adaptation initiatives in scientific assessments that identify how the climate is projected to change and the likely impacts these changes will have on an urban area (Mehrotra et al. 2012; ICLEI/CSES 2007; World Bank 2010; UN Habitat 2011). For example, Mehrotra et al. maintain that researchers need to ensure the availability of climate science in order to “trigger a realistic assessment of vulnerability of the city and its systems so as to facilitate the development of pragmatic strategies” (2011: 20). The emphasis on establishing a scientific basis for action is also advanced in professional guidebooks and frameworks, such as those prepared by the World Bank (2010, 2011) and ICLEI-CSES (2007). Although cities are following a variety of trajectories in their planning, including with respect to the timing and approach to assessments, the advice provided to cities by many international and intergovernmental organizations is that they should create a foundation for their adaptation efforts by obtaining climate data that projects expected changes and assessing the impacts of anticipated change through models and scenarios. Two basic approaches to assessments have emerged: hazard-based and vulnerability-based approaches (Burton et al. 2005; Füssel 2007). The hazardbased approach, also referred to as the risk-based approach, typically draws on scientific models to identify anticipated changes in the climate system (Füssel 2007). These changes are then examined with respect to how they will be experienced in the city. When projected changes are assessed in the context of a city, the hazard-based approach enables the development of scenarios and evaluation of how climate change will affect a local area (Romero Lankao and Qin 2011). Alternatively, the vulnerability-based approach evaluates climate change in the context of current stresses, placing an emphasis on the social factors associated with exposure, sensitivity, and coping capacity. Inherent in this approach is recognition that the nature of climate risk is shaped by the development context (Ayers and Dodman 2010), that climate vulnerability is linked to both development patterns and government failure (Romero Lankao and Qin 2011), that reducing vulnerability requires reducing the sensitivity of social and economic systems and increasing the adaptive capacity of households and communities, and that good (or sustainable) development often leads to strengthening of adaptive capacity (Huq and Ayers 2008). Although both of these approaches are being adopted, the legitimacy of science and scientific evidence has led many urban adaptation practitioners to view the hazard-based approach as an essential aspect of developing an adaptation program. Book 1.indb 222 08/02/2013 11:37 Science and uncertainty in urban adaptation 223 Scientific evidence plays a critical role in defining and legitimating policy initiatives from the local to the global. In adaptation, assessments contribute to success since they provide information to decision-makers about future conditions with the goal of reducing risk and vulnerability. From a practical standpoint, assessments facilitate the selection of adaptation options that can contribute to adaptive capacity (Hay and Mimura 2006; Romero Lankao and Qin 2011). For example, Chicago identified extreme heat and precipitation, infrastructure damage, and ecosystem degradation as major issues that would affect the city as a result of climate change (Coffee et al. 2010), while London’s adaptation strategy focuses on flooding, drought, and overheating (Greater London Authority 2010). Using assessments as a foundation, both cities identified a wide range of actions they could take to reduce vulnerability and then pared back their options based on what they could feasibly achieve given cost, time, and implementation-related issues. This resulted in a focused set of measures that could be readily achieved, such as planting trees where they could reduce heat island effect and amendments to the air ordinance to protect air quality as temperatures increased. The emphasis placed on using assessments based on climate science as a foundation for adaptation planning and action is aligned with the rational perspective, which is predicated on the assumption that scientific data and findings will guide decision-makers in selecting the best possible course of action. However, there are three critical limitations to this point of view with respect to urban adaptation. First, this perspective ignores the fact that scientific analyses, including the results of assessments, are themselves the product of social and political processes. These influences, including the knowledge base of the stakeholders involved in the process, shape both the types of assessments conducted and the findings that are produced (Tierney 1999; Jasanoff and Martello 2004; Clark