Ecosystem-based adaptation in cities: An analysis of European urban climate adaptation plans

(1)

Contents lists available atScienceDirect

Land

Use

Policy

j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e :w w w . e l s e v i e r . c o m / l o c a t e / l a n d u s e p o l

Ecosystem-based

adaptation

in

cities:

An

analysis

of

European

urban

climate

adaptation

plans

Davide

Geneletti

a,b,∗

_,

_Linda

_Zardo

a

a_Department_of_Civil,_{Environmental}_and_Mechanical_Engineering,_University_of_Trento,_Via_Mesiano,_77,₃₈₁₂₃_Trento,_Italy b_Natural_Capital_Project,_Woods_Institute_for_the_Environment,_Stanford_University,₃₇₁_Serra_Mall,_Stanford,_CA_94305,_United_States

a

r

t

i

c

l

e

i

n

f

o

Articlehistory: Received21March2015

Receivedinrevisedform29July2015 Accepted4September2015 Keywords:

Ecosystem-basedadaptation Urbanecosystemservices Urbanplanning Climatechange

a

b

s

t

r

a

c

t

Ecosystem-basedadaptation(EbA)measureshavebeenincreasinglypromotedintheliterature,aswell asinpoliciesandpractices,fortheirenvironmentalandsocio-economicco-benefits.Therecentscientific literaturehasshownagrowinginteresttoassessclimateadaptationplansattheurbanlevel,in recog-nitionoftheimportantroleplayedbyurbanareasinaddressingclimatechangechallenges.However, littleinformationisavailableonthecombinationofthesetwoissues,i.e.,theactualinclusionofEbA measuresinclimateadaptationplansattheurbanlevel.Thispaperaddressesthisgapbydevelopinga frameworktoanalyzethetreatmentofEbAinurbanlevelclimateplanning,andapplyittoasampleof climateadaptationplansinEurope.TheframeworkconsistsofaclassificationofEbAmeasures,anda scoringsystemtoevaluatehowwelltheyarereflectedindifferentcomponentsoftheplans.Theresults suggestthatthereisingeneralgoodawarenessinplansofEbAmeasures,andoftheirpotentialrolein addressingclimatechangechallenges.However,theirtreatmentinclimateadaptationplansattheurban leveloftenlackssufficientbaselineinformation,aswellasconvincingimplementationactions.Thepaper concludesbyofferingrecommendationstoimprovefuturepractice,intermsofenhancingthebaseline informationtoimprovetheproposalanddesignofEbAmeasures,improvingthetreatmentofco-benefits associatedtoEbAmeasures,andstrengtheningcoordinationwithotherplanningtools.Possiblefuture developmentofthisworksincludetheintegrationoftheproposedEbAclassification,andtheanalysisof alargersampleofterritorialplans.

1. Introduction

Climatechangeadaptationincludesactionsundertakenin nat-uralorhumansystemsinresponsetoactualorexpectedclimatic stimuliortheireffects,inordertoreduceharmorexploitsbeneﬁts

(IPCC,2007).Althoughhistoricallyadaptationtoclimatechange

hasreceivedlessattentionthanmitigation(Füssel,2007), there hasbeen arecent surge ofinterest inadaptationinterventions, whicharealreadyanecessityinmanycontexts,particularlyuntil greenhousegasesemissionswillnotbestabilized(Pickettsetal.,

2013).

Adaptation to climate change may be attained in different ways.Onewaythatisattractingincreasingattentionisthrough ecosystem-basedapproaches.Ecosystem-basedadaptation(EbA)

∗ Correspondingauthorat:DepartmentofCivil,Environmentaland Mechan-ical Engineering, University of Trento,Via Mesiano, 77, 38123 Trento,Italy. Fax:+390461282672.

E-mailaddresses:[email protected](D.Geneletti),[email protected] (L.Zardo).

isdefinedastheuseofbiodiversityandecosystemservicestohelp peopleto adapt totheadverse effects of climatechange (CBD, 2008).Theconcept of EbA wasfirst introducedin the interna-tionalpolicyarenabytheUnitedNationsFrameworkConvention onClimateChange in2008,and hasbeenwidelyadvocatedby environmentalorganizationssincethen(CollsandAsh,2009;TNC, 2009).EbA approaches include management, conservation and restoration ofecosystemsthat deliverservicesthat canhelpto reduceclimatechangeexposures(Munangetal.,2013a).For exam-ple, restoring mangrove forest can contribute to dissipate the energyofstormsurges,bufferinghumancommunitiesfromfloods anderosion(Erwin,2009).Protectinggroundwaterrechargeareas andfloodplaincanhelptosecurewaterresourcesandcopewith droughts (TNC, 2009).Enhancinggreen infrastructuresinurban areascanreducetheheatislandeffect,andtheassociatedhealth risks(Lafortezzaetal.,2013).

Asopposedtomoretraditionalinfrastructure-basedapproaches (e.g.,levees,seawalls,irrigationsystems),EbAofferstheadvantage of promoting “no regrets” interventions, and potentially deliv-ering multiple economic, social and environmental co-beneﬁts http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.09.003

(2)

thatgobeyondclimateadaptation(Jonesetal.,2012).These co-beneﬁtsinclude,amongothers,biodiversityconservationthrough enhancedhabitatconditions;climatemitigationthroughincreased carbonsequestration;conservationoftraditionalknowledge, liveli-hoodandpracticesoflocalcommunities;improvedrecreationand tourismopportunities;enhanced foodsecurity(Demuzereetal.,

2014;Naumannetal.,2011;Vignolaetal.,2009;Munangetal.,

2013b,c).EventhoughEbAapproachesgenerallylackquantitative

estimatesoftheadaptationpotential(Jonesetal.,2012),thereis increasingevidencethattheycanprovideﬂexible,cost-effective andbroadlyapplicablealternativestocopewiththemagnitude, speedanduncertaintyofclimatechange(Munangetal.,2013a).For thesereasons,EbAhasrapidlybecomeanimportantaspectofthe internationalclimatepolicyframework.Asanexample,the Euro-peanUnionrecentclimateadaptationstrategy(EC,2013)explicitly encouragestheadoptionofgreeninfrastructureand ecosystem-basedapproachestoadaptation.

Citiesareparticularlyvulnerabletoclimatechange,duetothe largeandgrowingurbanpopulationworldwideandthecomplex patternsofeconomicassets,infrastructuresandservicesthat char-acterizethem.Hence,achievingclimateadaptationinurbanareasis pivotalforsustainabledevelopment,asshownbygrowingactions undertakenbycitiestopursueadaptation(Rosenzweigetal.,2010), aswellasguidancedocumentsproducedtoassistinthisendeavor (e.g,ICLEI,2010).Pickettsetal.(2013)suggestedthatclimate adap-tation“iswellsuitedtolocallevelsofgovernments,ascitizenscan participateincreatingtargetedadaptationstrategiesthataddress theimportantregionalimpacts,andthesestrategieswillprovide tangiblebeneﬁtstolocalresidents”.Alongthesamelines,Measham

etal.(2011)considerplanningatmunicipallevelasakeyavenue

tomainstreamadaptationactions.

EbAcanplayanimportantroleinurbancontextsandhelpto copewithincreasedtemperature,ﬂoodeventsandwaterscarcity, byreducingsoilsealing,mitigatingheatislandeffectand enhanc-ingwaterstoragecapacityinurbanwatersheds(Mulleretal.,2013;

Grimsditch,2011;Gilletal.,2007).EbAincitiesincludeapproaches

basedonthedesignandimprovementofgreenandblue infras-tructures(e.g.,urbanparks,greenroofsandfacades,treeplanting, rivers,ponds), aswell as othertypes of interventions that use ecosystemfunctionstoprovidesomeformofadaptationto cli-materisks(e.g.,measurestoreducesoilimperviousness)(Roberts

etal.,2012;DoswaldandOsti,2011).Incities,mostecosystemsare

“urbanecosystems”,i.e.,ecosystemswherethebuiltinfrastructure coversalargeproportionofthelandsurface,orthoseinwhich peo-pleliveathighdensities(Pickettetal.,2001;Savardetal.,2000). Urbanecosystemsincludeallgreenandbluespacesinurbanareas, andtypicallyhavealowlevelofnaturalness,beingheavily man-agedorentirelyartiﬁcial(Gómez-Baggethunand Barton,2013). Green roofsareanexample ofurbanecosystemsalmost exclu-sivelydeterminedbyhumansandthatrequireregularmaintenance

(Oberndorferetal.,2007).ThetermEbA measuresiscommonly

usedalsoincitiestorefertotheuseofurbanecosystemsto pro-videservicesthathelptoadapttoclimatechange(e.g.,Zandersen

etal.,2014;Doswaldetal.,2014;Munroeetal.,2012;Doswaldand

Osti,2011).

