Editing IPCC:AR6/WGII/Chapter-6 (section)

== Executive Summary ==

<div id="h1-1-siblings" class="h1-siblings"></div>

'''In all cities and urban areas, the risk faced by people and assets from hazards associated with climate change has increased (''' '''''high confidence''''' [[#footnote-003|1]] ''').''' Urban areas are now home to 4.2 billion people, the majority of the world’s population. Urbanisation processes generate vulnerability and exposure which combine with climate change hazards to drive urban risk and impacts ( ''high confidence'' ). Globally, the most rapid growth in urban vulnerability and exposure has been in cities and settlements where adaptive capacity is limited, especially in unplanned and informal settlements in low- and middle-income nations and in smaller and medium-sized urban centres ( ''high confidence'' ). Between 2015 and 2020, urban populations globally grew by more than 397 million people, with more than 90% of this growth taking place in less developed regions. {Box 6.1; 6.1.4; 6.2.1; 6.3.2; 6.3.3.4; 6.2.2.2; 6.4.4}

'''The documentation of climate-related events and observed human and economic losses have increased since AR5 for urban areas and human settlements. Observed losses arise from single, compound, cascading and systemic events (''' '''''medium evidence, high agreement''''' ''').''' Losses from single events include the direct impact of heat stress on human health. Compound event losses arise from the interaction of single climate hazards with at least one other hazard driver such as heat with poor air quality (e.g., from traffic fumes or wildfire), flooding with poor water quality (e.g., from contaminated runoff and flood water) or land subsidence. Cascading impacts are observed when damages in one place or system reduce resilience and generate impacts elsewhere (e.g., when flood waters damage energy infrastructure causing blackouts and knock on financial and human impacts). Losses become systemic when affecting entire systems and can even jump from one system to another (e.g., drought impacting on rural food production contributing to urban food insecurity) ( ''medium confidence'' ). In some cases, maladaptive responses to hazards have exacerbated inequality in the distribution of impacts, for example shifting risk from one community to another. {Figure 6.2; 6.2.6; 6.3.4.1; 6.4.5; Cross-Chapter Paper 2; Cross-Working Group Box URBAN in Chapter 6}

'''Evidence from urban and rural settlements is unequivocal; climate impacts are felt disproportionately in urban communities, with the most economically and socially marginalised being most affected (''' '''''high confidence''''' ''').''' Vulnerabilities are shaped by drivers of inequality, including gender, class, race, ethnic origin, age, level of ability, sexuality and non-conforming gender orientation, framed by cultural norms, diverse values and practices ( ''high confidence'' ). Intersections between these drivers shape unique experiences of vulnerability and risk and the adaptive capacities of groups and individuals. Robust adaptation plans are those developed in inclusive ways. However, few adaptation plans for urban areas and infrastructure are being developed through consultation and co-production with diverse and marginalised urban communities. The concerns and capacities of marginalised communities are rarely considered in planning ( ''medium confidence'' ). {Box 6.3, Box 6.4; 6.4.3.1; 6.4.5.2, Case Study 6.7; Cross-Working Group Box URBAN in Chapter 6}

'''The COVID-19 pandemic has had a substantial impact on urban communities and climate adaptation (''' '''''medium evidence''''' ''',''' '''''high agreement''''' ''').''' The pandemic has revealed both systemic under-investment resulting in multiple, persistent health-related vulnerabilities (many of which also exacerbate climate change risk) and co-benefits for urban interventions to reduce future pandemic and climate change risk. The COVID-19 pandemic is estimated to have pushed an additional 119 to 124 million people into poverty in 2020, with South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa each contributing roughly two-fifths of this total ( ''medium confidence'' ). At city level, community groups, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and local governments face challenges to bring agencies already working on social and economic development into coordinated action to reduce urban vulnerabilities and manage risks. COVID-19 and climate change impacts are exacerbated by widening social inequality. Addressing the causes of social vulnerability creates opportunity for transformative adaptation. {Box 6.4; 6.1.4; 6.2.2.4; 6.2.5; 6.4.1.3; Case Study 6.4; Cross-Chapter Box COVID in Chapter 7}