et al. 2006). Second, the findings of assessments often are used as a basis for advancing political and organizational agendas. For instance, when results diverge from the preferences or aims of decision-makers, they may be compelled to change their option or they may challenge the methods or the findings (Clark et al. 2006; Farrell et al. 2006). Third, although science often is envisioned as producing unbiased and irrefutable results, all scientific endeavors are an emerging process of knowledge acquisition: that is, knowledge is constructed via social interaction even as it influences and interacts with individual and organizational beliefs and actions. While many scholars and practitioners are focusing on how to design assessment processes that cities can adopt, as is the case with science in general, the estimations used in these and other types of urban climate assessments are inherently social and uncertain. The uncertainty in most climate assessments is due to the reliance on estimates of future emissions derived from a range of socioeconomic development scenarios, with additional uncertainty arising from the way in which the climate system itself will respond to these potential concentrations (Mastrandrea et al. 2010; van Vuuren et al. 2011). Since the future is uncertain, and since methods and models are continually refined, the science provides a high level of confidence in largescale future trends and outcomes, but remains unable to give precise predictions Book 1.indb 223 08/02/2013 11:37 224 JoAnn Carmin and David Dodman at local levels. Of further importance to cities, global models cannot yet estimate regional patterns with a high degree of confidence and efforts to develop models at the city and neighborhood scale are still under development (Mastrandrea et al. 2010; Oreskes et al. 2010). This means that the results of assessments and scenarios are far from precise, generating results contingent on the methodology employed (Mastrandrea et al. 2010) and producing projections based on data that are not specific to the urban scale of action (Oreskes et al. 2010). These can be further complicated by the local effects of urbanization on weather and climate, including the urban heat island, which are also difficult to model with precision. Planners and politicians do not have the luxury of waiting for the science to be perfected as they are under increasing pressure from their constituencies to account for potential climate impacts in their decisions and actions. Further, not all cities generate local data that can support climate assessments or have the capacity to pay for services to provide locally specific analyses. In situations such as these, which are not uncommon in policy and planning, decision-makers often will acknowledge existing limitations and then proceed with caution (Reckhow 1994). One approach to limit exposure, for instance, is to focus on measures that have co-benefits and limited costs (Reckhow 1994; Hallegatte 2009). To some extent, this may reflect why many cities are adopting low-risk and “no-regrets” measures that produce benefits under all climate scenarios (Bulkeley 2001; Preston et al. 2010) or finding ways to integrate adaptation into ongoing activities and existing policies and plans (Carmin et al. 2012a). In keeping with principles of adaptive management (Holling 1978), a second approach reflecting caution is to take incremental action and then learn from these efforts. In urban and environmental planning, this often takes the form of testing ideas through a process of trial and error and then using the lessons learned as a basis for subsequent action (Bruton et al. 2005). Incrementalism also reinforces the view that in highly uncertain contexts such as climate change there is a need for decision-makers and planners to adopt flexible measures and modes of action (Hallegatte 2009; Hunt and Watkiss 2011). The successful use of science and management of uncertainty Previous research suggests that science can be used successfully to lend credibility and provide political leverage to decisions and actions, while uncertainty can be managed by limiting exposure and engaging in cautious forms of action (Reckhow 1994; Hallegatte 2009; Bulkeley 2001; Preston et al. 2010). While these insights apply to policy and planning in general, the specific ways in which cities successfully use climate data and manage the inherent uncertainty of these data in their adaptation initiatives has not been examined. To understand what constitutes successful uses of science and management of scientific uncertainty in urban adaptation planning, focus groups were conducted with practitioners who are leading adaptation initiatives in 14 cities in North America, Latin America, Europe, Asia, and Africa. These individuals offer Book 1.indb 224 08/02/2013 11:37 Science and uncertainty in urban