TherecentliteraturehasaddressedthepotentialroleofEbAin cities(Mülleretal.,2013;Bowleretal.,2010;Berndtsson,2010). Inparticular,Demuzereetal.,(2014)presentedacomprehensive analysisoftheavailableempiricalevidenceaboutthe contribu-tionofgreeninfrastructurestoclimatechangeadaptationinurban areas.Nevertheless,theconceptofEbAisstillrelativelynewfor cities,andlittleevidenceisavailableontheinclusionofEbA mea-suresin actualurbanplansand policies(Wamsleret al.,2014). Urbanplanning,atleastinmoreindustrializedcountries,hasbeen increasinglyaddressingclimateadaptationstrategiesandactions, asshownbyrecent reviewsof planningdocumentsundertaken

forcitiesinEurope(Reckienetal.,2014),theUK(Heidrich,2013), Australia(Bakeretal.,2012)andNorthAmerica(Zimmermanand

Faris,2011).However,noneofthesepapers addressspeciﬁcally

EbA.

Thegreyliteraturecontainsseveralcollectionsofexperiences, but theyfocus either on urbanadaptation in general,with lit-tleemphasisonecosystem-basedapproaches(EEA,2012),oron EbA,withlittleemphasisonurbanareas(DoswaldandOsti,2011;

Naumannetal.,2011;AndradePérezetal.,2010).Themajorityof

theEbAcasestudiespresentedinthelatterreportsisrelatedto nat-uralareas,coastalzones,agricultureandforestry.Anexceptionis representedbytheworkofKazmierczakandCarter(2010),which compilesadatabaseofcasestudiestoshowcaseEbAapproaches incities.However,thesecasestudiesdonotspeciﬁcallyrelateto planning,buttoabroadersetofinitiatives,includingfor exam-pleincentiveschemes,physicalinfrastructuredelivery,guidance documents,etc.Inconclusion,theextenttowhichEbAapproaches areactuallyincludedinplanningattheurbanlevelislargelynot documented.

Thispaperaddressesthisgapbydevelopingaclassiﬁcationof EbAandascoringsystemtoanalyzethetreatmentofEbAinurban climateadaptationplanning,andapplyittoasampleofplansin Europe.Speciﬁcally,thepaperaimsatansweringquestionsrelated to:

-ThetypesofEbAmeasuresthatareincludedinclimateadaptation plans(Whatarethemostcommonones?Towhatclimatechange impactdotheyaimtorespond?)

-TheextenttowhichEbAmeasuresareconsideredanddescribed inclimateadaptationplans(Inwhatpartsoftheplanning docu-mentsareEbAmeasurespresent?Howwellandhowconsistently aretheytreated?)

Theultimatepurposeofthepaperistoprovideanoverview of the current state of the art related to the inclusion of EbA in urbanplanning, and useit to identifyand discuss themain shortcomingandproposepossiblesolutions.First,wedescribethe reviewframework,whichincludestheidentiﬁcationofEbA mea-suresthatarerelevantforurbanadaptation.Wethenpresentthe sampleofplanningdocuments,andthemethodthatwasusedto extractinformationrelevanttothestudy.Afterwards,wepresent theresultsoftheevaluation.Finally,wediscussthemainﬁndings and concludebyproviding recommendationstoimprovefuture practiceinurbanplanning.

2. Methods

2.1. ClassiﬁcationofEbAmeasures

Asafirststepin ourstudy,weidentifiedand classified pos-siblemeasuresfor EbAthat arerelevant for urbanareas.Many examplesanddescriptionsofEbAmeasuresarepresentinthe lit-erature(Doswaldetal.,2014;Zandersenetal.,2014;Jonesetal.,

2012;DoswaldandOsti,2011;TNC,2009).However,tothebest

ofourknowledge,acomprehensiveclassificationoftypologiesof EbAmeasuresthatcanbeemployedinurbanareashasnotbeen developed.MoststudiesfocusonEbAinagricultureandforestareas (e.g.,Vignolaetal.,2009)oranywaydonotprovideaclassification ofdifferentEbAtypologies.Theclosestattempttoproducealist ofpossibleEbAinurbancontextswasfoundinEEA(2012).Here, differenttypesofmeasuresareassociatedtotheclimatechange impactstheyaimatreducing,i.e.,heat,floodingandwaterscarcity. These three impacts reflect the expectedeffects of thecurrent projectionsof averageclimatechange:theincreaseinduration, frequencyand/orintensityofheatwaves,extremeprecipitation

(3)

eventsanddroughts(Barriopedroetal.,2011;Giorgietal.,2011;

Hoerlingetal.,2012).

ThelistproposedbyEEA (2012)wasrevisedand integrated withothertypologiesfoundintheliterature.Thisresultedinthe classiﬁcationpresentedinTable1,wheredeﬁnition,rationaleand supportingreferencesareprovided foreach measure.Measures areassociated totheclimatechangeimpact theyaremeantto reduce,eventhoughitisrecognizedthatsynergiesoccur.For exam-ple,greenroofsmaycontributetoreducerunoffwaterquantity

(CzemielBerndtsson,2010),inadditiontobuildingcooling.TheEbA

measuresplayatdifferentspatialscales,rangingfrom building-scale interventions (e.g., green roofs and walls) to urban-scale interventions(e.g.,city-widegreen corridors).Despite their dif-ferenceinscale,theidentiﬁedmeasuresareallwithinthescope ofurbanplans,hencetheycanbe(atleastpartly)implemented byactionsproposedin planninginstruments.Measuressuchas riverrenaturalization,inmostcases,cannotbehandledwithinthe borderofacityalone.However,urbanplanshavethepossibility toimplementtheseinterventions(atleastfortheurbansectorof rivers),aswellastopromotecoordinationwithotherplanning lev-els(e.g.,regionalplanning,riverbasinplanning).Forthisreason, thesemeasureshavebeenincludedintheproposedclassiﬁcation ofEbAmeasuresrelevantforurbanareas.

2.2. Selectionofthesampleofplans

There are many planning instruments that address climate changeadaptationatthelocallevel.Weusetheterm‘climate adap-tationplan’toreferingeneraltoplansthatincludestrategiesto reducevulnerabilitytoclimatechangeincities,eventhoughthe actualnameoftheplanmightbedifferent.AtEuropeanlevel,there islittleinformationontherangeofplansbeingdevelopedunder therubricofclimateactionplanning,andtoourknowledgethere isnocentraldatabaseoragencycollectingthisinformation.For thisreason,wedecidedtofocusonasampleofcitiesconsidered activeinclimatechangeadaptation,byreferringtothe“C-40” ini-tiative(http://www.c40.org).TheC-40wasestablishedin2005asa networkoflargecitiesworldwidethataretakingactiontoreduce greenhousegasemissionsandtofaceclimaterisks.Thissample offerstheadvantageofprovidinginformationondifferent initia-tivesundertaken by citiesthat have beenparticularlyactive in climateadaptationstrategies.Thisisconsistentwiththepurposeof thisstudy,whichistoofferanoverviewoftheextenttowhichEbA measuresareincludedinplanninginstrumentsofcitiesengaged inclimateactions,asopposedtoevaluatingtheperformance of differentcitiesorgeographicalregions.Amongthecitiesofthe C-40database,weselectedtheonesbelongingtoMemberStatesof theEuropeanUnion.Thisresultedinasampleof14cities,namely Amsterdam,Athens, Barcelona, Berlin, Copenhagen,Heidelberg, London,Madrid,Milan,Paris,Roma,Rotterdam,Stockholm,Venice andWarsaw.Across-checkwithEuropean-leveldatasetsonheat, ﬂoodsandwaterscarcitypublishedbytheEuropean Environmen-talAgency1_revealed_an_even_presence_of_climate_change_challenges

inthecitysample:sevenoftheselectedcitiesarelocatedinregions affectedbyheatwaves,sevenbyﬂoodsandsixbywaterscarcity.

