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

=== FAQ 6.5 | What policy tools, governance strategies and financing arrangements can enable more inclusive and effective climate adaptation in cities and settlements? ===

<div id="h2-44-siblings" class="h2-siblings"></div>

''Inclusive and effective climate adaptation requires efforts at all levels of governance, including the public sector, the private sector, the third sector, communities and intermediaries such as universities or think tanks. Inclusive and effective adaptation requires action fit for the diverse conditions in which it is needed. Collaborative dialogues can help to map both adaptation opportunities and potential negative impacts.''

There is no one-size-fits-all approach to ensure that climate adaptation efforts have positive results and include the concerns of everyone affected. Cities and local communities are diverse, and thus they have diverse perspectives on what responses to prioritise. Moreover, adaptation efforts may impact people’s lives in very different ways. Policy tools, strategies and financial arrangements for adaptation can include all society sectors and address socioeconomic inequalities. Planning and decision making must respond to marginalised voices and future generations (including children and youth).

Efforts to adapt to climate change can be incremental, reformist or transformational, depending on the scale of the change required. Incremental action may address specific climate impacts in a given place, but do not challenge the social and political institutions that prevent people from bouncing back better. Reformist action may address some of the social and institutional drivers of exposure and vulnerability, but without addressing the underlying socioeconomic structures that drive differential forms of exposure. For example, social protection measures may improve people’s capacity to cope with climate impacts, but that improved capacity will depend on maintaining such protection measures. Transformative action involves fundamental changes in political and socioeconomic systems, oriented toward addressing vulnerability drivers (e.g., socioeconomic inequalities, consumption cultures). All forms of adaptation are relevant to deliver resilient futures because of the variability of conditions in which adaptation action is needed.

Local and regional governments play an essential role in delivering planning and institutional action suited to local conditions in cities and settlements. Potential strategies can span multiple sectors and scales, ranging from land use management, building codes, critical infrastructure designs and community development actions, to different legal, financial, participatory decision making and robust monitoring and evaluation arrangements. NGOs or third sector organisations can also play a coordinating role by building dialogues across governments, the private sectors and communities through effective communication and social learning. Local action tends to falter without the support of national governments as they are often facilitators of resources and finance. They can create institutional frameworks that facilitate (rather than impede) local action. National governments also play a crucial role in the development of large-scale infrastructures.

Private actors can also drive adaptation action. The evaluation of private-led infrastructure and housing projects suggests that the prioritisation of profit, however, may have a detrimental impact on the overall resilience of a place. New institutional models such as public–private partnerships respond to the shortcomings of both the public and private sectors. Still, the evidence of them facilitating the inclusion of multiple actors is mixed.

The private sector can mobilise finance. However, the forms of finance available for adaptation are limited and directed to huge projects that do not always address local adaptation needs. Private actors tend to join adaptation projects when there is an expectation of large profits, such as in interventions that increase real estate value. Private-led adaptation can lead to ‘gentrification’ whereby low-income populations are relocated from urban centres and safer settlements. Models that enable the collaboration between public, private and civil society sectors have greater potential to mobilise adaptation finance in inclusive ways.

Forms of collaborative planning and decision making can create dialogues for a sustainable future in cities, settlements and infrastructure systems. Adaptation action needs multiple approaches. For example, adaptation needs both actions that depend on dialogues between multiple actors (e.g., urban planning and zoning) and action that follows strong determination and leadership (e.g., declarations of emergency and target commitments). There are adaptation actions that depend on place-based conditions (e.g., flood defences) and those that require considering interactions across scales (e.g., regulatory frameworks). The growth of adaptation capacities, fostering dialogues, empowered communities, multi-scalar assessments and foresight within current institutions can support effective and inclusive adaptation action that is also sustained in the long term.

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