adaptation 225 considered perspectives on what actions are appropriate, effective, and reflective of the overall planning process since they have initiated or are integral to the activities taking place in their cities. The focus groups took place over three days and were organized around large and small group sessions. The sessions covered a variety of topics, including discussions of assessments, the role of science, and the ways in which uncertainty were managed. All of the sessions were recorded and the recordings were then transcribed. Using grounded theory techniques (Corbin and Strauss 1998), the transcripts were coded to identify emergent themes. This thematic analysis forms the basis for the sections that follow, which illustrate how urban adaptation practitioners are using science and managing uncertainty in their adaptation programs.1 Using science in urban adaptation One way in which urban adaptation leaders engage scientific data and analysis is through the use of climate change projections. Some cities rely on national assessments, while others use regional assessments as a means to understand potential impacts, for example from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and its Regional Integrated Sciences & Assessments (RISA) program in the United States, or the United Kingdom’s Climate Impacts Programme (UKCIP). For example, Boston used a regional report prepared by the Union of Concerned Scientists on climate impacts in the northeast United States as a framework for planning, while London’s approach was based on national information from the UKCIP. When scientific data are not available, or when there is a desire to generate additional specific and detailed information, some cities commission or conduct dedicated assessments. For instance, as highlighted by participants in the focus groups, in the initial phase of their adaptation planning process, Durban hired a consultant to develop models and evaluate projected climate impacts in the city. While this involved using some regional data, through this process they were able to focus on localized impacts resulting from sea-level rise and changes in temperature and precipitation. Seattle also has considered impacts in a range of sectors, although the initial stages of the planning effort focused on water. This involved developing projections based on global climate models to assess impacts on drainage and how changes in demand would impact the water supply. This work was extended to sea-level rise. Within the water sector, the city subsequently has been assessing the ways that climate change will affect water quality and the risk of fires in forested watersheds (Focus Group 2011a: 9). Variation may be present in the scope and types of data used in assessments, but cities consistently are drawing on climate science when it is available to ensure that they have an understanding of projected changes and climate impacts. Forging partnerships with universities and research institutes, and maintaining a dialogue, enables cities to extend their capacity for adaptation planning by ensuring that they have current information and locally relevant analyses. This information, in turn, is being used to shape planning initiatives, including in Book 1.indb 225 08/02/2013 11:37 226 JoAnn Carmin and David Dodman establishing priorities and identifying adaptation measures. This point was highlighted by one focus group participant who noted: I do think the engagement in science is really important, and I think it can really set the parameters, and constrain the policy and managerial options going forward. So I think it’s really important to have that engagement and understand the science, particularly as it’s applied at a local level. (Focus Group 2011f: 11) Toronto provides an example of how assessments shaped action. In their evaluation of high-rise, public housing, they found that many units were reaching dangerous temperatures in the summer. Given that many families could not afford air conditioning, they were vulnerable to heat stress. In addition to expanding cooling centers, this program also led to programs targeting energy and building retrofits and renovations in order to conserve heat in the winter and disperse heat during the summer (Focus Group 2011d: 30). A further example is Copenhagen, where projections indicated higher rainfall. The city evaluated a number of options and elected to pursue cost-effective measures, including reuse of excess water and the construction of small creeks that would transport water out of the city to offset stress on the municipal sewer system (Focus Group 2011a: 3). Climate science, along with projections of the impacts that climate change is expected to have on urban areas, have been used by departmental representatives and adaptation champions to provide a rationale for action and engender political