The presentation details the need to mainstream climate change adaptation into urban planning.

1. Mwenje Emmanuel (BA, MSc, MSc,)
Spatial Resilience Planner & GIS Analyst
+254723426986
e.mwenjeh@gmail.com
September 2020.
Urbanplanes Virtual Conference in collaboration with Nigerian Institute of
TownPlanners(Kogistatechapter)andTheFederalPolytechnicIdah.
15th September,2020

2. ▪ Urban planning (also referred to as land use/physical planning) entails a
methodological approach in which a determination is made as far as
the appropriate use of a particular geographical location is concerned
(EMI, 2015; Schmidt-Thome, 2017).
▪ According to Schmidt-Thome et al.( 2017), urban planning in Global
South involves:
i) Problem identification
ii) Problem analysis
iii) Objective setting,
iv) Identification of intervention alternatives,
v) Evaluation of alternatives,
vi) Selection of the best alternative(s),
vii) Implementation of the best alternative, and
viii) Monitoring and evaluations

3. Schmidt-Thome et al.( 2017)
CONVENTIONAL URBAN PLANNING PROCESS

4. ▪ FOCUS of Conventional Urban Planning: spatial distribution of land uses, social
Economic, environmental (quality/waste management)
▪ Thus, CONVENTIONAL Urban Planning has never focused on the Impacts of
Climate Change.
▪ Due to climatological hazards, Global South cities have resorted to DEDICATED &
SECTORAL ADAPTATION (Klein et al., 2007,Lwasa, 2010;African Union, 2014;Filho,
2017;Butterfield, 2018b).
▪ However, urban planning can aid spatial adaptation (EMI, 2015) via:
▪ Modifying planning frameworks & development guidelines;
▪ Land Use classification based on (acceptable) risk levels

5. (UN-HABITAT 2014)
▪ Inability to identify the core issues (Myopic visions will result in poor plans)
▪ Inappropriate or outdated planning approaches and tools (Plans
conceived exclusively by technical experts, in isolation; plans using imported approaches)
▪ Weak capacity to develop and implement plans (insufficient human
resources to develop plans and implement them.)
▪ Legal frameworks that do not provide sufficient traction for
plans (A sound legal framework is indispensable for the implementation of plans)
▪ Plans that do not have sufficient time (Lack of continuity because of political
cycles, and uncommitted leaders who fail to assess the long-term negative consequences of
overruling plans)

6. Climate Change
“Climate Change refers to a change in the
state of the climate that can be identified
(e.g., by using statistical tests) by changes in
the mean and/or the variability of its
properties, and that persists for an
extended period, typically decades or
longer. (IPCC, 2014,p 120)
Hazards,Vulnerability and Risks
▪ Hazards are natural/climatological
or man-made threats to the built and
Natural Environments.(UNISDR,
2004)
▪ Vulnerability: the susceptibility
(likeliness to be adversely affected)
of urban dwellers and developments
exposed to hazards.
▪ Risks are actual/anticipated losses
(eg property, damaged
infrastructure) due to hazards eg
floods.

7. ▪ Risks are a derivative of both Hazards and Vulnerability
Flood risk dynamics (Earthquake and Megacities Initiative, 2015).

8. ▪ “Resilience” is the ability of an Urban system to withstand shocks while still
maintaining its essential functions, and recovering effectively to a state better
prepared to cope with shocks/stresses/Hazards (UNFCCC 2016)
▪ Spatial Adaptation: Adjustments in the natural and built environment to minimize the
impacts of hazards (Chmutina & Bosher, 2015) .
▪ Mainstreaming : The modification of formal urban planning process (planning
methodology) and urban plans (development guidelines) to incorporate
climatological risk adaptation.(EMI, 2015; Runhaar et al., 2018)

9. Source: Mwenje (2019)

10. Dimensions/PHASES Description Sub-dimensions Indicators
Agenda setting Overall preparations to jump start the
planning and mainstreaming process.
Inception
Preliminary activities
-Stakeholder mapping
--Knowledge gaps identification
-Data needs identification
Context Evaluation The mainstreaming needs to have an
adequate understanding of the status quo of
the planning area and systems for effective
decision making.
Socio-economic and environmental Analysis -Review of literature ( policies, previous plans..)
-Analysing emergency systems
-Urban resilience analysis
Urban Hazard analysis (eg floods) -Hazard (eg Flood) mapping
-Vulnerability assessment
-Exposure assessment
City risk profile (eg floods) -Flood risk quantification
-Geographical risk levels and distribution
-Risk maps
Validation of situational analysis findings -Multi-agency approach
-Gaps identification
-Analytical tools (network analysis etc)
Risk-informed Plan Making This entails a detailed process of the actual
plan preparation and decisions made based
on the findings of the situational analysis
above.
Vision setting -Urban development vision
-Hazard (eg Flood) resilience vision
Strategy prioritization -Land use concepts
-Urban resilience models (floods, landslides etc)
-Funding identification
Projects identification -Risk-sensitive Urban development plan/projects
-Flood risk adaptation projects
-Budgetary indications
Role distribution -Stakeholder per project
-Timelines
-Budgetary commitment
Implementation, Monitoring And
Evaluation
Once the flood risk mainstreamed plan has
been prepared, the actors in question should
take due diligence to implement, monitor
and evaluate the final outcomes relative to
the set expectations.
Implementation -Well defined timelines (e.g. 5years cycles)
Monitoring and evaluation -Well defined mainstreaming indicators
-Assessment frameworks
RISK-SENSITIVE APPROACH

