Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
Climate change adaptation in European cities Jeremy G Carter European cities face a range of challenges over the coming decades that will influence the nature of urban growth and development across the continent. Climate change is central amongst these, and will have direct implications for urban processes through changes to temperature and precipitation patterns. As European cities contribute to and are supported by tightly coupled global networks of socio-economic and biophysical goods and services, many of which are influenced by weather and climate, a changing climate will present complex and uncertain indirect impacts for cities to contend with. Climate change adaptation relates to responding to the risks and potential opportunities associated with changing climates. Although adaptation appears at present to be a relatively low priority issue for city planners and governors in Europe, there are examples from policy and practice that demonstrate positive activity in this field. Although these initiatives do not always have adaptation as their primary focus, they do highlight progress in this arena and offer transferable lessons to other cities aiming to address the impacts of a changing climate. However, there remain a series of barriers to progress that relate to issues such as policy and governance frameworks, and more nebulous issues including complexity and uncertainty in climate science and institutional structures. These barriers must be acknowledged and addressed as a part of an approach that responds holistically to the adaptation challenge that faces European cities in the coming decades. Address University of Manchester, School of Environment and Development, Oxford Road, Manchester M139PL, United Kingdom Corresponding author: Carter, Jeremy G (Jeremy.Carter@manchester.ac.uk)
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2011, 3:193–198 This review comes from a themed issue on Human Settlements and Industrial Systems Edited by Patricia Romero Lankao and David Dodman Received 29 October 2010; Accepted 21 December 2010 Available online 22nd January 2011 1877-3435/$ – see front matter # 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. DOI 10.1016/j.cosust.2010.12.015
Introduction and context Europe is a heavily urbanised continent. Around 75% of Europeans live in urban areas, with this figure predicted to rise to 80% (and to 90% in certain countries) by 2020 [1]. Urban sprawl results in increasing use of energy, land www.sciencedirect.com
and water, and the loss of environmental services (including flood protection and urban cooling) associated with landscapes such as wetlands, forests and coastal zones. Despite facing such challenges, cities remain the economic engines of developed countries [2,3]. They are drivers of wealth creation and cultural exchange, and their sustainable growth and development is fundamental to the welfare of Europe’s citizens and environments. The prospect of significant climate change over the coming decades brings the debate over the future of European cities into sharp focus. Future climate and weather patterns are projected to be markedly different across the continent than they are today [4 ,5,6]. Over recent years, the scientific community has issued increasingly stark warnings concerning the threat of high-end climate change (potentially a 48C rise in global mean surface temperatures above pre-industrial levels by the 2060s or 2070s) that would stretch the adaptive capacity of societies to the limit [7 ,8,9 ]. Although increasingly sophisticated projections are now available for climate variables such as temperature and precipitation, some of which now incorporate a probabilistic dimension [10], changes in extreme weather events (floods, droughts, heat waves, etc.) are more difficult to model [5,11]. It is these events that are likely to test cities the most. Indeed, across Europe, weather and climate related events have accounted for the vast majority of all natural disasters and economic losses associated with catastrophic events since 1980 [4]. Further to this, cities have particular characteristics that act to exacerbate the impacts of climate change and extreme weather. The high proportion of non-porous surfaces in urban areas increases flood risk [12,13]. This is because of the increased volume and speed at which rainwater runoff reaches watercourses [14], which are themselves often heavily modified and channelised reducing their capacity to deal with excess water. In addition, the built environment creates an Urban Heat Island [14,15] which is projected to intensify with climate change [16]. As cities also encompass a high concentration of ‘elements at risk’ to climate and weather impacts, such as people, critical infrastructure, and buildings [17], they are central to the adaptation agenda. Although top-down approaches based on emission targets and budgets may be suitable for climate change mitigation, bottom-up approaches are likely to be a crucial element of adaptation responses given the diversity of local areas [18 ]. Just as climate change projections differ spatially so do patterns of exposure and vulnerability, for Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2011, 3:193–198
194 Human Settlements and Industrial Systems
example of people and infrastructure, to climate change impacts [19,20]. This emphasises the need for cities to develop adaptation strategies and responses tailored to their particular circumstances. These should account for issues including local climatic and biophysical conditions, the specific characteristics of elements at risk of climate and weather events, as well as less tangible factors such as levels of political will for action, the existence of relevant governance frameworks and stakeholder networks, and the availability of resources (financial and human resources). However, given the cross boundary nature of some climate change impacts (such as heat waves and fluvial floods), there is also a need for higher level strategic frameworks to support local activities. A strategic perspective is also necessary to support adaptation responses that require a broader spatial perspective to be taken (e.g. developing cool air corridors feeding into urban areas or catchment scale flood risk management responses).