'''The number of people expected to live in urban areas highly exposed to climate change impacts has increased substantially (''' '''''high confidence''''' ''').''' An additional 2.5 billion people are projected to be living in urban areas by 2050, with up to 90% of this increase concentrated in the regions of Asia and Africa. Projections of the number of people expected to live in urban areas highly exposed to climate change impacts have increased. Sea level increase and increases in tropical cyclone storm surge and rainfall intensity will increase the probability of coastal city flooding, with more than a billion people located in low-lying cities and settlements expected to be at risk from coastal-specific climate hazards by 2050 ( ''high confidence'' ). Sea level rise, increases in tropical cyclone storm surges and more frequent and intense extreme precipitation will increase the number of people, area of urban land, and damages from flood hazard ( ''high confidence'' ). The main driver for increased heat exposure is the combination of global warming and population growth in already-warm centres, and the majority of the population exposed to heatwaves will live in urban centres. An additional 350 million people living in urban areas are estimated be exposed to water scarcity from severe droughts at 1.5°C warming, and 410.7 million at 2°C warming. {6.1; 6.2.2; Cross-Chapter Paper 2}

'''Many more cities have developed adaptation plans since AR5, but only a limited number of these have been implemented (''' '''''medium confidence''''' ''').''' Many of these plans focus narrowly on climate risk reduction, missing opportunities to advance co-benefits of climate mitigation and sustainable development, compounding inequality and reducing well-being ( ''medium confidence'' ). However, an increasing array of adaptation options are available. Nature-based solutions are now mainstream urban adaptation options and there remains considerable scope for their wider application. Social-policy-based adaptation, including education and the adaptation of health systems offers considerable future scope. Options of adapting physical infrastructure are similarly advancing, though at times constrained by existing infrastructure design and location. The greatest gaps between policy and action are in failures to manage adaptation of social infrastructure (community facilities, services and networks) and failure to address complex interconnected risks for example in the food–energy–water–health nexus or the inter-relationships of air quality and climate risk ( ''medium confidence'' ). Barriers to implementing plans include lack of political will and management capacity, limited financial means and mechanisms (especially for smaller urban settlements) and competing priorities ( ''limited evidence'' , ''high agreement'' ). {6.3.1, 6.4.3; 6.4.5; 6.4.5.1; 6.4.5.2; Figure 6.5}

'''The shift from urban planning to action in ways that identify and advance synergies and co-benefits of mitigation, adaptation and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) has occurred slowly and unevenly (''' '''''high confidence''''' ''').''' While there is ambition for joined-up policy, action and research, this is still the exception. One area of sustained effort is community-based adaptation planning and resilience actions which have potential to be better integrated to enhance well-being and create synergies with the Sustainable Development Goal ambitions of leaving no one behind. Complex trade-offs and gaps in alignment between mitigation and adaptation over scale and across policy areas where sustainable development is hindered or reversed also remain. {6.1.1, Table 6.2; 6.1.5; 6.4.1.4; 6.4.3; 6.4.4}

'''Urban adaptation gaps exist in all world regions and for all hazard types, although exposure to the limits to adaptation is unevenly distributed. Governance capacity, financial''' '''support''' '''and the legacy of past urban infrastructure investment constrain how all cities and settlements are able to adapt (''' '''''high confidence''''' ''').''' Critical capacity gaps exist at city and community levels that hinder adaptation. These include the limited ability to identify social vulnerability and community strengths; the absence of integrated planning to protect communities; and the lack of access to innovative funding arrangements and limited capability to manage finance and commercial insurance ( ''medium confidence'' ). These can be addressed through enhanced locally accountable decision making with sufficient access to science, technology and local knowledge to support widespread application of adaptation solutions. {6.3.1, 6.4.3; 6.4.5; 6.4.5.1; 6.4.5.2; Figure 6.4; Figure 6.5}