11. (Adapted from EMI,2015)

13. ETHEKWINI MUNICIPALITY (EM),DURBAN SOUTH AFRICA
❑Durban expects the maximum and minimum temperatures to increase,
exceeding 30°C.
❑ Temperatures to increase by 1.5⁰C and 2.5⁰C by 2065 and by 3.0⁰C and 5.0⁰C by
2100
❑Longer periods of no rainfall and an increased frequency in high intensity
rainfall events with potential floods. (increase of up to 500 mm by 2100.)
❑Numerous impacts on urban areas, water availability, agricultural productivity
and food security
❑Implementation of the United Nation Framework Convention on Climate
Change and Habitat III programs

14. POLICY FRAMEWORK
EM INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT
PLAN (IDP) 2019/2020
• Strategic Focus Area: Climate
Response Planning
• Programme 1.4: Develop and
Implement a Municipal Climate
Response Programme on Climate
Adaptation
• DEDICATED Adaptation

15. DURBAN’ RESILIENT STRATEGY (Adopted by the EM in 2017)

16. STEP 1: Systems analysis of Durban’s
Resilience Focus Areas (Gathered data and
identified systemic challenges)
STEP 2: Identifying ‘Resilience Building
Options’ for Durban (eg the need for
Collaborative informal settlement action
planning)
STEP 3: Exploring and understanding the
Resilience Building Options for Durban
(Built an initial understanding of the RBOs
and key stakeholders and issues associated
with each)
STEP 4: Human Benefit Analysis: Further
developed an existing Human Benefit
Analysis Tool
(Lever ‘Manage environmental assets more
effectively’:‘
Does the outcome reduce critical ecological
degradation or known environmental/climatic
risks?’
STEP 5: Refining areas for implementation and
finalizing Durban’s Resilience Strategy
1. Developed a draft Resilience Strategy
2. Facilitated stakeholder engagement in reviewing
Durban’s draft Resilience Strategy
3. Consulted with political leadership in order to
secure final approval and sign off for Durban’s
Resilience Strategy
STEP 6: Institutionalizing resilience in eThekwini
Municipality
STEP 7: Monitoring and evaluating the
implementation of Durban’s Resilience Strategy

17. Resilience Building Option 1:
Collaborative informal settlement
action
Resilience Building Option 2:
Integrated and Innovative Planning
at the interface between municipal
and traditional governance systems.

18. ETHEKWINI MUNICIPALITY
Ethekwini Municipality IDP 2019/2020

19. Phases Missing Implicit Explicit Expected
Max. score
Agenda setting 0.19 0.06 0.75 1.0
Context
Evaluation
0.63 0.20 0.16 1.0
Risk-informed
planning
0.20 0.38 0.53 1.0
Implementatio
n, M & E
0.75 0 0.25 1.0
(Source: Mwenje, 2019)
KIGALI CITY
Min_Max Frequency standardization
Where Z is the indicator whose frequency is being standardized,
X is the frequency of occurrence of Z for each of the evaluation
criteria across the plans evaluated,
min(x) is the least possible frequency (which is zero in this study)
max (x) is the maximum possible frequency of occurrence across
the plans

20. (Source: Mwenje, 2019)
Critical
barriers

21. (Source: Mwenje, 2019)Nationally
determined
City level
determined

22. NEPAL

24. ▪ The KV plan was YET to incorporate was
the hazard risk information and
implications
▪ Actors agreed on the necessity for CC
integration in urban plans (among
others):
The Risk prone areas NOT shown
clearly in KV Plans;
Physical infrastructure unable to adapt
to risks and disasters;
Areas for rescue and relief not
identified and protected;
Areas for future expansion of
infrastructure not designated;
Open spaces not defined;
Conflicts in sensitive areas ( ex.
encroachment in sensitive areas) neither
identified NOT addressed;
Need for Integration of KV Plan with
Risk Management Plans.
24
(Source: EMI,2016)

25. Hazard maps and hazard and climate
change related risk assessment
prepared (new or updated) by mandated
agencies or by a third party;
A technical group to:
Interpret and simplify the
assessments for the deliberative body
and stakeholders;
Advocate awareness and better
understanding of the following:
▪ Consider Climate change risks
▪ Environmental management
▪ Climate proofing of structures
Coordinate and engage hazard
(mandated) related agencies
Prepare guidelines for
mainstreaming Risks and Climate
Change Adaptation in KV Plan
formulation and Implementation at
Valley level
Use of hazard risk data in Planning
Engage relevant agencies
25