support for action. Because models and estimations based on data were respected and trusted by these city leaders, they also provided elected officials and political decision-makers with a level of comfort and confidence in pursuing adaptation. For instance, the report published by the Union of Concerned Scientists captured the attention of Boston’s mayor, resulting in his support for initiating adaptation planning in the city (Focus Group 2011a: 24). Alternatively, in Copenhagen, risk maps derived from scientific data helped politicians visualize locations where threats exist and fostered their commitment to an adaptation program (Focus Group 2011a: 6) (see also Chapter 16). Beyond generating support for adaptation programs in general, scientific data has been used to guide specific decisions related to the investment of scarce resources, or the selection of actions by individuals and organizations. In Durban, for example, scientific projections forecast a 15 per cent increase in stormwater runoff, which led to a change in policy requiring that infrastructure be designed to accommodate this increase. Even where local governments and elected officials do not view adaptation as a priority, scientific analyses and projections have been used to legitimate and leverage action: Although there’s no political support, because the science is so heavily weighted in our favor, I’ve still been able to maneuver . . . And so, if the science is bulletproof, does that provide particular kind of tool that can be leveraged to achieve particular kinds of change? Perhaps in terms of Book 1.indb 226 08/02/2013 11:37 Science and uncertainty in urban adaptation 227 political or social capital, the ways in which the political game is played. It means there is the potential to lean on people and lean on institutions to achieve goals. (Focus Group 2011g: 6) By providing evidence that is viewed as credible about the impacts of climate change, scientific models and data reinforce the need for adaptation and support proposals from municipal departments and adaptation champions for specific actions. However, as one representative commented, “politics can overturn the importance of science . . . your arguments along risk really depend on the type of institutions and politics you have in place” (Focus Group 2011c: 8). Managing uncertainty in urban adaptation Climate science is providing useful data points and lending credibility to decisions in urban areas. However, adaptation leaders acknowledge that “the climate science information we have isn’t perfect” (Focus Group 2011b: 20), and that “[it] simply doesn’t provide the silver bullet I think we hoped it would in terms of ultimate answers” (Focus Group 2011c: 7). Although scientific uncertainty permeates all aspects of adaptation activities, many of the focus group participants have responded creatively and explored new ways they can compensate in order to develop robust planning programs and adaptation initiatives. Indeed, these are the approaches that have resulted in these cities and city officials being recognized as leaders and pioneers in adaptation. In addition, many of the cities represented in these discussions appreciate the need to routinely update their projections and analyses: We emphasized the need of using the best of available science and see science as in constant evolution, too. We are aware of the need of doing assessments periodically and to revise assessments. It’s not that we have one vulnerability assessment in 2011 and then we never do it again. (Focus Group 2011c: 6) Many cities at the meeting noted that they have strong ties to the scientific and academic communities. Importantly, they are not unique among those pursuing adaptation: a recent survey of urban adaptation activities worldwide suggests that 48 per cent of cities interact with local universities, and 20 per cent engage with research institutes in the course of their adaptation planning (Carmin 2012). However, the need for updated science and information is creating a new basis for ongoing exchanges and working relationships to be established: You can start with baseline projections and then start a dialogue saying, “Well, these are interesting, but what the electricity company cares about is average temperature and precipitation projections. Or, what the electricity company cares about is the number of days above 90 degrees Fahrenheit. And Book 1.indb 227 08/02/2013 11:37 228 JoAnn Carmin and David Dodman so, we’d like the data retranslated into these metrics.” . . . When you can structure a process so that it’s iterative, and really a dialogue between the science community and the user community, you end up getting a better product, in the end. (Focus Group 2011e: 5) Professional norms in many planning-related disciplines such as engineering tend to emphasize certainty, data precision, and