planning frameworks at the regional or municipal level. Relevant examples relate to themes such as green infrastructure provision, which is an important adaptation response because of the role it can play in urban cooling and flood risk management [26]. For example, in Stuttgart, Germany, planning and zoning regulations aim to preserve open space and increase the presence of vegetation in densely built-up areas. This is in order to reduce problems of overheating and air pollution by improving air circulation. In Basel, Switzerland, a Building and Construction Law passed in 2002 specifies that all new and renovated flat roofs must be greened. This has resulted in Basel becoming the world’s leading green roof city, as measured by area of green roof per capita [27]. In Berlin, Germany, the Biotope Area Factor regulation requires that a certain proportion of the area of new developments is left as green or permeable space. Whilst this initiative is aimed at landscape design and species protection, it also delivers climate change adaptation benefits [27].
Adaptation approaches in European cities: policy and practice
Freiburg, regarded as one of the ‘greenest’ cities in Europe, has a strong spatial planning system that incorporates a range of measures that provide adaptation benefits. The city’s Land Use Plan 2020, which is novel in that it prioritises landscape protection over building development, recognises the need to encourage urban cooling through protecting cool air corridors. The city’s ‘Open Spaces Concept’ has the potential to help further respond to the threat of high temperatures in the future through its aspiration to develop a network of green open spaces through the city. Planning polices also look to moderate the risk of surface water flooding through reducing the amount of hard surfaces in the city, therefore lowering runoff volumes through allowing rainwater to percolate more easily into the soil.
It is broadly accepted that climate change adaptation (responding to the impacts of a changing climate) lags behind mitigation (reduction of greenhouse gas emissions) in a number of areas, including the development of policy and strategy frameworks and the existence of targeted responses in practice [18,21,22 ]. A recent national level assessment of the UK’s progress in preparing for climate change concluded that, ‘whilst the UK has started to build capacity for adaptation through advice and information to a range of public and private sector organisations, there is little evidence that this is translating into tangible action on the ground in a systematic way.’ [22 ]. Nevertheless, there are examples of approaches across different spatial scales within European cities that demonstrate progress in this arena. These relate to policy and strategy development, and to the implementation of practical actions. In terms of policy responses, examples of city-scale climate change adaptation strategies are beginning to emerge. These often form part of wider climate change and sustainability strategies that encompass, and in some cases are largely focused on, climate change mitigation. Such ‘integrated’ climate change strategies include those prepared for cities including Madrid [23] and Manchester [24]. There are also examples of ‘stand alone’ adaptation strategies focusing exclusively on responding to impacts associated with climate change. These include the London Climate Change Adaptation Strategy [25], and adaptation strategies currently in development for Copenhagen and Rotterdam. Examples can also be cited of specific policies and strategies that support efforts to adapt to climate change impacts. These are often embedded within spatial Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2011, 3:193–198
There are also individual projects and schemes at the local level that constitute good examples of adaptation responses [28,29]. These include, for example, ‘hard infrastructure’ flood protection measures, Sustainable Drainage Systems (SUDS), protecting and enhancing urban green and blue spaces and coastal zone management. These approaches are often supported by overarching strategic frameworks, particularly spatial plans [30 ]. Activity at the building scale to respond to climate change impacts includes measures such as insulation and passive cooling through shading to prevent overheating, and flood resilience measures such as waterproof membranes and airbrick covers [29,31]. Spatial planning frameworks and building regulations to influence the built and urban form are only one element of a holistic approach to climate change adaptation in cities. The behavioural dimension of adaptation to climate change impacts is also significant. Engaging individual land and property owners through ‘governing by enabling’ [21] is important. This may involve initiatives www.sciencedirect.com
Climate change adaptation in European cities Carter 195
