Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
Help about MediaWiki
Special pages
ClimateKG
Search
Search
English
Appearance
Create account
Log in
Personal tools
Create account
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
IPCC:AR6/WGII/Chapter-6
(section)
IPCC
Discussion
English
Read
Edit source
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit source
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Page information
In other projects
Appearance
move to sidebar
hide
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
==== 6.2.3.2 Informality, Planning and Vulnerability ==== <div id="h3-6-siblings" class="h3-siblings"></div> Particularly in low- and middle-income countries, much urban building occurs outside formal parameters and entails a high degree of urban informality. According to the United Nations statistics, the proportion of urban populations living in slums and informal settlements increased from 23% in 2014 to 23.5% in 2018 ( [[#United%20Nations--2018|United Nations, 2018]] ). Informality is one pathway through which urbanisation generates differentiated vulnerability, tending to increase exposure and susceptibility of physical structures and their occupants to climate-related risks (Dodman et al., 2017; [[#Dobson--2017|Dobson, 2017]] ) in contexts including Guadalajara, Mexico ( [[#Gran%20Castro--2019|Gran Castro and Ramos De Robles, 2019]] ), Kampala, Uganda (Richmond, Myers and Namuli, 2018), Bengaluru, India (Kumar, Geneletti and [[#Nagendra--2016|Nagendra, 2016]] ), and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania (Yahia et al., 2018). In addition to facing emerging water- and heat-related risks, such areas are also more vulnerable to the health impacts of climate change (Scovronick, Lloyd and Kovats, 2015). Even where formal planning is the norm, this has often remained oriented toward enabling value by adding construction or the protection of existing high-value physical assets, for example infrastructure and built cultural heritage, private residential) rather than enabling disaster risk reduction for all ( [[#Long--2019|Long and Rice, 2019]] ). This tendency has been widely documented, including from cases in Australia, Thailand, Indonesia (King et al., 2016), Canada ( [[#Stevens--2017|Stevens and Senbel, 2017]] ), Amman, Moscow and Delhi ( [[#Jabareen--2015|Jabareen, 2015]] ), and South Africa (Arfvidsson et al., 2017). Such inconsistencies between the delivery of land use planning and the aims of the SDGs combine with other social structures, economic pathways and governance systems to shape city risk profiles (Dodman et al., 2017). <div id="6.2.3.3" class="h3-container"></div> <span id="migration-and-differentiated-vulnerability"></span>
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to ClimateKG may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see
ClimateKG:Copyrights
for details).
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)
Search
Search
Editing
IPCC:AR6/WGII/Chapter-6
(section)
Add languages
Add topic