expertise. On the one hand, adherence to norms can present obstacles when dealing with a situation that is continually in flux and is rife with uncertainty. On the other hand, the willingness to acknowledge professional limits in this situation can serve as a catalyst for working across disciplines to solve problems and achieve more successful adaptation programs: There’s a legacy of engineers and others being trained to design to fixed points, rather than the uncertainty. So we’ve got that legacy that we need to overcome almost, and start training in different ways so that people build in flexibility to their decisions, and that’s where the cross-sectoral working also comes in, because to build in that flexibility, it won’t necessarily be just met by your discipline. It’s going to be met across disciplines. (Focus Group 2011f: 24) This same principle applies to working across different urban sectors in order to design flexible interventions. For instance, given the significant expenditures, stormwater infrastructure is expected to have a lifespan of 20 to 50 years and typically is in place for much longer. Engineers can amend specifications, such as by increasing the width of the pipe, to account for anticipated climate impacts. However, this is a temporary and costly solution since projections generally are valid only for a short portion of the potential lifespan of the investment. Working across sectors and disciplines can provide an alternative approach. In addition to building a pipe to a size that accommodates projected runoff, additional increases in precipitation levels obtained through ongoing analyses can be managed through interventions such as household and municipal-level measures to reduce the flow of water into sewer systems as well as green stormwater infrastructure (Focus Group 2011f: 25). Relying on expensive and comprehensive approaches to solve an uncertain problem might result in undesired outcomes. In contrast, as this example suggests, incremental approaches provide greater flexibility to adjust and respond to new conditions over time. In addition to uncertainty around the type and extent of climatic change that will occur in a given location, there is also uncertainty in relation to the types of interventions that are most appropriate to reduce impacts. Because adaptation is a nascent policy arena, some pioneering cities are exploring and testing new ideas in an iterative manner as they move forward in their adaptation programs: All the uncertainty that surrounds not only impacts, but also responses and effectiveness of the solutions, is that what makes that interesting . . . we have Book 1.indb 228 08/02/2013 11:37 Science and uncertainty in urban adaptation 229 to learn by doing, and while doing because we have to act now. And I think that gives people a lot of opportunities to innovate and to create. (Focus Group 2011a: 18) These innovative processes can include technical measures as well as new institutional mechanisms for coordination, such as Quito’s creation of an interinstitutional committee for the metropolitan area that includes high-level committee representatives as well as academic and citizen counterparts to this committee. Examples of these types of committees are not limited to cities represented in the focus group. For instance, New York and Chicago relied on multi-stakeholder committees and panels to provide input and advisement on a range of aspects of the adaptation planning process (Coffee et al. 2010; Rosenzweig and Solecki 2010). Conclusion Cities initiating adaptation plans and programs have recognized the need for action and taken steps to address this need in the absence of scientific certainty about the scope of climate change and magnitude of impacts. Despite facing a range of challenges, those represented in the focus groups all have moved forward with adaptation planning and, in the process of their discussions, deepen our understanding of how science can be engaged and scientific uncertainty can be managed. For these cities, scientific information is being used to achieve three critical objectives. First, scientific data obtained through assessments have been used as a basis for gaining insight into projected climate impacts and, in turn, establishing the need for action. Second, the scientific evidence available has provided them with a means for setting priorities and identifying what measures are appropriate for building adaptive capacity. Third, the legitimacy of science is recognized as a means for generating support by decision-makers and by the general public. As a result, adaptation leaders use science as a discursive and symbolic tool to attract interest and commitment from political decision-makers and to communicate the importance of policies and investments as well as to justify their adaptation-related activities. Rather than