such as communicating climate change information and building awareness of potential impacts amongst decision makers and potentially affected stakeholder groups [32]. This is significant seeing that, for example, willingness to install and to pay for property-level flood resilience measures amongst homeowners in England was found to be strongly associated with concern for climate change impacts, and also the perceived level of responsibility of homeowners to take action [33]. It is clear that awarenessraising initiatives emphasising personal responsibility for action, such as the Dutch campaign ‘The Netherlands Live with Water’, are a crucial component of adaptation strategies in European cities. Examples are also emerging of interdisciplinary initiatives involving researchers, practitioners and policy makers working within large collaborative projects on the development of adaptation responses for cities and urban areas. The Klimzug-Nord projecta concerns research and development into strategies to promote sustainable adjustments to climate change in the metropolitan area of Hamburg. A key output will be the development of a master plan for metropolitan Hamburg to the year 2050 which will incorporate adaptation responses. Operating at the national level in the Netherlands, the Knowledge for Climate research programmeb aims to develop knowledge and services to help the Netherlands respond to the impacts of climate change. One of the core programmes of this large consortium of government organisations, businesses and research institutes is ‘Climate Proof Cities’. This programme is researching issues including urban climate processes and their impacts, the vulnerability of cities to these impacts and possible adaptation responses and strategies. Close cooperation with cities including Rotterdam, Amsterdam and The Hague aims to secure the transfer of research findings into policy and practice. The KlimzugNord and Knowledge for Climate research programmes highlight the potential value of developing interdisciplinary, cross sector adaptation strategies that are reflective of the nature of the challenges associated with a changing climate. It is important to acknowledge that pre-emptive adaptation to potential future climate change impacts is often not the driving force behind many of the examples of policy and practice highlighted above, and in some cases adaptation may not have featured at all in their planning and development. In the context of green and blue infrastructure initiatives, primary motivating factors include biodiversity conservation, improvements to public spaces, reduction in energy use and responses to current climate and weather extremes [27]. Indeed, strategies and actions developed exclusively to promote adaptation goals are unlikely to be as effective as measures that a b
www.klimzug-nord.de. www.knowledgeforclimate.climateresearchnetherlands.nl.
www.sciencedirect.com
integrate adaptation alongside the progression of other agendas, such as climate change mitigation, health and wellbeing or enhancing the economic competitiveness of cities. In an ‘age of austerity’, placing adaptation initiatives in competition for resources against other agendas should be cautioned against. Conversely, identifying existing or planned initiatives that could perform or support adaptation functions (such as urban greening or restoration of waterways for recreation or biodiversity reasons), and where possible building on the potential adaptation functions that they could offer, would help to strengthen the adaptive capacity of cities.
‘Mainstreaming’ climate change adaptation in European cities Despite the positive examples from policy and practice discussed above, climate change adaptation is currently a relatively marginal issue. In the case of UK cities, adaptation is often ‘name-checked’ within relevant policies (e.g. spatial planning and infrastructure planning) whilst remaining subsumed under other shorter term priorities [22]. There are a range of generic barriers that can help to explain the slow uptake of adaptation policy and practice by European cities and the institutions involved in their planning and governance [34,35 ]. These include policybased barriers, such as limited overarching policy frameworks to support adaptation responses at lower levels. A supranational framework is in development at the European level, demonstrated by the European Commission’s White Paper on adapting to climate change [36 ]. However, only nine out of 25 EU countries had national adaptation strategies by the end of 2008 [18 ]. At the local level, where resources are often limited and capacity stretched, patchy high level policy leadership can act to reinforce barriers such as a lack of political will and the consequent low priority offered to adaptation within local policy development and decision making. Different initiatives can build or erode resilience to climate change and extreme weather events. Climate adaptation constraining decisions or actions [37], or mal-adaptations [38 ], reduce the capacity to respond to challenges and opportunities associated with climate change. Examples include policies that encourage development in exposed locations (e.g. flood risk zones or areas subject to coastal erosion), and policies that are excessively inflexible or short-termist and therefore constrain the creation of long term adaptation responses [39]. Specific mal-adaptive actions can also be envisaged, such as wasteful depletion of limited groundwater supplies in drought prone areas, or the loss of established trees in dense urban areas subject to heat stress. The existence of policies or actions that hinder local level adaptation is not uncommon and is clearly problematic. Barriers to developing adaptation responses also encompass more amorphous issues. These include the strong Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2011, 3:193–198
196 Human Settlements and Industrial Systems