'''Slow uptake of monitoring and evaluation frameworks constrains potential for developing climate resilient urban development pathways (''' '''''medium confidence''''' ''').''' A lack of agreement on metrics and indices to measure urban adaptation investment, impacts and outcomes, reduces the scope for sharing lessons and joined-up action across interconnected sectors and places in the face of compound and systemic risks. These constraints affect the potential for climate resilient development pathways. Limits to adaptation are often most pronounced in rapidly growing towns and cities and smaller settlements including those without dedicated local government. At the same time, legacy infrastructure in large and mega-cities, designed without taking climate change risk into account, constrains innovation leading to stranded assets and increasing numbers of people unable to avoid harm, including heat stress and flooding, without transformative adaptation. {6.2.5; 6.3.3.3; 6.3.7; Figure 6.4; 6.4.4; 6.4.6 FAQ6.5}

'''City and local governments are key among multiple actors facilitating climate change adaptation in cities and settlements (''' '''''medium confidence''''' ''')''' '''''.''''' City and local governments can invest directly and work in partnership with community, private sector and national agencies to address climate risk. Private and business investment in key infrastructure, housing construction and through insurance requirements can also drive widespread adaptive action, though at times excluding the priorities of the poor ( ''medium confidence'' ). Networked community actions can also go beyond neighbourhood-scale improvements to address widespread vulnerability. Such actions include fostering roles of intermediaries and multiple spaces for networked governance across scales of decision-making, improving development processes through an understanding of social and economic systems, foresight, experimentation and embedded solutions, and social learning. Transnational networks of local government can also enhance city level capacity, share lessons and advocacy ( ''medium confidence'' ). {Table 6.2; 6.3.3.4; 6.3.3.5; 6.4.1; 6.4.1.1; Case Study 6.2; FAQ 6.5}

'''Globally, decisions about key infrastructure systems and urban expansion drive risk creation and potential action on climate change (''' '''''high confidence''''' ''').''' Urban infrastructure concentrates and connects populations, physical assets and energy use. Urban expansion and the compromising of green infrastructure and ecosystem services reduce adaptive capacity and can increase risk: the urban heat island, a product of expansion, can add 2°C to local warming. How settlements and key infrastructure are planned, designed and maintained determines patterns of exposure, social and physical vulnerability and capacity for resilience. Unplanned rapid urbanisation, including peri-urban development, is a major driver of risk, particularly where cities and settlements are expanding into land that is prone to coastal flooding or landslides, or where there is inadequate water to meet the needs of growing populations. Urban decision making processes equally shape how far low- and zero-carbon development can meet social needs; enhancing well-being while enabling climate change mitigation and advancing the SDGs. {6.1.3; 6.2.3; 6.2.4; 6.3.3; 6.3.4; 6.3.5; 6.4.6; Cross-Working Group Box URBAN in Chapter 6}

'''Investment in urban adaptation has not kept pace with innovations in policy and practice (''' '''''medium confidence''''' ''').''' Knowledge transfer and innovation in adaptation has broadened advances in social and ecological infrastructures including disaster risk management, social policy and green/blue infrastructure, especially where these are integrated with grey/physical infrastructure ( ''medium evidence'' , ''high agreement'' ). Innovation has also taken place at the interface of difference systems, for example information and communications technology (ICT) and water or energy, although financial investment has been slow to recognise and support these activities. Adaption finance continues to be directed at large-scale grey/physical engineering projects, neglecting maintenance and reproducing risk of stranded assets if climate change risk accelerates beyond planned-for levels. Finance deployed at the interface of multiple, integrated adaptation measures can support climate resilient development ( ''high confidence'' ). Access to finance is most difficult for city, local and non-state actors, and in conditions where governance is fragile. {6.3.3; 6.3.4; 6.3.6; 6.4.5; 6.4.5.2; Table 6.10; Table 6.11; Box 6.8; Case Study 6.2; Case Study 6.3; Case Study 6.5}