Wethengatheredalltheurbanclimatechangeresponsesin theformofplanningdocumentsapprovedbytherelevant munic-ipalauthority,andavailableontheinternet.Thisresultedinthe listofplanningdocumentslistedin Table2.Ascanbeseen,all theselectedcitieshaveapprovedaSustainableEnergyActionPlan (SEAP). The SEAP is the key planning instrument provided for

1 _The _maps _are _available _at _{http://eea.maps.arcgis.com} _(heat _and _ﬂoods)

andhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/ﬁgures/drought(waterscarcityand drought).

bythe“CovenantofMayor”,alocal-levelinitiativesupportedby theEuropeanCommissionthatpromotestheinvolvementoflocal authoritiesinrespondingtoclimatechange.Eventhoughoriginally SEAPweretoaddressmostlymeasuresforCO2emissionreduction,

energyefﬁciencyandrenewableenergy,theyhaveexpandedtheir scopetoincludemorebroadlyallclimate-relatedmeasures(Zanon

andVerones,2013).AsshowninTable2,somecitiesapproved

addi-tionalplansrelatedtoclimatechange,whichwerealsoincludedin ouranalysis.

2.3. Analysisofthecontentoftheplans

Priortotheanalysis,thecontentoftheplanswasdividedinto fourcomponents:informationbase;visionandobjectives;actions; implementation.Thesecomponentsrepresentthematically differ-entpartsoftheplans.Theinformationbaseincludestheanalysis ofcurrentconditionsandfuturetrends(typicallypresentedinthe introductorypartsoftheplanningdocuments),whichisperformed inordertoprovideabasisforthesubsequentdevelopmentofthe plan’sobjectivesandactions.Visionandobjectivesincludethe state-mentoftheambitionandofthegeneraland specificobjectives thata planintendstoachieve.Actionsinclude allthedecisions, strategiesandpoliciesthattheplanpropose,inordertoachieveits objectives.Finally,implementationrefertoallmeasures(including budget-relatedones)proposedtoensurethatactionsarecarried out.Thisclassificationofplancomponentsisamodifiedversionof theoneproposedbyBakeretal.(2012),whichcomprisesalsoafifth component:optionsandpriorities,i.e.,thedevelopmentand prior-itizationofalternativesolutions.Thiscomponentwasnotincluded herebecauselargelymissingfromtheplanningdocuments con-sideredinthisstudy.Theproposedfour-componentapproachis consistent(eventhoughitusesadifferentterminology)withthe

oneusedbyHeidrichetal.(2013)toreviewadaptationand

miti-gationplansintheUK.

Adirectcontentanalysis(HsiehandShannon,2005)was per-formed,byreadingallthedocumentsassociatedtotheselected plans,andidentifying–foreachofthefourcomponents–the con-tentrelatedtoEbAmeasures,usingtheclassiﬁcationpresentedin

Table1.Thisapproachwaspreferredtoakeyword-based

analy-sis,giventhatthereisnotyetawell-establishedterminologyin thisﬁeld,andplansuseawiderangeofdifferentwordingtorefer toconceptsrelatedtoEbA,andtoecosystemservicesingeneral

(BraatanddeGroot,2012).Hence,wesearchedforthepresenceof

thedifferentmeasures,irrespectiveofwhethertheplanusedthe term“EbA”ornottodescribethem.Bybreakingdownthe anal-ysisinthefourplancomponents,itwaspossibletotestalsothe overallconsistencyoftheplanwithrespecttoEbA-relatedissues, i.e.theextenttowhichtheEbA-relatedanalysiscontainedinthe informationbaseprovideanappropriatefactualbasisfor devel-opingobjectives,whichinturnarelinkedtosuitableactions,and implementationproposals(BassettandShandas,2010).

Thecontentanalysisfollowedatwo-stepprocess.First,the pres-enceofthedifferentEbAmeasuresineachplancomponentwas searched,byusingthefollowingguidingquestions:

-Informationbase:Doesitcontaindata/statements/analysesthat showawarenessaboutEbA?

-Visionandobjectives:Arethereobjectivesassociatedtothe devel-opment/enhancementofEbAmeasures?

-Actions:Arethere actionsaimedatdeveloping/enhancing EbA measures?

-Implementation:Dotheimplementationprovisionsinclude ref-erencetoEbAmeasures?

Second,whenevertheanswertothepreviousquestions was positive,thecontentwasfurtheranalyzedinordertoassessthe

(4)

Table1

TheclassiﬁcationofEbAmeasuresforurbanareasadoptedinthisresearch(buildingonthelistproposedbyEEA,2012).

EbAmeasure Climatechangeimpact Rationale References

a.Ensuringventilationfromcooler areasoutsidethecitythrough waterwayandgreenareas

Heat Ifcarefullydesigned,urbanwaterwaysandopengreenareas

havethepotentialtocreateaircirculationandprovide downwindcoolingeffect

Oke(1988)

b.Promotinggreenwallsandroofs Heat Vegetatedroofsandfacadesimprovethethermalcomfortof buildings,particularlyinhotanddryclimate

Skelhornetal.(2014); Bowleretal.(2010); Castletonetal.,2010). c.Maintaining/enhancingurbangreen

(e.g.,ecologicalcorridors,trees, gardens)

Heat Greenurbanareasreduceairandsurfacetemperatureby providingshadingandenhancingevapotranspiration.This coolingimpactisreﬂected,tosomeextent,alsointhebuilding environmentsurroundinggreenareas.

YuandHien(2006); Demuzereetal.(2014)

d.Avoiding/reducingimpervious surfaces

Flooding Interventionstoreduceimpervioussurfacesinurban environments(e.g.,porouspaving;greenparkinglots; brownﬁeldrestoration)contributetoslowdownwaterrunoff andenhancewaterinﬁltration,reducingpeakdischargeand offeringprotectionagainstextremeprecipitationevents.

Farrugiaetal.(2013); Jacobson(2011)

e.Re-naturalizingriversystems Flooding Restoringriverandflood-plainsystemstoamorenaturalstate inordertocreatespaceforfloodwatercansupporthigherbase flows,reducingfloodrisk.Restorationinterventionsinclude, forexample,theestablishmentofbackwatersandchannel featuresandthecreationofmorenaturalbankprofilesand meanders.

Burnsetal.(2012);Palmer etal.(2009)

f.Maintainingandmanaginggreen areasforﬂoodretentionandwater storage

Flooding,waterscarcity Vegetatedareasreducepeakdischarge,increaseinﬁltration andinducethereplenishmentofgroundwater.Toenhance this,retentionbasins,swales,andwetdetentionsystemscan bedesignedintoopenspacesandurbanparks.

Fosteretal.(2011); Cameronetal.(2012)

g.Promotingtheuseofvegetation adaptedtolocalclimateanddrought conditionsandensuringsustainable wateringofgreenspace

Waterscarcity Greenspacemayexacerbatewaterscarcityinurbanareas.To limitthisproblem,interventionscanbedirectedatchoosing themostappropriatetreespecies(thataredroughtresistant butstillsuitableasapartoftheurbangreenspace),and designingsustainablewateringsystems(e.g.,usinggreywater orharvestedrainwater)

EEA(2012)

extenttowhichEbAmeasureswereaddressed,byusingthe four-levelscoringsystempresentedinTable3.Theassignedscoreswere cross-checkedbyallauthorsofthisresearch.Finally,anaverage scorewasobtainedforeachtypeofEbAmeasurebycomputingthe averagevalueobtainedbythatmeasureinalltheplanswherethe measureisfound,andforallplancomponents.

InthisstudywereviewedtheEnglishtranslationofthe plan-ningdocuments,whichwasalwaysavailableexceptfortheplans of Milan, Venice and Rome, for which we reviewed the orig-inal documents in Italian. Fearing that translations might be reducedversionsoftheoriginalplans(andomitimportantdetails), wecheckedalsotheoriginaldocuments,wheneverwe hadthe requiredlanguageskills,i.e.fortheplanswritteninSpanishand French.Thesechecksshowedthatthetranslationswereaccurate andcomplete.Basedonthis,weconcludedthattheEnglish trans-lationsareadequateforthepurposesofthisstudy.