influence of social and cultural inertia on individual and collective actions, a relevant example being the desire to live close to rivers or the sea for aesthetic reasons despite increased flood risk. Complexity and uncertainty also manifest themselves in different ways to constrain adaptation progress. Uncertainty in areas such as climate change science can limit the development of adaptation responses [34]. Uncertainty in terms of the nature, scale and timing of climate change impacts being adapted to, and over perceived responsibility for taking action, can stifle progress in sectors such as local spatial planning [40]. This situation is compounded by issues related to clarifying the costs and benefits of adaptation responses. These can be difficult to calculate, particularly where the benefits of adaptation responses may take several decades to accrue or cannot easily be assigned monetary value. Consequently, decisions over prioritising between available adaptation responses can be potentially difficult, as can even justifying adaptation responses in practice. There is also significant complexity regarding the institutional arrangement of policy arenas relevant to climate change adaptation in cities. For example, in the case of the UK, key adaptation arenas such as spatial planning and coastal zone management are characterised by multilevel governance systems that make it difficult to determine where responsibility lies for taking adaptation responses forward [35 ]. There are transferable conclusions to be drawn from this analysis of the current status of climate change adaptation in European cities. Significantly, the interrelationship between adaptation and other agendas at the level of both policy making and practical implementation of actions is apparent. There is a need to develop collective responses to climate change impacts integrating sectors, spatial scales and temporal scales. In this respect, the adaptation agenda shares many of the fundamental principles that characterise debates concerning sustainable development (acknowledging the flaws within this concept [41]), from justice and equity to the need for holistic and long term thinking. More specifically, principles do exist to support planners and decision makers addressing adaptation issues, which include building knowledge and awareness, working to prioritise adaptation options and systematically monitoring and evaluating adaptation responses [38 ]. It is also clear that adaptation responses must recognise certain cross-cutting spatial considerations, including the need to look beyond the administrative boundaries of cities into the peri-urban hinterland within which they sit [42], and further still to the global networks that sustain cities. Alongside local impacts and contexts, the threat to European cities from climate change impacts worldwide should be borne in mind. Implications for issues including global trade, agricultural systems and migration patterns and flows are potentially very significant [22 ,43,44]. Further research into this topic would be valuable. In Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2011, 3:193–198
addition, awareness raising and stakeholder network development will be necessary to build a firmer framework for taking more holistic adaptation approaches forward. When doing so, it will also be important to recognise and build on emerging examples of good practice in the field, some of which have been referred to within this paper. Adaptation is equally a problem of governance and behaviour as it is an issue to be addressed through scientific and technical responses. However, there remain gaps in our understanding over how best to govern and deliver adaptation responses [45]. Indeed, it could be argued that with scientific consensus coalescing around the causes and potential consequences of climate change, understanding governance frameworks and stakeholder networks to implement appropriate adaptation responses becomes even more vital. A better insight is needed into related issues such as the influence that different governance models and institutional structures have on the eventual form and function of policies and strategies developed to advance adaptation goals. There is also a need to recognise and act on the key challenges and barriers associated with progressing the adaptation agenda. These include developing a tiered hierarchy of policy frameworks from the supranational level downwards, where possible eliminating mal-adaptations, and developing approaches that can generate adaptation responses despite the complexity and uncertainty that characterises climate science and the structure of institutions responsible for implementing adaptation responses. For European cities to progress in an era of climate change, they should not only be able to understand the associated implications for their locality, but also must be in a position to mobilise appropriate adaptation responses across scales, sectors and stakeholder groups.
Acknowledgements Grateful thanks go to Aleksandra Kazmierczak and Gina Cavan for their support during the preparation of this paper, and to the referees for their valuable comments. Support provided by the INTERREG IVC green and blue space adaptation for urban areas and eco-towns (GRaBS) project was also much appreciated.
References and recommended reading Papers of particular interest, published within the period of review, have been highlighted as: of special interest of outstanding interest 1.
European Environment Agency (EEA): Urban Sprawl in Europe: The Ignored Challenge. European Environment Agency; 2006.
2.
Jacobs J: Cities and the Wealth of Nations. Random House; 1984.
3.
Conway M, Konvitz J: Meeting the challenges of distressed urban areas. Urban Studies 2000, 4:749-774.
4.
