Advertisement

Bridging the gap between will and action on climate change adaptation in large cities in Brazil

  • Gabriela Marques Di GiulioEmail author
  • Roger Rodrigues Torres
  • David M. Lapola
  • Ana Maria Bedran-Martins
  • Maria da Penha Vasconcellos
  • Diego Rafael Braga
  • Marcos Paulo Fuck
  • Yohanna Juk
  • Veruska Nogueira
  • Ana Carolina Penna
  • Tiago Jacaúna
  • Marcelo Fetz
  • Zoraide Pessoa
  • Rylanneive Pontes
  • Marize Schons
  • Adriano Premebida
Original Article

Abstract

All over the world, there is a pressing need to better understand how climate change has been incorporated into governmental agendas, and evaluate the status of adaptation planning and interventions at the local level. In this paper, we seek to contribute towards bridging this gap by identifying local practices connected to climate adaptation in six large Brazilian cities, and presenting a framework, based on the existing literature, for assessing constraints to adaptation across the municipal level. Although local governments are not the only actors who can take the lead through their actions, the employed framework considers that effective adaptation planning in urban areas is highly dependent on municipal efforts. Our findings indicate that six aspects have the highest levels of impact on adaptation in the Brazilian cities studied: administrative practices, political will, level of commitment, mismatch between the scale of urban issues and the extent of local government authority, pressures from private sectors, and inspection. Although these barriers are not specific only to climate issues and can be identified in other environmental arenas, when combined, they cause and worsen constraints to advancing urban adaptation at the local level. Specifically concerning the local dynamics of urban planning, the combination of pressures from private sectors and insufficient inspection negatively affects the ability of these cities to consolidate adaptation interventions. Our results are helpful in the context of large cities, particularly in Global South, where, as in Brazil, competitive urbanism and specific interest groups confront municipal efforts, and make achieving adaptation more difficult.

Keywords

Climate change Adaptation Local governments Cities Brazil 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to the all practitioners of the six studied cities that participated in this project.

Funding information

This study is part of the CiAdapta project funded by Brazil’s National Council for Scientific and Technological Development – CNPq (Proc. 446032/2015-8).

Supplementary material

10113_2019_1570_MOESM1_ESM.docx (18 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 18 kb)
10113_2019_1570_MOESM2_ESM.docx (17 kb)
ESM 2 (DOCX 17 kb)
10113_2019_1570_MOESM3_ESM.docx (18 kb)
ESM 3 (DOCX 18 kb)