3. Results

3.1. WhatEbAmeasuresareincludedintheplansandhowwell aretheyaddressed?

Consistentlywiththepurposeofthestudy,theresultsarenot presentedanddiscussedintermsofthequalityoftheindividual plans,buttheyarebrokendownbyEbAmeasureandbyplan com-ponents.Atotalof44EbAmeasureswerefoundintheselected plans.Fig.1illustratesthebreakdownintheseventypesdescribed

in Table1. Ascan beseen, measuresc(maintaining/enhancing

urbangreen)andf(maintainingandmanaginggreenareasforﬂood retentionandwaterstorage)arethemostcommonones,andare

foundin85%oftheselectedplans.Examplesofmeasurescinclude effortstoincreasegreenareasandneighborhoodgardens(Paris), proposals for enhancingthe connectivityamong existing green areasthroughthedesignofgreencorridorsandrings(Milan)and theuseofplantstoprovideshadeinnewindustrialestates (Ams-terdam).Measuresfconsist,forexample,inthecreationofnew wetlandareasandponds(Berlin),andthedesignofgreenspaces tostorerainwaterintheeventoftorrentialrain(Copenhagen).

Measureb(Promotinggreenwallsandroofs)isfoundin57% oftheplans.Forexample,Paris’splancontainsprovisionsforthe establishmentofroofandwallgardens(measureb),includingthe identificationof priorityspotsfor this typeof green infrastruc-tures.Measure e(re-naturalizingriversystems)isfoundin29% oftheplans.InMadrid,forexample,thisconsistedinaseriesof bankimprovementsprojectsaimedarereducingfloodhazardand expandingriversidepublicspace.Measuresa,dandg(respectively, ensuringventilation,avoiding/reducingimpervioussurfaces,and promotingclimate-adaptedvegetationandsustainablewatering) arelesscommon,andfoundonlyin14–21%oftheplans.For exam-ple,concerningmeasurea,coldairnetworkstoensureventilation and preventover-heatingare mentioned in Copenhagen’splan, whereasMadrid’sprovidesforthepromotionofecobarrioswhere ventilation will be one of the factorsconsidered in the design of greening interventions.Berlin’splan attainsthereduction of impervioussurfaces(measured)throughrenovationprojectsfor buildings and school playgrounds that include interventions to improvesoilpermeabilityandinsituinfiltration.Finally, concern-ingmeasureg,Venice’splanpromotestheuseofautochthonous species adapted to the local climate, and Madrid’s contains detailedguidelinesfor“sustainablegardens”with

(5)

recommenda-Table2

Listoftheplanningdocumentsreviewedinthisresearch.

City Nameoftheplan Year Source

Amsterdam Amsterdam:adifferentenergy(SEAP) 2010 http://mycovenant.eumayors.eu/

Amsterdamdeﬁnitelysustainable 2011 http://www.nieuwamsterdamsklimaat.nl/ NewAmsterdamclimate 2010 http://mycovenant.eumayors.eu/ Outspokenlysustainable-perspective2014 2009 http://www.nieuwamsterdamsklimaat.nl/ StructurevisionforAmsterdam2014 2008 http://www.nieuwamsterdamsklimaat.nl/ Barcelona Theenergy,climatechangeandairqualityplanfor

Barcelona(SEAP)

2011 http://mycovenant.eumayors.eu/

Berlin Berlinenvironmentalreliefprogramme(10years) (SEAP)

2011 http://mycovenant.eumayors.eu/http://http://www.berlin.de/

Copenhagen Copenhagenclimateadaptationplan(SEAP) 2011 http://mycovenant.eumayors.eu/ http://www.kk.dk/ Heidelberg ClimateprotectioncommitmentHeildelberg

(SEAP)

London DeliveringLondon’senergyfuture(SEAP) 2010 http://mycovenant.eumayors.eu/ TheLondonPlan:spatialdevelopmentstrategyfor

agreaterLondon

2008 http://www.london.gov.uk

Madrid Plandeusosostenibledelaenergiayprevencion decambioclimatico(SEAP)

Milano Pianoperl’energiasostenibileedilclima(SEAP) 2009 http://mycovenant.eumayors.eu/ Paris Parisclimateprotectionplan(SEAP) 2004 http://mycovenant.eumayors.eu/ Roma Pianod’azioneperl’energiasostenibileperlacittà

diRoma(SEAP)

Rotterdam Investinginsustainablegrowth,Rotterdam programmeon(SEAP)

2010 http://mycovenant.eumayors.eu/ Rotterdamclimatecity,mitigationaction

programme

2010 http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/ ThenewRotterdam,Rotterdamclimateinitiative 2009 http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/ Stockholm Stockholmactionplanforclimateandenergy

(SEAP)

2012 http://mycovenant.eumayors.eu/http://www.stockholm.se/ Stockholmclimateinitiative 2010 http://www.stockholm.se/

Venezia Pianod’azioneperl’energiasostenibile(SEAP) 2013 http://mycovenant.eumayors.eu/ Warsaw SustainableactionplanforenergyWarsaw(SEAP) 2011 http://mycovenant.eumayors.eu/

tionsfortheselectionofplantspeciesandsustainablewatering systems.

Theresultsoftheapplicationofthescoringsystems(presented

inTable3)wereusedtocomputeanaveragescoreforeachtype

ofEbAmeasure(Fig.2),representingtheaveragevalueobtained bythemeasureinalltheplanswheretheitisfound,andforall plancomponents.Ascanbeseen,theaveragescorerangesfrom 1.1(achievedbymeasuresaandg)to2.4(measurese).Measuresc andf,whicharethemostfrequentlyfound,arealsotheoneswith thehighestscores,togetherwithactione.

3.2. HowareEbAmeasuresreﬂectedwithinplancomponents?

Fig.3showsinwhichplancomponents(seeSection2.3)EbA measuresarereﬂected.91%ofthemeasuresarepresentinthevision andobjectivescomponent.Thismeansthat,whenaplanincludesan EbAmeasure,thisisveryoftenlistedas(partof)oneofthe objec-tivesthattheplanintendstoachieve.For example,Paris’splan objectivesincludethedevelopmentofamulti-yearschemeto pro-moteroofgardens.91%oftheEbAmeasuresareaddressedinthe actionscomponent,meaningthattheplansincludespeciﬁc

poli-Table3

Scoringsystemusedtoevaluatetheplancomponents.

Score Informationbase Visionandobjectives Actions Implementation

0 Noevidenceofinformationrelated toEbAmeasures

Noevidenceofobjectivesrelated toEbAmeasures

NoevidenceofEbAmeasures Noevidenceofimplementation provisionsrelatedtoEbAmeasures

1 AcknowledgesEbAmeasuresonly

generally(notinconnectionto speciﬁcclimatechangeissues)

MentionsEbA-relatedobjectives, butlacksfurtherdeﬁnition

MentionsEbAmeasures,butlacks furtherdeﬁnition

Mentionsimplementation provisionsrelatedtoEbA measures,butlacksfurther deﬁnition

2 AcknowledgesEbAmeasuresinthe contextofspeciﬁcclimatechange issues

IncludesEbAmeasuresinthe objectivesandprovidessome detailsontheirspeciﬁccontent andhowtopursuethem

IncludesEbAmeasuresinthe actionsandprovidessomedetails ontheirapplicationandactivities

IncludesEbA-related implementationprovisionsand providessomedetailsontheir application

3 AcknowledgesEbAmeasuresand

describes(atleastqualitatively) thepotentialclimate changeadaptationeffects

IncludesEbAmeasuresinthe objectives,providesdetailson theircontent,anddescribeslinks withrelatedplanningandpolicy processesatthelocal/regionallevel

IncludesEbAmeasuresinthe actions,providesinformationon theirapplicationandactivities, includinglocally-speciﬁcdetails

IncludesEbA-related implementationprovisionsand providesinformationontheir application,includingdetailson budget,responsiblebodies,etc

(6)

Fig.1.NumberofmentionsoftheseventypesofEbAmeasures(seelegendinTable1)inthesampleofplans.

ciesoractivitiestoattainthem.Forexample,Milan’splanincludes aseriesoflineargreeninginterventionsalongcanalbanks,roads, bikingroutes,etc.Theinformationbasecomponentoftheplans con-tainsdatarelevanttoEbAmeasuresonlyin79%ofthecases.That is,21%ofthemeasuresfoundintheplansarenotsupportedby anybaselineinformationoranalysis.Evenwhenbaseline infor-mationispresent,thisconsistsmostlyofgeneralstatementsand descriptions.For example,Berlin’splancontains descriptionsof howenergyefﬁciencyofbuildingsorindustrycouldbeusefully combinedwithprojectstosupportsustainablelocalwater manage-mentsystems,byincreasingthepermeabilityofsoilandplanting vegetation.