'''Global urbanisation offers a time-limited opportunity to work toward widespread and transformational adaptation and climate resilient development (''' '''''high confidence''''' ''').''' Current dominant models of energy intensive and market-led urbanisation build high carbon dependency and high vulnerability into cities, but this need not be the case. Integrated development planning that connects innovation and investment in social, ecological and grey/physical infrastructures can significantly increase the adaptive capacity of urban settlements and cities. Transitioning cities to low carbon development and equitable resilience may lead to trade-offs with dominant models of economic growth based on housing and infrastructure investment. Integrated planning approaches are important for climate resilient development to enable planning and monitoring of interactions between development, mitigation and adaptation. Urban adaptation measures can offer a considerable contribution to climate resilient development. This potential is realised by adaptations that extend predominant physical infrastructure approaches to also deploy nature-based solutions and social interventions. The most consistent limit for all infrastructure types is in risk transfer. Current adaptation approaches in cities, settlements and key infrastructure tend to move risk from one sector or place to others. Multi-level leadership and institutional capacity, together with financial resources (including climate finance) to support inclusive and sustainable adaptation in the context of multiple pressures and interconnected risks, can help to ensure that global urbanisation of an additional 2.5 billion people by 2050 reduces rather than generates climate risk ( ''medium confidence'' ). {Table 6.7; Table 6.5; 6.1.3; 6.3.6; 6.3.5.2; 6.4.7; Box 6.5; Cross-Working Group Box URBAN in Chapter 6; Cross-Chapter Paper 2}

'''Intersectional, gender-responsive and inclusive action can accelerate transformative climate change adaptation. The greatest gains in well-being in urban areas can be achieved by''' '''prioritising''' '''investment to reduce climate risk for low-income and marginalised residents and targeting informal settlements (''' '''''high confidence''''' ''').''' These approaches can advance equity and environmental justice over the long term in ways more likely to lead to outcomes that reduce vulnerability for all urban residents. Participatory planning for infrastructure provision and risk management to address climate change and underlying drivers of risk in informal and underserviced neighbourhoods, the inclusion of Indigenous knowledge and local knowledge, communication and efforts to build local leadership, especially among women and youth, are examples of inclusive approaches with co-benefits for equity. Providing opportunities for marginalised people, including women, to take on leadership and participation in local projects can enhance climate governance and its outcomes ( ''high confidence'' ). Since AR5 ( [[#IPCC--2014|IPCC, 2014]] ), social movements in many cities, including movements led by youth, Indigenous and ethnic communities have also heightened public awareness about the need for urgent, inclusive action to achieve adaptation that can also enhance well-being. {6.1.5; 6.3.5; 6.4.1.2; 6.4.7; Box 6.6, Case study 6.2; Case study 6.4, FAQ6.3}

'''City and infrastructure planning approaches that integrate adaptation into everyday decision making are supported by the 2030 Agenda (the Paris Agreement, the SDGs, the New Urban Agenda and the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction) (''' '''''high confidence''''' ''').''' The 2030 Agenda provides a global framework for city and community level action to be points of alignment between Nationally Determined Contributions, National Adaptation Plans and the SDGs. City and local action can complement, and at times go further than national and international interventions. Similarly, the Convention on Biological Diversity offers a global agreement through which nature-based solutions can be viewed as benefits for biodiversity, social justice and climate resilience. However, there is no specific global agreement that addresses informality and city-level climate adaptation. More comprehensive and clearly articulated global ambitions for city and community adaptation will contribute to inclusive urbanisation, by addressing the root causes of social and economic inequalities that drive social exclusion and marginalisation, so that adaptation can directly support the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda (high confidence). {6.1.1; Table 6.2; 6.2.3.2; 6.4.1.4; Case Study 6.4}

<div id="6.1" class="h1-container"></div>

<span id="introduction-and-points-of-departure"></span>