References

  1. Anguelovski I, Carmin J (2011). Something borrowed, everything new: innovation and institutionalization in urban climate governance. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability. 3:169–175.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2010.12.017
  2. Anguelovski I et al (2016) Equity impacts of urban land use planning for climate adaptation: critical perspectives from the Global North and South. J Plan Educ Res 36(3):333–348.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X16645166 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Araos M et al (2016) Climate change adaptation planning in large cities: a systematic global assessment. Environ Sci Pol 66(2016):375–382.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.06.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Araos M et al (2017) Climate change adaptation planning for Global South megacities: the case of Dhaka. J Environ Policy Plan.  https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2016.1264873
  5. Aylett A (2014) Progress and challenges in the urban governance of climate change: results of a global survey. MIT, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  6. Aylett A (2015) Institutionalizing the urban governance of climate change adaptation: results of an international survey. Urban Clim 14:4–16.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2015.06.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Biesbroek G et al (2013) On the nature of barriers to climate change adaptation. Reg Environ Chang 13:1119–1129.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-013-0421-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Biesbroek R, Lesnikowski A (2018) The Neglected Dimension of Polycentric Climate Governance. In: Jordan A et al. (eds) (2018). Governing Climate Change - Polycentricity in Action? Cambridge University Press.  https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108284646
  9. Broto VC (2017) Urban governance and the politics of climate change. World Dev 93(1–15):2017.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2016.12.031 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brown K, Westaway E (2011) Agency, capacity, and resilience to environmental change: lessons from human development, well-being, and disasters. Annu Rev Environ Resour 36:321–342.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-052610-092905 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bulkeley H (2010) Cities and the governing of climate change. Annu Rev Environ Resour 35:229–253.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-072809-101747 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bulkeley H, Broto V (2013) Government by experiment? Global cities and the governing of climate change. Trans Inst Br Geogr 38:361–375.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-5661.2012.00535.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Burch S (2009) In pursuit of resilient, low carbon communities: an examination of barriers to action in three Canadian cities. Energy Policy.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.06.070
  14. Burch S (2010) Transforming barriers into enablers of action on climate change: insights from three municipal case studies in British Columbia, Canada. Glob Environ Chang 20:287–297.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2009.11.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Carmin J et al (2012) Urban climate adaptation in the Global South: planning in an emerging policy domain. J Plan Educ Res 32(1):18–32.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X11430951 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Carmin J, Dodman D, Chu E (2013) Urban climate adaptation and leadership: from conceptual understanding to practical action. OECD Regional Development Working Papers, 2013/26. OECD Publishing, Paris.  https://doi.org/10.1787/5k3ttg88w8hh-en CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Chu E et al (2017) Climate adaptation as strategic urbanism: assessing opportunities and uncertainties for equity and inclusive development in cities. Cities 60:378–387.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2016.10.016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Darela-Filho J et al (2016) Socio-climatic hotspots in Brazil: how do changes driven by the new set of IPCC climatic projections affect their relevance for policy? Clim Chang 136:413–425.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-016-1635-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Donat MG et al. (2013). Updated analyses of temperature and precipitation extreme indices since the beginning of the twentieth century: The HadEX2 dataset. JGR Atmospheres. 118:2098–2118.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50150
  20. Eakin HC, Patt A (2011) Are adaptation studies effective, and what can enhance their practical impact? WIREs Clim Chang 2:141–153.  https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.100 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Eakin H et al (2014) Differentiating capacities as a means to sustainable climate change adaptation. Glob Environ Chang 27:1–8.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.04.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ford JD et al (2011) A systematic review of observed climate change adaptation in developed nations. Clim Chang 106:327–336.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0045-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Geneletti D, Zardo L (2016) Ecosystem-based adaptation in cities: an analysis of European urban climate adaptation plans. Land Use Policy 50:38–47.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.09.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gomes MDL et al. (2017) Capacidade estatal e formulação de políticas sociais por municípios sob a ótica da gestão pública democrática. Soc. e Cult. 20:83–104.  https://doi.org/10.5216/sec.v20i1.51065
  25. IPCC (2013) In: Stocker TF, Qin D, Plattner G-K, Tignor M, Allen SK, Boschung J, Nauels A, Xia Y, Bex V, Midgley PM (eds) Climate change 2013: the physical science basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1535 ppGoogle Scholar
  26. IPCC (2014) Climate change 2014: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Part A: global and sectoral aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In: Field CB, Barros VR, Dokken DJ, Mach KJ, Mastrandrea MD, Bilir TE, Chatterjee M, Ebi KL, Estrada YO, Genova RC, Girma B, Kissel ES, Levy AN, MacCracken S, Mastrandrea PR, White LL (eds) . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1132 ppGoogle Scholar