Theimplementationcomponentoftheplansperformsevenmore poorly:referencestoEbAmeasuresarefoundinonly52%ofthe cases.Therefore,abouthalfofEbAmeasuresarenotassociatedto anyactiontoensurethattheyarecarriedout.Wheninformation aboutimplementationmeasuresarepresent,thisconsistsmainly ofbudget-relateddetails,asforexampleinthecaseofMadrid’s

plan(whereeachactionislinkedtoaplanofimplementationand budget),andRotterdam’s,wherethereareindicationsaboutgreen roofssubsidies.

InordertoassesshowwellEbAmeasuresarereflectedwithin thedifferentplancomponents,wecomputed theaveragescore obtainedbyallEbAmeasuresthatarefoundineachofthefour com-ponents.Forexample,outofthe44EbAmeasures,35arepresent intheinformationbasecomponentoftheselectedplans.The aver-agescorerepresentstheaverageofthescoresobtainedbythese 35EbAaccordingtothescoringsystempresentedinTable3 (sec-ondo column:information base).The results(Fig. 3)showthat actions component scoredthe highest (average score:2.8), fol-lowedbytheimplementation(2.5),thevisionandobjectives(2.2) andtheinformationbase(1.8).Concerningthegoodperformanceof actions,examplesincludeLondon’splan,whichdescribesindetail theactionsand associatedsub-actions,specifiestheresponsible bodiesandidentifylinkswithotherplansandpolicies.Similarly, Madrid’splanprovidesactionfact-sheets,withtheidentification

(7)

Fig.3. Frequencyofpresenceofinformationaboutthe44EbAmeasuresinthe differentplancomponents.

ofresponsiblebodiesandassociatedbudget.Thepoorerscoresof thevisionsandobjectivescomponentareduetothefactthattheir descriptiontendtobeverygeneral.Theinformationbasetypically lacksdetailsonthelinksbetweenmeasuresandclimate-related issues,particularlyconcerningtheresultsexpectedfromthe appli-cationofthemeasure.

Finally,Fig. 4 providesa visualoverview of thedistribution ofinformation ontheidentifiedEbAmeasuresacrossplan com-ponents. This figurehelps to understandhow consistency EbA measuresaretreatedacrossthedifferentplancomponents,and wherethegapsare.Thefigureshowsthatthe44EbAmeasures identifiedintheplanscanbegroupedinsixcategories:

-Measuresaddressedinallthefourplancomponents,fromthe informationbasethroughtheimplementation.Thisisobviouslythe mostdesirablesituation,butoccurredonlyfor45.5%oftheEbA measures.Inallothercases,atleastonecomponentislacking; -Measuresaddressedintheﬁrstthreecomponentsoftheplans,

butnotintheimplementationpart.Thisoccursfor22.7%ofthe EbAmeasures;

-Measuresaddressedonlyinthevisionandobjectivesandactions withnolinkstotheinformationbaseorimplementation(13.6%); -Measuresaddressedonlyintheinformationbaseandvisionand

objectives,withnofollow-upintherestoftheplan(6.8%); -Measuresaddressedintheinformationbaseonly,withno

follow-upintherestoftheplan(2.3%)

-Measuresaddressedinthevisionandobjectives,actionsand imple-mentationcomponents, with nolinks to theinformation base (2.3%).

4. Discussion

Ecosystem-based climate adaptation strategies have been increasinglypromotedintheliterature,aswellasinpoliciesand practices,acknowledgingtheirenvironmental,socialandeconomic co-beneﬁts(Jonesetal.,2012;DoswaldandOsti,2011;TNC,2009). Inparallel, therecentscientiﬁc literaturehasshown agrowing interestin analyzingthecontentofclimateadaptationplansat

thelocallevel,in ordertoassesstheirqualityandeffectiveness andtoformulatesuggestionsforfutureimprovement(Kumarand

Geneletti,2015;Reckienetal.,2014;Heidrichetal.,2013;Baker

etal.,2012;Tangetal.,2010).Thisinrecognitionoftheimportant

roleplayedbylocaladministrationsinaddressingclimatechange challenges,beingoftenaheadofnationallegislationandactions

(Rosenzweigetal.,2010).However,tothebestofourknowledge,

thereare nopublishedstudies thataddressthecombination of thesetwoissues,i.e.,theactualinclusionofEbAmeasuresinurban climateadaptationplans.Moreingeneral,littleevidenceis avail-ableontheup-takeofEbAmeasuresinurbanareas,giventhat mostofthepublishedworkfocusesonnaturalareas,agriculture andforestry(DoswaldandOsti,2011).Thisresearchcontributed toﬁllthisgap,bysheddingsomelightonwhatEbAmeasuresare mostcommonlyfoundinplans,howwelltheyareaddressed,and howconsistentlythroughoutthedifferentplancomponents.

Measurescandfarethemostcommonones,showingthatthere isstrongawarenessoftherolethatgreenareasplayinaddressing climatechangechallenges,bothintermsofmitigatingheatwaves (measurec)andpreventingfloods(measuref).Thefrequencyof thesemeasuresisperhapsnotsurprisinggivingthattheyresult intheenhancementofgreen areas,whichis atypicalobjective thatplannerspursuetoimprovetheurbanspaceforavarietyof purposesthatgobeyondclimatechangeadaptation(e.g., provid-ingrecreationopportunities,improvingairquality)(Tzoulasetal., 2007).So,theirfrequencycouldbeexplainedbythefactthatthese measuresrelyonactionsthatarepartofthestandardportfoliothat plannershavebeenemployingfordecades.However,acriticalissue thatwedetectedisthattheproposaloftheseEbAmeasuresinthe plansisrarelybacked-upbyspecificinformationontheexpected contributionintermsofclimatechangeadaptation,aswellasthe target beneficiaries.That is, in therevised plans,the enhance-mentofgreenareastoreduceheatortopreventfloodsistypically proposedasageneralmeasurethatwilldosomegood,without providingdetailsandjustificationforcriticaldecisions,suchasthe designandthelocationoftheseinterventions,andthe distribu-tionandvulnerabilityoftheexpectedbeneficiaries.Theseissues playakeyroleindeterminingtheeffectivenessofthemeasures

(Kleerekoperetal.,2012;Kazmierczak,2012).

Greenwallsandgreenroofs(measureb)arefoundinmorethan halfofthecities.Thesemeasuresarewellcoveredbytheliterature, whichoffersampledebateontheeffectivenessofvegetatedroofs andfacadestoimprovethethermalcomfortofbuildings,providing datafordifferentclimatezonesandrecommendationsfor imple-mentation(Santamouris,2014;Cook-Pattonand Bauerle,2012). Therelativelylowpresenceofmeasuredissomehowsurprising, especially consideringthat EbA measurestoreduceimpervious surfacesincludeinterventionsatthelocallevel,whichareoften relativelycheapand donot poseparticularchallengesin terms ofcoordinationwithotherpoliciesorplans(CarmonandShamir, 2010).Therefore,theyarequitestraightforwardtoincludein cli-mateadaptationplans,andthefactthattheyarementionedonly inlessthanonethirdoftheplanssuggestthatthereisstillneedto increaseawarenessinlocaladministrationofﬁcersandplanners. Thisﬁndingisconsistentwithpreviousresearch(Brabec,2009), showingthatthecarefuldesignofimperviousareasislargely over-looked.

