Editing IPCC:AR6/WGII/Chapter-12 (section)

===== 12.5.5.3.1 Housing, Informality and Risk Areas =====

<div id="h4-5-siblings" class="h4-siblings"></div>

Informality and precariousness in housing is one of the most sensitive issues for adaptation in CSA cities ( ''medium confidence: medium evidence, high agreement'' ) ( [[#Satterthwaite--2018|Satterthwaite et al., 2018]] ; [[#UN-Habitat--2018|UN-Habitat, 2018]] ). Housing deficit in 2009, as a regional baseline, estimated that 37% of households suffered from quantitative or qualitative deficiencies due to the high cost of housing and the incidence of poverty ( [[#Blanco%20Blanco--2014|Blanco Blanco et al., 2014]] ; [[#McTarnaghan--2016|McTarnaghan et al., 2016]] ; NU CEPAL et al., 2016; [[#Vargas--2018a|Vargas et al., 2018a]] ; [[#Rojas--2019|Rojas, 2019]] ).

Policies and programmes have been implemented accumulating good practices and reducing the percentage of population in informal and precarious settlements (33.7% in 1990 to 21% in 2014) (NU CEPAL et al., 2016; [[#Satterthwaite--2018|Satterthwaite et al., 2018]] ; [[#Teferi--2018|Teferi and Newman, 2018]] ; [[#UN-Habitat--2018|UN-Habitat, 2018]] ). Slum upgrading and built-environment interventions (housing and infrastructure improvement and provision) in informal settlements can enhance adaptation ( ''high confidence'' ) ( [[#Teferi--2018|Teferi and Newman, 2018]] ; [[#Núñez%20Collado--2020|Núñez Collado and Wang, 2020]] ; [[#Satterthwaite--2020|Satterthwaite et al., 2020]] ) while reducing floods, landslides and cascading impacts of storms, floods and epidemics, as observed with the ‘incremental housing approach’ in Quinta Monroy ( [[#Rojas--2019|Rojas, 2019]] ) and the ‘social urbanism’ in Medellin ( [[#Garcia%20Ferrari--2018|Garcia Ferrari et al., 2018]] ).

The climate adaptation plans of several large CSA cities include efficient land use and occupation planning and urban control systems (comprising regulation, monitoring), fostering the articulation with housing and environmental policy (by means of intersectoral and multi-level governance), inhibiting and reducing the occupation of risk areas (mainly flooding and landslides risks); increasing population density in areas already served by infrastructure; expanding slum urbanisation and technical assistance programmes to improve and expand social housing ( ''high confidence'' ) ( [[#Municipio%20del%20Distrito%20Metropolitano%20de%20Quito--2020|Municipio del Distrito Metropolitano de Quito, 2020]] ; [[#Prefeitura%20Municipal%20do%20Salvador--2020|Prefeitura Municipal do Salvador, 2020]] ; [[#Municipalidad%20de%20Lima--2021|Municipalidad de Lima, 2021]] ; [[#Prefeitura%20da%20Cidade%20do%20Rio%20de%20Janeiro--2021|Prefeitura da Cidade do Rio de Janeiro, 2021]] ; [[#Prefeitura%20do%20Município%20de%20São%20Paulo--2021|Prefeitura do Município de São Paulo, 2021]] ).

Housing programmes and initiatives that consider resilient construction and site selection strategies are still in their nascent stages ( [[#Martin--2013|Martin et al., 2013]] ). Initiatives in slum upgrading, social housing improvement and regularising land tenure, associated with infrastructure provision, do not usually focus on adaptation, although they often focus on risk reduction. Those initiatives, associated with a housing policy that guarantees access to land and decent housing, represent a comprehensive intervention in vulnerable neighbourhoods for their adaptation to climate change, and CbA (community-based adaptation) strategies, including housing self-management and the participation of cooperatives, demonstrate the need and opportunity to transition to a transformative urban agenda that encompasses sustainable development, poverty reduction, disaster-risk reduction, climate-change adaptation and climate-change mitigation ( ''high confidence'' ) ( [[#Muntó--2018|Muntó, 2018]] ; [[#UN-Habitat--2018|UN-Habitat, 2018]] ; [[#Valadares--2018|Valadares and Cunha, 2018]] ; [[#Bárcena--2020b|Bárcena et al., 2020b]] ; [[#Núñez%20Collado--2020|Núñez Collado and Wang, 2020]] ; [[#Satterthwaite--2020|Satterthwaite et al., 2020]] ).

Several large cities are implementing municipal risk management plans and management and restoration plans for hydrologically relevant areas, considering threats of drought and heat waves, integrated watershed management and flood control programmes ( ''high confidence'' ) ( [[#Municipio%20del%20Distrito%20Metropolitano%20de%20Quito--2020|Municipio del Distrito Metropolitano de Quito, 2020]] ; [[#Prefeitura%20Municipal%20do%20Salvador--2020|Prefeitura Municipal do Salvador, 2020]] ; [[#Municipalidad%20de%20Lima--2021|Municipalidad de Lima, 2021]] ; [[#Prefeitura%20da%20Cidade%20do%20Rio%20de%20Janeiro--2021|Prefeitura da Cidade do Rio de Janeiro, 2021]] ; [[#Prefeitura%20do%20Município%20de%20São%20Paulo--2021|Prefeitura do Município de São Paulo, 2021]] ). Quito and Rio de Janeiro are two examples of comprehensive and effective city-level climate action that includes creating environmental protected areas, managing appropriate land use, household relocation and EWSs in areas vulnerable to high levels of precipitation associated with EbA, such as reforestation projects, to address natural hazards ( [[#ELLA--2013|ELLA, 2013]] ; [[#Anguelovski--2014|Anguelovski et al., 2014]] ; [[#Calvello--2015|Calvello et al., 2015]] ; [[#Alcaldía%20de%20Quito--2017|Alcaldía de Quito, 2017]] ; [[#Sandholz--2018|Sandholz et al., 2018]] ; [[#Prefeitura%20da%20Cidade%20do%20Rio%20de%20Janeiro--2021|Prefeitura da Cidade do Rio de Janeiro, 2021]] ) ( [[#12.6.1|Section 12.6.1]] ). EWS and the use of mapping tools as undertaken in La Paz proved to be an effective adaptation measure in the face of increasing hydro-climatic extreme events ( [[#Aparicio-Effen--2018|Aparicio-Effen et al., 2018]] ).

<div id="12.5.5.3.2" class="h4-container"></div>

<span id="green-and-grey-infrastructure"></span>