adopting the posture that science is perfect, or being immobilized by its imperfections, the cities that participated in the focus groups are recognizing and compensating for uncertainty in their adaptation programs and moving forward in flexible and creative ways. While science remains influential, and some seek definitive models and precise metrics so they can plan for future conditions with greater confidence, many of those gathered understand the limits to the scientific projections that are available. In these latter instances, city leaders obtain the best scientific analyses available to them while finding ways to compensate for limitations they know are present. As suggested by scholars (e.g. Holling 1978; Reckhow 1994; Hallegatte 2009), in uncertain conditions, actions and initiatives tend to be cautious and flexible. In keeping with this perspective, many of the measures cities are pursuing are incremental. Using the science they have available, city representatives test ideas and then evaluate the outcomes, all Book 1.indb 229 08/02/2013 11:37 230 JoAnn Carmin and David Dodman the while moving forward with contingency plans in mind. In addition, many of these approaches also are initiated with the understanding that as information is obtained and conditions change it will be necessary to refine their plans. This often means accounting for the complementarity of structural and non-structural measures at the outset and then anticipating that these will be phased in as a response to changes that take place over time. These approaches help limit costs in the short term while ensuring flexibility in the long term. In addition, because of the presence of uncertainty, cities are working across sectors and initiating partnerships with diverse stakeholders as a means for gaining input about current and anticipated conditions. The emerging qualities and processes associated with adaptation planning, as reflected in the patterns revealed in the course of the focus groups, offer insights into the ways in which cities are successfully using science and dealing with scientific uncertainty when designing and advancing adaptation programs. Science, as reflected in assessments, provides a foundation that is used to guide action and to enlist support of politicians. Uncertainty often is thought of in negative terms. However, scientific uncertainty is leading cities to develop incremental and flexible programs that, in many ways, are aligned with the principles of adaptive management. In particular, they are cautious in their approaches, being sure to limit their financial exposure and to select adaptation options that combine structural and nonstructural approaches. As city governments plan for the future, and attempt to address vulnerabilities and reduce risks to local residents, assets, and economies, they need to account for climate change. This requires moving forward in conditions of scientific uncertainty. The findings suggest that cities can initiate action using regional assessments, evaluating the data in light of local changes and local goals. They also show that incremental and flexible planning can be used to offset some of the scientific uncertainty that is inherent in climate predictions. At the same time, city authorities could perhaps pay more attention to strategies that reduce vulnerability through engaging with the sensitivity and increasing the adaptive capacity of particular groups within the city – interventions which are less dependent on predictions of future exposure to climate risk. While more refined scientific models and data would foster greater certainty in making adaptation decisions at the city scale, the findings suggest that drawing on the data that are currently available, along with a reliance on incremental action, flexible measures, and a willingness to be creative and innovative, provides cities with a foundation for initiating and sustaining adaptation planning at the present time. Acknowledgments We are grateful to the organizations that supported this research. The meeting of adaptation leaders was hosted at the Rockefeller Foundation Bellagio Study and Conference Center. Travel was funded by the US National Science Foundation – NSF (Grant #0926349), Institute of International Education (IIE), and International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED). Data collection and analysis Book 1.indb 230 08/02/2013 11:37 Science and uncertainty in urban adaptation 231 were funded by NSF. In addition, we thank Cristina Rumbaitis del Rio and Shuaib Lwasa for their help facilitating the meeting, Eric Chu for assisting with meeting coordination and data analysis, and Toddi Steelman and Stacy D. VanDeveer for suggestions on earlier drafts of the chapter. Note 1 The ideas presented in the subsections that follow are based on group discussions and therefore not attributable to individuals. While quotations represent individual comments, both general points and quotes are referenced by their position in the focus group transcripts in order to reflect collective views as well as to maintain the confidentiality of participants. Bibliography Adger, W.N., Paavola, J., Huq, S. and Mace, M.J. (eds) (2003) Fairness in Adaptation to Climate Change. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Anguelovski, I. and Carmin, J. (2011) ‘Something borrowed, everything new: innovation and institutionalization in urban climate governance’, Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 3(3): 169–175. Ayers, J. and Dodman, D. (2010) ‘Climate change adaptation and development I: the state of the debate’, Progress in Development Studies, 10(2): 161–168. Birkmann, J., Garschagen, M., Kraas, F. and Quang, N. (2010) ‘Adaptive urban governance: new challenges for the second generation of urban adaptation strategies to climate change’, Sustainability Science, 5: 185–206. Brugmann, J. (2012) ‘Financing the resilient city’, Environment and Urbanization, 24(1): 215–232. Bruton, M., Bruton, S.G. and Li, Y. (2005) ‘Shenzhen: coping with uncertainties in planning’, Habitat International, 29: 227–243. Bulkeley, H. (2001) ‘No regrets? Economy and environment in Australia’s domestic climate change policy process’, Global Environmental Change, 11: 155–169. Burton, I., Malone, E., Huq, S., Lim, B. and Spanger-Siegfried, E. (2005) ‘Adaptation policy frameworks for climate change: developing strategies, policies and measures’, Climate Policy, 2: 145–149. Carmin, J. (2012) ‘Progress and challenges in urban climate adaptation planning’, Keynote address given at the Resilient Cities Congress, Bonn, Germany, 13 May. Carmin, J., Anguelovski, I. and Roberts, D. (2012a) ‘Urban climate adaptation in the global South: planning in an emerging policy domain’, Journal of Planning Education and Research, 32: 18–32. Carmin, J., Nadkarni, N. and Rhie, C. (2012b) Progress and Challenges in Urban Climate Adaptation Planning: Results of a Global Survey. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Christensen, K.A. (1985) ‘Coping with uncertainty in planning’, Journal of the American Planning Association, 51: 63–73. Clark, W.C., Mitchell, R.B. and Cash, D.W. (2006) ‘Evaluating the influence of global environmental assessments’, in R.B. Mitchell, W.C. Clark, D.W. Cash and N.M. Dickson (eds), Global Environmental Assessments: Information and Influence. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Book 1.indb 231 08/02/2013 11:37 232 JoAnn Carmin and David Dodman Coffee, J.E., Parzen, J., Wagstaff, M. and Lewis, R.S. (2010) ‘Preparing for a changing climate: the Chicago Climate Action Plan’s adaptation strategy’, Journal of Great Lakes Research, 36: 115–117. Corbin, J.M. and Strauss, A. (1998) Basics of Qualitative Research Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Dodman, D. and Satterthwaite, D. (2008) ‘Institutional capacity, climate change adaptation and the urban poor’, IDS Bulletin, 39: 67–74. Farrell, A.E., Jäger, J. and VanDeveer, S.D. (2006) ‘Overview: understanding design choices’, in A.E. Farrell and J. Jäger (eds), Assessments of Regional and Global Environmental Risks: Designing Processes for the Effective Use of Science in Decisionmaking. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future. Focus Group (2011a) Morning session 1, 20 April, Bellagio, Italy. Focus Group (2011b) Afternoon session 1, 20 April, Bellagio, Italy. Focus Group (2011c) Afternoon session 2, 20 April, Bellagio, Italy. Focus Group (2011d) Morning session 1, 21 April, Bellagio, Italy. Focus Group (2011e) Morning session 2, 21 April, Bellagio, Italy. Focus Group (2011f) Afternoon session 1, 22 April, Bellagio, Italy. Focus Group (2011g) Afternoon session 2, 22 April, Bellagio, Italy. Füssel, H.M. (2007) ‘Adaptation planning for climate change: concepts, assessment approaches, and key lessons’, Sustainability Science, 2: 265–275. Gasper, R., Blohm, A. and Ruth, M. (2011) ‘Social and economic impacts of climate change on the urban environment’, Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 3: 150–157. Greater London Authority (2010) The Draft Climate Change Adaptation Strategy for London: Public Consultation Draft. London: Greater London Authority. Hallegatte, S. (2009) ‘Strategies to adapt to an uncertain climate change,’ Global Environmental Change, 19: 240–247. Hay, J. and Mimura, N. (2006) ‘Supporting climate change vulnerability and adaptation assessments in the Asia-Pacific region: an example of sustainability science’, Sustainability Science, 1: 23–35. Holling, C.S. (1978) Adaptive Environmental Assessment and Management. New York: Wiley. Hunt, A. and Watkiss, P. (2011) ‘Climate change impacts and adaptation in cities: a review of the literature’, Climatic Change, 104: 13–49. Huq, S. and