Measureais theleast frequentlyencountered measure.One reasonmaybethattheeffectivenessofthismeasureisrelatedto theurbanmorphologymoreingeneral.Elementssuchasbuilding footprint,densityandheightandstreetlayouthaveastrong inﬂu-enceonurbanventilationcorridors(Wongetal.,2010).Hence,the designofurbanwaterwaysandopengreenareasthatcreateair cir-culationneedstobeundertakenjointlywithotheractionsrelated tothebuiltenvironmentthat gobeyondthecontentof climate adaptationplans.Thishampersthepossibilityforclimate

(8)

adapta-Fig.4. DistributionofinformationontheidentiﬁedEbAmeasuresacrosstheplancomponents(seetextforfurtherexplanation).

tionplanstoadvancethistypeofEbAmeasures,requiringstrong coordinationwithotherplanninginstruments,suchasurbanplans. Measuregwasalsorarelyfoundinplans,butthismaybeexplained bythefactthatitencompassesamorelimitedsetofactions,which mayberelevantonlyinspeciﬁcclimateconditions.

Finally,theanalysisrevealedthatallthecitiesaffectedbywater scarcityincludedintheirplansatleastoneEbAmeasuretocope withthisclimatechangechallenge.Thesameoccurredwithcities affectedbyfloods.Concerningheatwaves,allbutonecityproposed EbAmeasurestocopewithit.Thissuggeststhatthereisageneral awarenessabouttheportfolioofpossibleEbAmeasures,andthe capabilitytoselectthosethatbetterfittheneedsofaparticular contexts.Themaincriticalpointresidesinthedepthoftheanalyses performedtosupportanddesignaspecificmeasure,asdescribed next.

BytrackingthetreatmentofEbAmeasuresinthefourplan com-ponents,itwaspossibletotestalsotheoverallconsistencyofthe plan,i.e.theextenttowhichtheEbA-relatedanalysiscontained intheinformationbaseprovidesanappropriatefactualbasisfor developingobjectives,whichinturnarelinkedtosuitableactions, andﬁnallytoimplementationproposals.Ouranalysisrevealsthat themostfrequentmissinglinkinvolvestheimplementation com-ponent.Thiscomponentisoftenabsent,withmanycasesofEbA measuresthatareaddressedthroughouttheplan,butinthe imple-mentationpart.Evenwhenpresent,thiscomponenthasthepoorest performance,as thecontenttendstobevaguewithfew tangi-bleelementsthatmaybeusedtotrackhowplannersenvisageto implementthemeasures.Thisproblemwasalsofoundbyother studiesof climateadaptation plans,suchas Tanget al.(2010)’ whichconcludedthatimplementationprovisionswereassociated torelativelyfewstrategies.

Onefinalnoteconcerningpossiblefuturedevelopmentsofthis research.ThisstudyproposedaclassificationforEbAmeasuresand ascoringsystemtoassesstheextenttowhichtheyareincludedin plans.Furtherworkcanbedonetorefineandimprovethis clas-sification,whichcouldbeultimatelyemployedasabasisforthe developmentofEbAreferencemanualsandhandbooksfor plan-ners.Therelativelysmallsizeofthesampleofcities,andtheway itwasselected(i.e.,bylookingatcitiesthatarealreadyactivein climateadaption),donotpermittoreachconclusionsonthe“state ofpreparedness”(Heidrichetal.,2013)ofdifferentcitiesorregions

inEurope,withrespecttotheadoptionofEbAmeasuresintheir cli-mateadaptationplans.AsacknowledgedinSection2,thechoiceof thesampleisbiasedinthatitincludescitiesthatrepresentpositive examplesofclimateadaptation,andthatoftenhaveaconsolidated pastinsustainableplanning.Thisisconsistentwiththeobjective ofthestudy,whichwastoassesstheinclusionofEbAmeasures incitiesengagedinclimateactions,inordertounderstandwhat arethemostcommonmeasuresandhowtheyaredevelopedin theirplanninginstruments.Afollow-upstudycouldemploythe sameapproachtoinvestigatealargersampleofcities,selectedin awaytoberepresentativeoftheconditionsindifferent geograph-icalareas.Forexample,futurestudiescouldfocusonindividual countries,andselectcitiesrepresentativeofsocio-economicand demographicconditionsacrossthosecountries.Anotherpossible follow-upofthisworkcouldshiftthefocusfromclimateadaptation planstoothertypesofplansattheurbanscale,suchasparticularly spatialplans.Thiswillallowtoevaluateandcomparethelevelof uptakeofEbAmeasuresindifferentcontextsanddifferent plan-ninginstruments,andtoprovidecontext-speciﬁcdirectionsand recommendationsforfutureimprovements.

5. Conclusionsandrecommendations

AsMunangetal.(2013a)putit,“integratingandmainstreaming

EbAintodecisionmakingframeworksandplanningprocessesare imperative”.TheresultsofthisstudysuggestthatEbAmeasures arefindingtheirwayinclimateadaptationplans,inresponseto abroadrangeofclimatechangechallenges.However,mostplans areaffectedbyalackofspecificityanddetailsthatmayhamperthe possibilityforthesemeasurestobeactuallyimplemented,aswell astheiroveralleffectivenessinreducingpopulationvulnerability. Basedonourfindings,wecanformulatethefollowing recommen-dationstoimprovetheconsiderationofEbAmeasuresinclimate adaptationplans:

1.Thebaseline informationupon whichEbA measuresare pro-posedanddesignedneedstobeenhanced.Methodstoassessthe existingstockofgreen/blueinfrastructures,andtheirpotential toprovideclimateadaptationservicesmustbemainstreamed in planningpractice. Particularly,assessments of theﬂow of ecosystemservicesatlocalscalesareoftenmissing,giventhat

(9)

manyclimatechangeimpactandvulnerabilitystudiesprovide resultsatlargerscales,limitingtheirusefulnessfordeveloping adaptationstrategiesatthelocalscale(Vignolaetal.,2009).A betterknowledgebase,includinginformation onspatial pat-ternofvulnerability,wouldallowtobettertargetthedesignand implementationofEbAmeasures.

2.Co-benefitsassociatedtoEbAneedtomemademoreexplicit. OneofthestrongestmotivationforpromotingEbAapproaches isthattheybringenvironmentalandsocio-economicbenefits, beyondclimateadaptation.Amoreformalanalysisofthe mag-nitudeoftheco-benefitsneedtobepromotedinplanning,in order toprovide a stronger rationale for decisionsinvolving EbA.Ideally,comparisonsbetweenEbAandalternative adap-tationmeasuresshouldbeperformed,asadvocatedbyJones

etal.(2012).Theseanalysescantakeadvantageofthe

method-ologiesandﬁndingspresentedinthegrowingliteratureonthe assessmentandevaluationofecosystemservices(Kareivaetal., 2011),includingitsemergingstreamsfocusedonspatial

plan-ning(McKenzieetal.,2014)andimpactassessment(Geneletti

2013,2011).

3.Interactionbetweenclimateadaptationplansandother plan-ninginstrumentsatthelocallevelneedstobestrengthen.Many EbAmeasuresrequirespace,hencecompetewithotherlanduses andneedsinareas(urbansettlements)wherelandresourcesare oftenscarce.Astrongcoordinationwithurbanplansandother actionsandpoliciesisrequiredtoensurethattheproposedEbA measuresarebothfeasibleanddesirable.Theissueofintegration betweenclimateadaptationactionsandotherplanningefforts hasbeenraisedbyPrestonetal.(2011),buthasnotreceivedthe requiredlevelofattention,evenbythescientiﬁcliterature.

Acknowledgement

Thecommentsprovidedbytheanonymousreviewershelpedto improvethequalityofthismanuscript.

References

AndradePérez,A.,HerreraFernandez,B.,CazzollaGatti,R.,2010.Building ResiliencetoClimateChangeEcosystem-BasedAdaptationandLessonsFrom theField.IUCN,Gland,Switzerland,pp.164.

Baker,I.,Peterson,A.,Brown,G.,McAlpine,C.,2012.Localgovernmentresponseto theimpactsofclimatechange:anevaluationoflocalclimateadaptationplans. LandscapeUrbanPlan.107(2),127–136.

Barriopedro,D.,Fischer,E.M.,Luterbacher,J.,Trigo,R.M.,Garcia-Herrera,R.,2011. Thehotsummerof2010:redrawingthetemperaturerecordmapofEurope. Science332(6026),220–224.