26. HOW TO BUILD RESILIENCE AND REDUCE CLIMATE RISKS
▪ Embed resilience in urban planning
▪ Resilience depends on the CAPACITY to
anticipate and plan for the future.
▪ Hazard/Risk Assessments to identify
SECTORIALVULNERABILITIES and justify spatial
adaptation.
▪ Resilience is not an add-on but an integral part
of a city’s plan. (all complex urban systems
MUST be considered.)
▪ MAINSTREAM adaptation in land policies and
building standards to reduce vulnerability.
UN-HABITAT, (2014)

27. ▪ African Union. (2014). African Strategy on Climate Change, (May), 86. Alam, M. (2014). Mainstreaming Climate Change Adaptation into Development
Planning, 5(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.4314/gjds.v14i2.11
▪ Butterfield, R. (2018). Inspiring climate action in African cities : practical options for resilient pathways About the authors, (January).
▪ Chmutina, K., & Bosher, L. (2015). Disaster risk reduction or disaster risk production: The role of building regulations in mainstreaming DRR.
International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 13, 10–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2015.03.002
▪ Earthquake and Megacities Inititative. (2015). Urban Resilience Master Planning: A Guidebook for Practitioners and Policymakers. EMI. (2015). Urban
Resilience Master Planning: Aguide for Priactitioners and Policy Makers (First). Quezon City. Retrieved from http://www.emi-megacities.org
▪ Filho, W. L. (2017). Climate Change Adaptation in Africa. (Walter Leal Filho, B. Simane, J. Kalangu, Menas Wuta, P. Munishi, Musiyiwa, & Kumbirai, Eds.)
(Climate Ch). Hamburg, Germany: Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315794907
▪ IPCC. (2014a). Climate Change, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Organization & Environment, 24(March), 1–44. https://doi.org/http://ipcc-
wg2.gov/AR5/images/uploads/IPCC_WG2AR5_SPM_Approved.pdf
▪ Klein, R. J. T., Eriksen, S. E. H., Næss, L. O., Hammill, A., Tanner, T. M., Robledo, C., & O’Brien, K. L. (2007). Portfolio screening to support the
mainstreaming of adaptation to climate change into development assistance. Climatic Change, 84(1), 23–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-007-
9268-x
▪ Lwasa, S. (2010). Adapting urban areas in Africa to climate change: The case of Kampala. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 2(3), 166–
171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2010.06.009
▪ Runhaar, H., Wilk, B., Persson, Å., Uittenbroek, C., & Wamsler, C. (2018). Mainstreaming climate adaptation: taking stock about “what works” from
empirical research worldwide. Regional Environmental Change, 18(4), 1201–1210. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-017-1259-5
▪ Uittenbroek, C. J. (2016b). Mainstreaming Climate Adaptation at the Implementation Level: Routines As Possible Barriers to Organizational Change.
Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 18(2): 161-167., 18(2)(November),1–49.
▪ Uittenbroek, C. J., Janssen-Jansen, L. B., & Runhaar, H. A. C. (2013a). Mainstreaming climate adaptation into urban planning: overcoming barriers,
seizing opportunities and evaluating the results in two Dutch case studies. Regional Environmental Change, 13(2), 399–411.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-012-0348-8
▪ UNISDR. (2014). Progress and challenges in disaster risk reduction: a contribut. Progress and Challenges in Disaster Risk Reduction: A Contribution
towards the Development of Policy Indicators for the Post-2015 Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction - 217.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.parkreldis.2015.02.017

28. HIERACHIES
▪ Vision 2020 (2012)
▪ Land Use Plans
o NLUDMP (2015)
o DDPs-IDDPs
o Kigali City Master Plan (2013)
✓ Kicukiro (2013)
✓ Nyarugenge (2010)
✓ Gasabo (2013)
IMPLICATIONS
▪ Limited vertical integration of flood risk
adaptation
▪ Limited of horizontal integration of flood
risk adaptation.
▪ Implicit focus on climate change ( flood
risk adaptation)
▪ Overall Knowledge gap on climate
change (flood risk adaptation)

29. Criteria Description Remark
0 Missing If the indicator/criterion or its proxies are completely not available in the planning
process
1 Implicit If the indicator/criterion or its proxies are just mentioned and not detailed out in
the planning process. For instance, if the planning process acknowledges that the
people and land uses in flood prone areas will be identified for effective measures,
but does not detail out “HOW” it will be done, by “WHO”, and “WHEN”, then
it may be identified as an implicit approach.
2 Explicit When the indicator/criterion is well acknowledged and a framework of addressing
it is provided. For instance, for an indicator proposed to address flood risks, the
process will conduct a risk and vulnerability assessment, by the municipality
wishing the three months before making development proposals.