European Environment Agency (EEA): Impacts of Europe’s Changing Climate — 2008 Indicator-based Assessment. European Environment Agency; 2008. This report provides a comprehensive picture of the impacts of climate change across a range of different themes and sectors. Particular attention is paid to the economic consequences of climate change. The report www.sciencedirect.com
Climate change adaptation in European cities Carter 197
helps to build the evidence base for the development of adaptation responses in Europe. 5.
6.
Inter Governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC): Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working groups I, II and III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. IPCC; 2007. McGregor G, Ferro C, Stephenson D: Projected changes in extreme weather and climate events in Europe. In Extreme Weather Events and Public Health Responses. Edited by Kirch W, Bertollini R, Menne B. Springer; 2005:13-23.
7.
Anderson K, Bows A: Reframing the climate change challenge in light of post-2000 emissions trends. Philos. T. Roy. Soc. 2008, 366:3863-3882. The analysis presented in this paper provides a warning that recent emissions trends and a lack of concerted response to rapid growth in emissions is leading the global climate towards a level potentially 48C above pre-industrial levels. This has profound implications for how the adaptation agenda should be perceived. 8.
Betts R, Collins M, Hemming D, Jones C, Lowe J, Sanderson M: When could warming reach 4-C. Philos. T. Roy. Soc. A 2011, 369:67-84.
9.
New M, Liverman D, Schroder H, Anderson K: Four degrees and beyond: the potential for a global temperature increase of four degrees and its implications. Philos. T. Roy. Soc. A 2011, 369:6-19. This paper attempts to assess the impacts and potential consequences of a world in which temperatures rise to a level 48C above pre-industrial levels. Taking a global perspective, the paper addresses issues including sea level rise and migration caused by climate change. The analysis demonstrates that adaptation at the local level must be sensitive to the global implications of climate change. 10. Jenkins GJ, Murphy JM, Sexton DMH, Lowe JA, Jones P, Kilsby CG: UK Climate Projections: Briefing Report. Met Office Hadley Centre; 2009. 11. McBean G: Climate change and extreme weather: a basis for action. Nat Hazards 2004, 31(1):177-190.
21. Alber G, Kern K: Governing climate change in cities: modes of urban governance in multi-level systems OECD. International Conference Competitive Cities and Climate Change, 2nd Annual Meeting of the OECD Roundtable Strategy for Urban Development; Milan: 2008. 22. Adaptation Sub-Committee (ASC):: How Well Prepared is the UK for Climate Change? Committee on Climate Change Adaptation; 2010. This study provides a status report of how one country, the UK, is progressing adaptation at the national level. Issues considered include the extent of progress to date, and details of further necessary actions. Many of the key conclusions are transferable across sectors and scales. 23. City of Madrid: City of Madrid Plan for the Sustainable Use of Energy and Climate Change Prevention. City of Madrid; 2008. 24. Manchester City Council: Manchester: A Certain Future. Manchester City Council; 2009. 25. Greater London Authority (GLA): The Draft Climate Change Adaptation Strategy for London: Public Consultation Draft. Greater London Authority; 2010. 26. Gill S, Handley J, Ennos RA, Pauleit S: Adapting cities for climate change: the role of the green infrastructure. Built Environ 2007, 33:97-115. 27. Kazmierczak A, Carter JG: Adaptation to climate change using green and blue infrastructure: a database of case studies. Available at: http://grabs-eu.org/casestudies.php; 2010. 28. Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE): Public Space Lessons: Adapting Public Space to Climate Change. CABE; 2008. 29. Shaw R, Colley M, Connell R: Climate Change Adaptation by Design: A Guide for Sustainable Communities. TCPA; 2007. 30. Davoudi S, Crawford J, Mehmood A (Eds): Planning for Climate Change: Strategies for Mitigation and Adaptation for Spatial Planners. Earthscan; 2009.
12. Hough M: Cities and Natural Process. Routledge; 2006.
This edited book addresses issues related to climate change adaptation (and mitigation) from the perspective of spatial planning, which is one of the key policy tools for progressing climate change adaptation in urban areas.
13. Sanders CH, Phillipson MC: UK adaptation strategy and technical measures: the impacts of climate change on buildings. Build Res Inf 2003, 31(3):210-221.
31. Three Regions Climate Change Group: Your Home in a Changing Climate: Retrofitting Existing Homes for Climate Change Impacts. Greater London Authority; 2008.