  27. Klostermann J et al (2018) Towards a framework to assess, compare and develop monitoring and evaluation of climate change adaptation in Europe. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang 23:187–209.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-015-9678-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Leck H, Roberts D (2015) What lies beneath: understanding the invisible aspects of municipal climate change governance. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 13:61–67.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2015.02.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lemos MC, Kirchhoff CJ (2016) Climate information and water management: building adaptive capacity or business as usual? In: Conca K, Weinthal E (eds) The Oxford handbook of water politics and policy. Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  30. Marques E (2013) Government, political actors and governance in urban policies in Brazil and São Paulo: concepts for a future research agenda. Braz Polit Sci Rev 7(3):8–35.  https://doi.org/10.1590/S1981-38212013000300001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. McClure L, Baker D (2018) How do planners deal with barriers to climate change adaptation? A case study in Queensland, Australia. Landscape and Urban Planning. 173:81–88.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2018.01.012
  32. Morgan E, Di Giulio G (2018) Science and evidence-based climate change policy: collaborative approaches to improve the science–policy interface. In: Serrao-Neumann et al. (Org.) Communicating climate change information for decision-making. Springer International Publishing, p. 13-28Google Scholar
  33. Moser S, Boykoff MT (2013) Successful adaptation to climate change: linking science and practice in a rapidly changing world. Routledge, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Moser SC et al (2010) Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 107(51):22026–22031.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas1.007887107 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Oliveira JAP (2017) Brazilian public administration: shaping and being shaped by governance and development. Chin Polit Sci Rev 2:7–21.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s41111-017-0052-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. PMMA 2017. Plano Municipal de Conservação e Recuperação da Mata Atlântica do Município de São Paulo, Prefeitura Municipal de São Paulo, Secretaria do Verde e Meio Ambiente, apoio SOS Mata Atlântica, novembro de 2017, 533 pgsGoogle Scholar
  37. Rochedo P et al (2018) The threat of political bargaining to climate mitigation in Brazil. Nat Clim Chang 8:695–698.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0213-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Romero-Lankao P et al (2018) Urban transformative potential in a changing climate. Nat Clim Chang 8(9):7154–7756.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0264-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rosenzweig C et al (2015) ARC3.2 Summary for city leaders. Urban Climate Change Research Network. Columbia University, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  40. Runhaar H et al (2018) Mainstreaming climate adaptation: taking stock about “what works” from empirical research worldwide. Reg Environ Chang 18:1201–1210.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-017-1259-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ryan D (2015) From commitment to action: a literature review on climate policy implementation at city level. Clim Chang 131:519–529.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-015-1402-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Serrao-Neumann S et al (2018) Communicating climate change information for decision-making. Springer International Publishing.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74669-2
  43. Sherman M et al (2016) Drawing the line between adaptation and development: a systematic literature review of planned adaptation in developing countries. WIREs Clim Chang 7:707–726.  https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.416 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sillmann J et al (2013) Climate extremes indices in the CMIP5 multimodel ensemble: part 2 Future climate projections. J Geophys Res 118:2473–2493Google Scholar
  45. Simões E et al (2017) Barriers and opportunities for adapting to climate change on the North Coast of São Paulo, Brazil.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-017-1133-5
  46. Torres RR, Marengo JA (2013) Uncertainty assessments of climate change projections over South America. Theor Appl Climatol 112:253–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Torres RR, Marengo JA (2014) Climate change hotspots over South America: from CMIP3 to CMIP5 multi-model datasets. Theor Appl Climatol 117:579–587.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-013-1030-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Uittenbroek CJ et al (2014) Political commitment in organising municipal responses to climate adaptation: the dedicated approach versus the mainstreaming approach. Environ Polit 26:1043–1063.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2014.92056 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gabriela Marques Di Giulio
    • 1
    Email author
  • Roger Rodrigues Torres
    • 2
  • David M. Lapola
    • 3
  • Ana Maria Bedran-Martins
    • 4
  • Maria da Penha Vasconcellos
    • 4
  • Diego Rafael Braga
    • 3
  • Marcos Paulo Fuck
    • 5
  • Yohanna Juk
    • 5
  • Veruska Nogueira
    • 2
  • Ana Carolina Penna
    • 2
  • Tiago Jacaúna
    • 6
  • Marcelo Fetz
    • 7
  • Zoraide Pessoa
    • 8
  • Rylanneive Pontes
    • 8
  • Marize Schons
    • 9
  • Adriano Premebida
    • 9
  1. 1.School of Public HealthUniversity of São Paulo (USP)São PauloBrazil
  2. 2.Federal University of ItajubáItajubáBrazil
  3. 3.University of CampinasCampinasBrazil
  4. 4.University of São PauloSão PauloBrazil
  5. 5.Federal University of ParanáCuritibaBrazil
  6. 6.Federal University of AmazonasManausBrazil
  7. 7.Federal University of Espírito SantoVitóriaBrazil
  8. 8.Federal University of Rio Grande do NorteNatalBrazil
  9. 9.Federal University of Rio Grande do SulPorto AlegreBrazil

Personalised recommendations