Bassett,E.,Shandas,V.,2010.Innovationandclimateactionplanning:perspectives frommunicipalplans.J.Am.Plan.Assoc.76(4),435–450.

Berndtsson,J.,2010.Greenroofperformancetowardsmanagementofrunoffwater quantityandquality:areview.Ecol.Eng.36,351–360.

Bowler,D.E.,Buyung-Ali,L.,Knight,T.M.,Pullin,A.S.,2010.Urbangreeningtocool townsandcities:asystematicreviewoftheempiricalevidence.Landscape UrbanPlan.97(3),147–155.

Braat,L.C.,deGroot,R.,2012.Theecosystemservicesagenda:bridgingtheworlds ofnaturalscienceandeconomics,conservationanddevelopment,andpublic andprivatepolicy.Ecosyst.Serv.1(1),4–15.

Brabec,E.A.,2009.Imperviousnessandland-usepolicy:towardaneffective approachtowatershedplanning.J.Hydrol.Eng.14(4),425–433. Burns,M.J.,Fletcher,T.D.,Walsh,C.J.,Ladson,A.R.,Hatt,B.E.,2012.Hydrologic

shortcomingsofconventionalurbanstormwatermanagementand opportunitiesforreform.LandscapeUrbanPlan.105(3),230–240. Cameron,R.W.F.,Blanuˇsa,T.,Taylor,J.E.,Salisbury,A.,Halstead,A.J.,Henricot,B.,

Thompson,K.,2012.Thedomesticgarden—itscontributiontourbangreen infrastructure.UrbanFor.UrbanGreening11,129–137.

Carmon,N.,Shamir,U.,2010.Water-sensitiveplanning:integratingwater considerationsintourbanandregionalplanning.WaterEnviron.J.24(3), 181–191.

Castleton,H.,Stovin,V.,Beck,S.,Davison,J.,2010.Greenroofs:buildingenergy savingsandthepotentialforretroﬁt.EnergyBuild.42(10),1582e–1591. CBD:Reportoftheﬁrstmeetingofthesecondadhoctechnicalexpertgroupon

biodiversityandclimatechange.ConventiononBiologicalDiversity:17–21 November2008,London,UK.

Colls,N.,Ash,N.,2009.Ecosystem-BasedAdaptation:ANaturalResponseto ClimateChange.IUCN,Gland,Switzerland,pp.16.

Cook-Patton,S.,Bauerle,T.,2012.Potentialbeneﬁtsofplantdiversityonvegetated roofs:aliteraturereview.J.Environ.Manag.106,85–92.

CzemielBerndtsson,J.,2010.Greenroofperformancetowardsmanagementof runoffwaterquantityandquality:areview.Ecol.Eng.36(4),351–360. Demuzere,M.,Orru,K.,Heidrich,O.,Olazabal,E.,Geneletti,D.,Orru,H.,Bhave,A.G.,

Mittal,N.,Feliu,E.,Faehnle,M.,2014.Mitigatingandadaptingtoclimate change:multi-functionalandmulti-scaleassessmentofgreenurban infrastructure.J.Environ.Manag.146,107–115.

Doswald,N.,Munroe,R.,Roe,D.,Giuliani,A.,Castelli,I.,Stephens,J.,Reid,H.,2014. Effectivenessofecosystem-basedapproachesforadaptation:reviewofthe evidence-base.Clim.Dev.6(2),185–201.

Doswald,N.,Osti,M.,2011.Ecosystem-basedApproachestoAdaptationand Mitigation:GoodPracticeExamplesandLessonsLearnedinEurope.BfN, FederalAgencyforNatureConservation.

EEA,2012.UrbanadaptationtoclimatechangeinEuropeChallengesand opportunitiesforcitiestogetherwithsupportivenationalandEuropean policies.EuropeanEnvironmentalAgency.EEATechnicalreportNo2/2012, 143pp.

EuropeanCommission,2013.COMMUNICATIONFROMTHECOMMISSIONTOTHE EUROPEANPARLIAMENT,THE,COUNCIL,THEEUROPEANECONOMICAND SOCIALCOMMITTEEANDTHECOMMITTEEOFTHEREGIONS.AnEUStrategy onadaptationtoclimatechange.COM(2013)216,Brussels.

Erwin,K.L.,2009.Wetlandsandglobalclimatechange:theroleofwetland restorationinachangingworld.WetlandsEcol.Manage.17,71–84. Farrugia,S.,Hudson,M.,McCulloch,L.,2013.Anevaluationofﬂoodcontroland

urbancoolingecosystemservicesdeliveredbyurbangreeninfrastructure.Int. J.Biodivers.Sci.Ecosyst.Serv.Manag.9(2),136e–145.

Foster,J.,Lowe,A.,Winkelman,S.,2011.TheValueofGreenInfrastructurefor UrbanClimateAdaptation.CenterforCleanAirPolicy,February. Füssel,H.M.,2007.Adaptationplanningforclimatechange:concepts,

assessmentapproaches,andkeylessons.Sustain.Sci.2,265–275. Geneletti,D.,2011.Reasonsandoptionsforintegratingecosystemservicesin

strategicenvironmentalassessmentofspatialplanning.Int.J.Bio.Sci.Ecosyst. ServicesManag.7(3),143–149.

Geneletti,D.,2013.Ecosystemservicesinenvironmentalimpactassessmentand strategicenvironmentalassessment.Environ.ImpactAssess.Rev.40,1–2. Gill,S.E.,Handley,J.F.,Ennos,A.R.,Pauleit,S.,2007.Adaptingcitiesforclimate change:theroleofthegreeninfrastructure.BuiltEnviron.33,115–133. Giorgi,F.,Im,E.S.,Coppola,E.,Diffenbaugh,N.S.,Gao,X.J.,Mariotti,L.,Shi,Y.,2011.

Higherhydroclimaticintensitywithglobalwarming.J.Clim.24(20), 5309–5324.

Gómez-Baggethun,E.,Barton,D.N.,2013.Classifyingandvaluingecosystem servicesforurbanplanning.Ecol.Econ.86,235–245.

Grimsditch,G.,2011.Ecosystem-BasedAdaptationintheUrbanEnvironment.In: Otto-Zimmermann,K.(Ed.),ResilientCities:CitiesandAdaptationtoClimate Change-ProceedingsoftheGlobalForum2010.Springer,

Dordrecht,Netherlands.

Heidrich,O.,Dawson,R.J.,Reckien,D.,Walsh,C.L.,2013.Assessmentoftheclimate preparednessof30urbanareasintheUK.Clim.Change120,771–784. Hoerling,M.,Eischeid,J.,Perlwitz,J.,Quan,X.,Zhang,T.,Pegion,P.,2012.Onthe

increasedfrequencyofMediterraneandrought.J.Clim.25(6),2146–2161. Hsieh,H.F.,Shannon,S.E.,2005.Threeapproachestoqualitativecontentanalysis.

Qual.HealthRes.15(9),1277–1288.

ICLEI(InternationalCouncilforLocalEnvironmentalInitiatives),2010.Changing Climate,ChangingCommunities:GuideandWorkbookforMunicipalClimate Adaptation.Toronto,ICLEICanada.

IPCC,2007.Climatechange2007:impacts,adaptationandvulnerability.In:Parry, M.L.,Canziani,O.F.,Palutikof,J.P.,vanderLinden,P.J.,Hanson,C.E.(Eds.), ContributionofWorkingGroupIItotheFourthAssessmentReportofthe IntergovernmentalPanelonClimateChange.CambridgeUnivPress, Cambridge,UK,p.2007.

Jacobson,C.R.,2011.Identiﬁcationandquantiﬁcationofthehydrologicalimpacts ofimperviousnessinurbancatchments:areview.J.Environ.Manag.92(6), 1438e–1448.

Jones,H.P.,Hole,D.G.,Zavaleta,E.S.,2012.Harnessingnaturetohelppeopleadapt toclimatechange.Nat.Clim.Change2(7),504–509.

Kareiva,P.,Tallis,H.,Ricketts,T.H.,Daily,G.C.,Polasky,S.,2011.NaturalCapital: TheoryandPracticeofMappingEcosystemServices.OxfordUniversityPress, Oxford.

