TY - JOUR
T1 - Climate action co-benefits and integrated community planning
T2 - Uncovering the synergies and trade-offs
AU - Newell, Robert
AU - Dale, Ann
AU - Roseland, Mark
N1 - Funding Information:
We gratefully acknowledge the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada for its support of our research project, Meeting the Climate Change Challenge (MC3). Funding was also provided to the first author through the Banting Postdoctoral Fellowships Program.
Publisher Copyright:
© Common Ground Research Networks, Robert Newell, Ann Dale, Mark Roseland.
PY - 2018
Y1 - 2018
N2 - Engaging in climate action through integrated sustainability strategies can yield benefits for communities in more effective ways than through compartmentalized approaches. Such strategies can result in co-benefits, that is, community benefits that occur from acting on climate change that extend beyond mitigation and adaptation. For example, creating more walkable cities can be a strategy for reducing greenhouse gases, but can also lead to healthier communities. Climate strategies with co-benefits can result in "win-win" situations and thus improve practices for integrated community planning. However, this planning approach also presents challenges because it requires understanding complex relationships between community development practices and identifying synergies. In addition, some co-benefit strategies may also have associated challenges and trade-offs. This research examines climate action cobenefits and trade-offs in order to develop a comprehensive picture of the relationships and potential effects of implementing certain plans and strategies. The research consisted of collecting data on climate action efforts occurring in eleven BC (Canada) communities and coding it to identify climate strategies, co-benefits, challenges, and trade-offs. Relationships between codes were then identified through a coding matrix, and these were used to build a series of models that illustrate co-benefits, challenges, and trade-offs associated with local climate action. Each model centered on a particular area of climate action, including energy innovation, urban densification, mixed-use and downtown revitalization, building stock, ecological capital, trails and transportation, and waste and water. The models provide a holistic impression of the advantages and disadvantages associated with different plans and strategies, which in turn can guide both quantitative analyses and qualitative explorations that contribute toward integrated community planning and decision-making.
AB - Engaging in climate action through integrated sustainability strategies can yield benefits for communities in more effective ways than through compartmentalized approaches. Such strategies can result in co-benefits, that is, community benefits that occur from acting on climate change that extend beyond mitigation and adaptation. For example, creating more walkable cities can be a strategy for reducing greenhouse gases, but can also lead to healthier communities. Climate strategies with co-benefits can result in "win-win" situations and thus improve practices for integrated community planning. However, this planning approach also presents challenges because it requires understanding complex relationships between community development practices and identifying synergies. In addition, some co-benefit strategies may also have associated challenges and trade-offs. This research examines climate action cobenefits and trade-offs in order to develop a comprehensive picture of the relationships and potential effects of implementing certain plans and strategies. The research consisted of collecting data on climate action efforts occurring in eleven BC (Canada) communities and coding it to identify climate strategies, co-benefits, challenges, and trade-offs. Relationships between codes were then identified through a coding matrix, and these were used to build a series of models that illustrate co-benefits, challenges, and trade-offs associated with local climate action. Each model centered on a particular area of climate action, including energy innovation, urban densification, mixed-use and downtown revitalization, building stock, ecological capital, trails and transportation, and waste and water. The models provide a holistic impression of the advantages and disadvantages associated with different plans and strategies, which in turn can guide both quantitative analyses and qualitative explorations that contribute toward integrated community planning and decision-making.
KW - Co-benefits
KW - Community climate action
KW - Community planning
KW - Integrated planning
KW - Local adaptation and mitigation
KW - Systems models
KW - Trade-offs
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85058055937&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85058055937&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.18848/1835-7156
DO - 10.18848/1835-7156
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85058055937
SN - 1835-7156
VL - 10
SP - 1
EP - 23
JO - International Journal of Climate Change: Impacts and Responses
JF - International Journal of Climate Change: Impacts and Responses
IS - 4
ER -