14. Whitford V, Ennos AR, Handley J: City form and natural process — indicators for the ecological performance of urban areas and their application to Merseyside, UK. Landscape Urban Plan 2001, 57(2):91-103.
32. Adger N, Arnell N, Tompkins E: Successful adaptation to climate change across scales. Global Environ Change 2005, 15:77-86.
15. Wilby RL: Past and projected trends in London’s urban heat island. Weather 2003, 58:251-260.
33. Kazmierczak A, Bichard E: Investigating homeowners’ interest in property-level flood protection. Int J Disaster Resilience Built Environ 2010, 1(2):157-172.
16. Wilby RL: Constructing climate change scenarios of urban heat island intensity and air quality. Environ Plann B 2008, 35(5):902-919. 17. Scatterthwaite D, Huq S, Pelling M, Reid H, Romero Lankao P: Adapting to climate change in urban areas. The possibilities and constraints in low- and middle-income countries. Human Settlements Discussion Paper Series. Theme: Climate Change and Cities – 1. International Institute for Environment and Development; 2007. 18. Biesbroek GR, Swart RJ, Carter TR, Cowan C, Henrichs T, Mela H, Morecroft MD, Rey D: Europe adapts to climate change: comparing national adaptation strategies. Global Environ Change 2010, 20(3):440-450. This paper provides a detailed review of seven national level adaptation strategies produced by EU member states. Although the development of these strategies demonstrates an important political commitment to adaptation, the authors highlight a number of institutional barriers to future policy development. 19. Fussel H: Vulnerability: a generally applicable conceptual framework for climate change research. Global Environ Change 2007, 17:155-167. 20. Smit B, Wandel J: Adaptation, adaptive capacity and vulnerability. Global Environ Change 2006, 16:282-292. www.sciencedirect.com
34. Hulme M, Adger N, Dessai S, Goulden M, Lorenzoni I, Nelson D, Naess L, Wolf J, Wreford A: Limits and Barriers to Adaptation: Four Propositions. Tyndall Centre Briefing Note No. 20. Tyndall Centre; 2007. 35. Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution: Adapting Institutions to Climate Change. Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution; 2010. This comprehensive report looks at the implications of climate change for the UK, focusing particularly on the challenges faced by the institutions that will be involved in the development of adaptation responses. Many of the key themes and conclusions are transferable to other contexts. 36. Commission of the European Communities (CEC): White paper – adapting to climate change: towards a European framework for action (COM 147 final). Comm Eur Commun 2009. This White Paper sets an important context for adaptation legislation and policy development within EU member states by setting out a framework to increase Europe’s resilience to climate change impacts. 37. Willows RI, Connell RK (Eds): Climate Adaptation: Risk, Uncertainty and Decision-making. UKCIP Technical Report. UKCIP; 2003. 38. Prutsch A, Grothmann T, Schauser I, Otto S, McCallum S: Guiding principles for adaptation to climate change in Europe. Eur Topic Centre Air Climate Change 2010. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2011, 3:193–198
198 Human Settlements and Industrial Systems
This report draws on the findings of a comprehensive review of available literature, supplemented by questionnaire responses from a wide range of experts, to define a series of generic principles to support adaptation action in Europe. 39. Hampshire County Council: What Policies Present Barriers to Adaptation in the UK and the Netherlands? Acclimatise and Climate Risk Management Limited; 2007. 40. Wilson E: Adapting to climate change at the local level: the spatial planning response. Local Environ 2006, 11(6):609-625. 41. Owens S, Cowell R: Land and Limits: Interpreting Sustainability in the Planning Process. 2002:. Routledge.
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2011, 3:193–198
42. McGregor D, Simon D, Thompson D (Eds): The Peri-urban Interface: Approaches to Sustainable Natural and Human Resource Use. Earthscan; 2005. 43. Dupont A, Pearman G: Heating Up the Planet: Climate Change and Security. Lowy Institute for International Policy; 2006. 44. German Advisory Council on Global Change: Climate Change as a Security Risk. Earthscan; 2007. 45. Manuel-Navarrete D, Pelling M, Redclift M: Coping, governance, and development: the climate change adaptation triad, Environment, Politics and Development Working Paper Series, WP18. Department of Geography, King’s College, London; 2009
www.sciencedirect.com