Ayers, J. (2008) ‘Streamlining adaptation to climate change into development projects at the national and local level’, in European Parliament (2008), Financing Climate Change Policies in Developing Countries, PE 408.546-IP/A/CLIP/A/CLIM/ ST/2008-13, Brussels: European Parliament. ICLEI/CSES (Centre for Science in the Earth System) (2007) Preparing for Climate Change: A Guidebook for Local, Regional, and State Governments. Seattle, WA: The Climate Impacts Group / King County, ICLEI–Local Governments for Sustainability. IPCC (2007) ‘Summary for policymakers’, in M. Parry, O. Canziani, J. Palutikof, P. van der Linden, and C. Hanson (eds) Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Jasanoff, S. and Martello, M.L. (2004) Earthly Politics: Local and Global in Environmental Governance. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Book 1.indb 232 08/02/2013 11:37 Science and uncertainty in urban adaptation 233 Mastrandrea, M.D., Heller, N.E., Root, T.L. and Schneider, S.H. (2010) ‘Bridging the gap: linking climate-impacts research with adaptation planning and management’, Climatic Change, 100: 87–101. Mehrotra S., Rosenzweig, C., Solecki, W.D., Natenzon, C.E., Omojola, A., Folorunsho, R. and Gilbride, J. (2011) ‘Cities, disasters, and climate risk’, in C. Rosenzweig, W.D. Solecki, S.A. Hammer and S. Mehrotra (eds), Climate Change and Cities: First Assessment Report of the Urban Climate Change Research Network. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Mehrotra, S., Natenzon, C., Omojola, A., Folorunsho, R., Gilbride, J. and Rosenzweig, C. (2012) ‘Framework for city climate risk assessment’, in D. Hoornweg, M. Freire, M.J. Lee, P. Bhada-Tata and B. Yuen (eds), Cities and Climate Change: Responding to an Urgent Agenda. Washington, DC: World Bank. Morgan, M. Granger and Carnegie Mellon (2011) ‘Certainty, uncertainty and climate change’, Climatic Change, 108: 707–721. NRC (National Research Council) (2010a) America’s Climate Choices: Advancing the Science of Climate Change. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. —(2010b) America’s Climate Choices: Adapting to the Impacts of Climate Change. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. Oreskes, N., Stainforth, D.A. and Smith, L.A. (2010) ‘Adaptation to global warming: do climate models tell us what we need to know?’, Philosophy of Science, 77: 1012–1028. Parry, M., Arnell, N., Berry, P., Dodman, D., Fankhauser, S., Hope, C., Kovats, S., Nicholls, R., Satterthwaite, D., Tiffin, R. and Wheeler, T. (2009) Assessing the Costs of Adaptation to Climate Change: A Review of the UNFCCC and Other Recent Estimates. London: International Institute for Environment and Development. Preston, B., Westaway, R. and Yuen, E. (2010) ‘Climate adaptation planning in practice: an evaluation of adaptation plans from three developed nations’, Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 16: 407–438. Reckhow, K. (1994) ‘Importance of scientific uncertainty in decision making’, Environmental Management, 18: 161–166. Romero Lankao, P. and Qin, H. (2011) ‘Conceptualizing urban vulnerability to global climate and environmental change’, Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 3: 142–149. Rosenzweig, C. and Solecki, W. (2010) ‘New York City adaptation in context’, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1196: 19–28. Satterthwaite, D., Huq, S., Pelling, M., Reid, H. and Romero Lankao, P. (2007) Adapting to Climate Change in Urban Areas: The Possibilities and Constraints in Low- and Middle-Income Nations. London: International Institute for Environment and Development. Tierney, K. (1999) ‘Towards a critical sociology of risk’, Sociological Forum, 14(2): 215–242. UN (United Nations) (2012) World Urbanization Prospects: The 2011 Revision, Highlights. New York: United Nations. UN Habitat (2011) Global Report on Human Settlements: Cities and Climate Change. London: Earthscan. van Vuuren, D., Edmonds, J., Kainuma, M., Riahi, K. and Weyant, J. (2011) ‘A special issue on the RCPs’, Climatic Change, 109: 1–4. Wilbanks, T., Romero Lankao, P., Bao, M., Berkhout, F., Cairncross, S., Ceron, J.P., Kapshe, M., Muir-Wood, R. and Zapata-Marti, R. (2007) ‘Industry, settlement and Book 1.indb 233 08/02/2013 11:37 234 JoAnn Carmin and David Dodman society’, in M. Parry, O. Canziani, J. Palutikof, P. van der Linden and C. Hanson (eds), Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. World Bank (2010) Climate Risks and Adaptation in Asian Coastal Megacities: A Synthesis Report. Washington, DC: World Bank. —(2011) Guide to Climate Adaptation in Cities. Washington, DC: World Bank. Yohe, G. and Oppenheimer, M. (2011) ‘Evaluation, characterization, and communication of uncertainty by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change – an introductory essay’, Climatic Change, 108: 629–639. Book 1.indb 234 08/02/2013 11:37