Kazmierczak,A.,2012.HeatandsocialvulnerabilityinGreaterManchester.In:A Risk-ResponseCaseStudy.TheUniversityofManchester,EcoCities. Kazmierczak,A.,Carter,J.,2010.Adaptationtoclimatechangeusinggreenand

blueinfrastructure.ADatabaseofCaseStudies,182.UniversityofManchester, GRaBSProject.

Kleerekoper,L.,vanEsch,M.,Salcedo,T.B.,2012.Howtomakeacityclimate-proof, addressingtheurbanheatislandeffect.Resour.Conserv.Recycl.64,30–38. Kumar,P.,Geneletti,D.,2015.Howareclimatechangeconcernsaddressedby

spatialplans?Anevaluationframework,andanapplicationtoIndiancities. LandUsePolicy42,210–226.

Lafortezza,R.,Davies,C.,Sanesi,G.,Konijnendijk,C.C.C.,2013.Greeninfrastructure asatooltosupportspatialplanninginEuropeanurbanregions.J.Biogeosci. For.6,102–108.

McKenzie,E.,Posner,S.,Tillmann,P.,Bernhardt,J.R.,Howard,K.,Rosenthal,A., 2014.Understandingtheuseofecosystemserviceknowledgeindecision

(10)

making:lessonsfrominternationalexperiencesofspatialplanning.Environ. Plan.C:Govern.Policy32(2),320–340.

Measham,T.G.,Preston,B.L.,Smith,T.F.,Brooke,C.,Gorddard,R.,Withycombe,G., Morrison,C.,2011.Adaptingtoclimatechangethroughlocalmunicipal planning.BarriersChallenges,889–909.

Müller,N.,Kuttler,W.,Barlag,A.-B.,2013.Counteractingurbanclimatechange: adaptationmeasuresandtheireffectonthermalcomfort.Theor.Appl. Climatol.115,243–257.

Munang,R.,Thiaw,I.,Alverson,K.,Goumandakoye,M.,Mebratu,D.,Liu,J.,2013a. Usingecosystem-basedadaptationactionstotacklefoodinsecurity.Environ. Sci.PolicySustainableDev.55,29–35.

Munang,R.,Thiaw,I.,Alverson,K.,Liu,J.,Han,Z.,2013b.Theroleofecosystem servicesinclimatechangeadaptationanddisasterriskreduction.Curr. OpinionEnviron.Sustain.5(1),47–52.

Munang,R.,Thiaw,I.,Alverson,K.,Mumba,M.,Liu,J.,Rivington,M.,2013c.Climate changeandecosystem-basedadaptation:anewpragmaticapproachto bufferingclimatechangeimpacts.Curr.OpinionEnviron.Sustain.5,67–71. Naumann,S.,Anzaldua,G.,Berry,P.,Burch,S.,McKenna,D.,Frelih-Larsen,A.,

Gerdes,H.,Sanders,M.,2011.Assessmentofthepotentialofecosystem-based approachestoclimatechangeadaptationandmitigationinEurope.Final reporttotheEuropeanCommission,DG,Environment,Contractno. 70,307/2010/580412/SER/B2,EcologicinstituteandEnvironmentalChange Institute,OxfordUniversityCentrefortheEnvironment.

Oberndorfer,E.,Lundholm,J.,Bass,B.,Coffman,R.R.,Doshi,H.,Dunnett,N.,Rowe, B.,2007.Greenroofsasurbanecosystems:ecologicalstructures,functions,and services.Bioscience57(10),823–833.

Oke,T.R.,1988.Streetdesignandurbancanopylayerclimate.EnergyBuild.11, 103–113.

Palmer,M.A.,Lettenmaier,D.P.,Poff,N.L.,Postel,S.L.,Richter,B.,Warner,R.,2009. Climatechangeandriverecosystems:protectionandadaptationoptions. Environ.Manage.44,1053–1068.

Pickett,M.L.,Cadenasso,J.M.,Grove,C.H.,Nilon,R.V.,Pouyat,Zipperer,W.C., Costanza,R.,2001.Urbanecologicalsystems:linkingterrestrialecological, physical,andsocioeconomiccomponentsofmetropolitanareas.Annu.Rev. Ecol.Syst.32(2001),127–157.

Picketts,I.M.,Déry,S.J.,Curry,J.A.,2013.Incorporatingclimatechangeadaptation intolocalplans.J.Environ.Plan.,37–41.

Preston,B.L.,Westaway,R.M.,Yuen,E.J.,2011.Climateadaptationplanningin practice:anevaluationofadaptationplansfromthreedevelopednations.J. Biogeosci.For.,407–438.

Reckien,D.,Flacke,J.,Dawson,R.J.,Heidrich,O.,Olazabal,M.,Foley,A.,

Pietrapertosa,F.,2014.ClimatechangeresponseinEurope:what’sthereality?

analysisofadaptationandmitigationplansfrom200urbanareasin11 countries.Clim.Change122(1–2),331–340.

Roberts,D.,Boon,R.,Diederichs,N.,Douwes,E.,Govender,N.,McInnes,A.,Spires, M.,2012.Exploringecosystem-basedadaptationinDurban,SouthAfrica learning-by-doingatthelocalgovernmentcoalface.Enviro.Urbaniz.24(1), 167–195.

Rosenzweig,C.,Solecki,W.,Hammer,S.A.,Mehrotra,S.,2010.Citiesleadthewayin climate-changeaction.Nature467(7318),909–911.

Santamouris,M.,2014.Coolingthecitieseareviewofreﬂectiveandgreenroof mitigationtechnologiestoﬁghtheatislandandimprovecomfortinurban environments.Sol.Energy103,682–703.

Savard,J.P.L.,Clergeau,P.,Mennechez,G.,2000.Biodiversityconceptsandurban ecosystems.LandscapeUrbanPlan.48(3),131–142.

Skelhorn,C.,Lindley,S.,Levermore,G.,2014.Theimpactofvegetationtypesonair andsurfacetemperaturesinatemperatecity:aﬁnescaleassessmentin Manchester,UK.LandscapeUrbanPlan.121,129–140.

Tang,Z.,Brody,S.D.,Quinn,C.,Chang,L.,Wei,T.,2010.Movingfromagendato action:evaluatinglocalclimatechangeactionplans.J.Environ.Plan.Sustain. 53(1),41–62.

TNC,2009.AdaptingtoClimateChange:Ecosystem-basedApproachesforPeople andNature,TheNatureConservancy.2009(Internet).

Tzoulas,K.,Korpela,K.,Venn,S.,Yli-Pelkonen,V.,Ka ´zmierczak,A.,Niemela,J., James,P.,2007.Promotingecosystemandhumanhealthinurbanareasusing greeninfrastructure:aliteraturereview.LandscapeUrbanPlan.81,167–178. Vignola,R.,Locatelli,B.,Martinez,C.,Imbach,P.,2009.Ecosystem-basedadaptation

toclimatechange:whatroleforpolicy-makers,societyandscientists?Mitig. Adapt.StrategiesGlobalChange14,691–696.

Wamsler,C.,Luederitz,C.,Brink,E.,2014.Localleversforchange:Mainstreaming ecosystem-basedadaptationintomunicipalplanningtofostersustainability transitions.GlobalEnviron.Change29,189–201.

Wong,M.S.,Nichol,J.E.,To,P.H.,Wang,J.,2010.Asimplemethodfordesignationof urbanventilationcorridorsanditsapplicationtourbanheatislandanalysis. Build.Environ.45(8),1880–1889.

Yu,C.,Hien,W.,2006.Thermalbeneﬁtsofcityparks.EnergyBuild.38(2),105–120. Zandersenetal.,2014.Ecosystembasedapproachestoclimateadaptation.Urban

prospectsandbarriers.ScientiﬁcReportfromDCE—DanishCentrefor EnvironmentandEnergy,no.83.

Zanon,B.,Verones,S.,2013.Climatechange,urbanenergyandplanningpractices: Italianexperiencesofinnovationinlandmanagementtools.LandUsePolicy 32,343–355.

Zimmerman,R.,Faris,C.,2011.ClimatechangemitigationandadaptationinNorth Americancities.Curr.OpinionEnviron.Sustain.3(3),181–187.