Climate policy feasibility across Europe relies on the conditional middle
E. Keith Smith, Žan Mlakar, Alessio Levis, Mary Sanford, Lea Stapper, Thijs Bouman, Johannes Emmerling, Goda Perlaviciute, Massimo Tavoni, Loïc Berger, Jeroen van den Bergh, Thomas Bernauer, Alessia Casamassima, Thomas Epper, Nahed Eddai, Ivan Savin, Milan Ščasný, Uyanga Turmunkh, Iva Zvěřinová, Silvia Pianta
The need to adapt to current and future climate impacts and the importance of tracking progress across time‐scales and locations has long been called for. Yet designing and implementing tracking frameworks for climate change adaptation (CCA) remains a challenge for various conceptual, empirical, and methodological reasons. Part of the challenge also lies in the politically contested nature of CCA tracking, which is important to understand but often overlooked, as tracking tends to be framed as a scientific and objective process. To address this gap, we review 47 peer‐reviewed articles found to discuss aspects of political contestations of tracking CCA. Through a thematic analysis, we interpretatively identify and theorize three areas of political contestations underpinning CCA tracking: (1) underlying assumptions and motives to track; (2) design of tracking metrics; and (3) the use and consequences of metrics. Our analysis reveals that although political contestations may not always be explicitly mentioned in peer‐reviewed literature, they are recognized, even as they receive limited empirical examination. We conclude with critically drawing out implications of these political contestations and discussing how tracking CCA can reinforce or contest what is included and supported within CCA policy through its performative impacts on authority, recognition, responsibility, and participation. These insights provide a comprehensive overview of the politically contested nature of CCA tracking and offer practical insights on these contestations and their real‐world implications. This article is categorized under: Vulnerability and Adaptation to Climate Change > Institutions for Adaptation
Global Environmental Change: Human and Policy Dimensions
The effects of self-governance arrangements on the climate change resilience of small-scale fisheries in Mexico
Xochitl Édua Elías Ilosvay, Sarah Elkin, Sebastian C.A. Ferse, Eréndira Aceves-Bueno, Javier Tovar-Ávila, Jhosafat Rentería-Bravo, Irving Alexis Medina Santiago, Jorge García Molinos, Elena Ojea
A significant gap persists between planning and implementing adaptation actions in European cities. This study investigates the social, institutional and economic factors influencing the implementation of 19,954 adaptation actions reported by 1596 signatories in 32 European countries within the Global Covenant of Mayors. Using statistical and machine learning methods, the research examines how contextual factors (such as social inequity or educational levels, among others) and stakeholder interactions relate to the implementation status of the actions, e.g., whether their implementation has started or is completed, and with how much delay the process started. The analysis reveals key insights into how those factors can shape adaptation implementation in different settlement types. This work contributes to closing the planning-implementation gap by identifying patterns among the factors and providing evidence-based guidance for policymakers and practitioners to enhance the implementation of climate adaptation strategies across European cities.
Global disparities in urban parks deepen inequality in resident well-being
Wenhui Kuang, Yali Hou, Yinyin Dou, Fubao Sun, Wenfeng Chi, Kai Wang, Gang Zhao, Yuyu Zhou, Zherui Yin, Changqing Guo, Wenlong Li, Rafiq Hamdi, Faith Ka Shun Chan, Hui Xu, Shufen Pan, Wenxuan Bao, Zhishou Wei, Ger Hong, Xiaoyong Li, Dengsheng Lu, Guangsheng Chen, Tao Pan, Fanhao Meng, Hanqin Tian
The current U.S. federal administration has sought to intervene into every aspect of academic life, university functioning, and the research enterprise including by attacking academic freedom and integrity and canceling and retreating from publicly funded research. Such actions have profound adverse effects on the U.S. public, especially its most marginalized communities, and on science, itself. This perspective provides a telling example of such impacts through our own experience of funding cancellation, the disruptions it causes and the effects it has on urban systems and the communities they support. By focusing on our project that sought to center environmental justice communities in urban transportation and climate planning we offer insights into the wide-ranging effects of such disinvestment, including on sustainability and air quality efforts, with recommendations for moving forward to advance sustainable, equitable, and resilient cities.
Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists