Understanding Conceptual Climate Change Meanings and Preferences of Multi-Actor Professional Leadership in New York

Jesse M. Keenan, David King, Derek Willis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This article sets out to evaluate the range of meanings and preferences for the concepts of adaptation, resilience, mitigation and coping of a variety of professionals in New York who are undertaking leadership positions in developing climate change policies and practices. This article positions a normative set of simplified meanings for each of the aforementioned concepts based on a review of existing literature. Utilizing a survey, these normative meanings are evaluated by and between the: (a) concepts and meanings; (b) concepts and applications and (c) applications and preferences, as applied to various risk-based scenarios ranging from sea-level rise to heat waves. This survey tests the hypotheses that the respondents: (i) are unable to consistently match the concept of resiliency with the normative meanings or applications: and (ii) will not consistently show a preference for resilience applications or outcomes ahead of other concepts. The results of the survey confirm both hypotheses, which is demonstrative of the inadequacy of the current framework dominated by a narrowly defined framework for resilience. It is anticipated that the results of this article will advance an argument for the necessity to develop consistent meanings for concepts which bridge the scientific, policy and popular domains.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)261-285
Number of pages25
JournalJournal of Environmental Policy and Planning
Volume18
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - May 26 2016
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

leadership
climate change
mitigation
heat wave
test
policy
sea level rise
scientific policy

Keywords

  • Built Environment
  • Climate Adaptation
  • Resilience
  • Urban Planning

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

Cite this

Understanding Conceptual Climate Change Meanings and Preferences of Multi-Actor Professional Leadership in New York. / Keenan, Jesse M.; King, David; Willis, Derek.

In: Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning, Vol. 18, No. 3, 26.05.2016, p. 261-285.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{35a2011fd0d1494b89210ee1a32878ba,
title = "Understanding Conceptual Climate Change Meanings and Preferences of Multi-Actor Professional Leadership in New York",
abstract = "This article sets out to evaluate the range of meanings and preferences for the concepts of adaptation, resilience, mitigation and coping of a variety of professionals in New York who are undertaking leadership positions in developing climate change policies and practices. This article positions a normative set of simplified meanings for each of the aforementioned concepts based on a review of existing literature. Utilizing a survey, these normative meanings are evaluated by and between the: (a) concepts and meanings; (b) concepts and applications and (c) applications and preferences, as applied to various risk-based scenarios ranging from sea-level rise to heat waves. This survey tests the hypotheses that the respondents: (i) are unable to consistently match the concept of resiliency with the normative meanings or applications: and (ii) will not consistently show a preference for resilience applications or outcomes ahead of other concepts. The results of the survey confirm both hypotheses, which is demonstrative of the inadequacy of the current framework dominated by a narrowly defined framework for resilience. It is anticipated that the results of this article will advance an argument for the necessity to develop consistent meanings for concepts which bridge the scientific, policy and popular domains.",
keywords = "Built Environment, Climate Adaptation, Resilience, Urban Planning",
author = "Keenan, {Jesse M.} and David King and Derek Willis",
year = "2016",
month = "5",
day = "26",
doi = "10.1080/1523908X.2015.1104628",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "18",
pages = "261--285",
journal = "Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning",
issn = "1523-908X",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Understanding Conceptual Climate Change Meanings and Preferences of Multi-Actor Professional Leadership in New York

AU - Keenan, Jesse M.

AU - King, David

AU - Willis, Derek

PY - 2016/5/26

Y1 - 2016/5/26

N2 - This article sets out to evaluate the range of meanings and preferences for the concepts of adaptation, resilience, mitigation and coping of a variety of professionals in New York who are undertaking leadership positions in developing climate change policies and practices. This article positions a normative set of simplified meanings for each of the aforementioned concepts based on a review of existing literature. Utilizing a survey, these normative meanings are evaluated by and between the: (a) concepts and meanings; (b) concepts and applications and (c) applications and preferences, as applied to various risk-based scenarios ranging from sea-level rise to heat waves. This survey tests the hypotheses that the respondents: (i) are unable to consistently match the concept of resiliency with the normative meanings or applications: and (ii) will not consistently show a preference for resilience applications or outcomes ahead of other concepts. The results of the survey confirm both hypotheses, which is demonstrative of the inadequacy of the current framework dominated by a narrowly defined framework for resilience. It is anticipated that the results of this article will advance an argument for the necessity to develop consistent meanings for concepts which bridge the scientific, policy and popular domains.

AB - This article sets out to evaluate the range of meanings and preferences for the concepts of adaptation, resilience, mitigation and coping of a variety of professionals in New York who are undertaking leadership positions in developing climate change policies and practices. This article positions a normative set of simplified meanings for each of the aforementioned concepts based on a review of existing literature. Utilizing a survey, these normative meanings are evaluated by and between the: (a) concepts and meanings; (b) concepts and applications and (c) applications and preferences, as applied to various risk-based scenarios ranging from sea-level rise to heat waves. This survey tests the hypotheses that the respondents: (i) are unable to consistently match the concept of resiliency with the normative meanings or applications: and (ii) will not consistently show a preference for resilience applications or outcomes ahead of other concepts. The results of the survey confirm both hypotheses, which is demonstrative of the inadequacy of the current framework dominated by a narrowly defined framework for resilience. It is anticipated that the results of this article will advance an argument for the necessity to develop consistent meanings for concepts which bridge the scientific, policy and popular domains.

KW - Built Environment

KW - Climate Adaptation

KW - Resilience

KW - Urban Planning

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84947908106&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84947908106&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/1523908X.2015.1104628

DO - 10.1080/1523908X.2015.1104628

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84947908106

VL - 18

SP - 261

EP - 285

JO - Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning

JF - Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning

SN - 1523-908X

IS - 3

ER -