Editing IPCC:AR6/SRCCL/Chapter-7 (section)

==== 7.4.6.1 Land-use zoning ====

<div id="section-7-4-6-1-land-use-zoning-block-1"></div>

Land-use zoning divides a territory (including local, sub-regional or national) into zones with different rules and regulations for land use (mining, agriculture, urban development, etc.), management practices and land-cover change (Metternicht 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r649|649]]</sup> ). While the policy instrument is zoning ordinances, the process of determining these regulations is covered in integrated land-use planning (Section 7.6.2). Urban zoning can guide new growth in urban communities outside forecasted hazard areas, assist relocating existing dwellings to safer sites and manage post-event redevelopment in ways to reduce future vulnerability (Berke and Stevens 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r650|650]]</sup> ). Holistic integration of climate mitigation and adaptation are interdependent and can be implemented by restoring urban forests, and improving parks (Brown 2010 <sup>[[#fn:r651|651]]</sup> ; Berke and Stevens 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r652|652]]</sup> ). Zoning ordinances can contribute to SLM through protection of natural capital by preventing or limiting vegetation clearing, avoiding degradation of planning for rehabilitation of degraded land or contaminated sites, promoting conservation and enhancement of ecosystems and ecological corridors (Metternicht 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r653|653]]</sup> ; Jepson and Haines 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r654|654]]</sup> ). Zoning ordinances can also encourage higher density development, mixed use, local food production, encourage transportation alternatives (bike paths and transit-oriented development), preserve a sense of place, and increase housing diversity and affordability (Jepson and Haines 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r655|655]]</sup> ). Conservation planning varies by context and may include one or several adaptation approaches, including protecting current patterns of biodiversity, large intact natural landscapes, and geophysical settings. Conservation planning may also maintain and restore ecological connectivity, identify and manage areas that provide future climate space for species expected to be displaced by climate change, and identify and protect climate refugia (Stevanovic et al. 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r656|656]]</sup> ; Schmitz et al. 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r657|657]]</sup> ).

Anguelovski et al. (2016) <sup>[[#fn:r658|658]]</sup> studied land-use interventions in eight cities in the global north and south, and concluded that historic trends of socio-economic vulnerability can be reinforced. They also found that vulnerability could be avoided with a consideration of the distribution of adaptation benefits and prioritising beneficial outcomes for disadvantaged and vulnerable groups when making future adaptation plans. Concentration of adaptation resources within wealthy business districts creating ecological enclaves exacerbated climate risks elsewhere and building of climate adaptive infrastructure such as sea walls or temporary flood barriers occurred at the expense of underserved neighbourhoods (Anguelovski et al. 2016a <sup>[[#fn:r659|659]]</sup> ).

<div id="section-7-4-6-2-conserving-biodiversity-and-ecosystem-services-es"></div>

<span id="conserving-biodiversity-and-ecosystem-services-es"></span>