TRANSFORMATION AND RESILINECE
ONURBAN COASTS
WORKING PAPER SERIES, WORKING PAPER #2
Climate Change Adaptation in Urban Planning: A
Comparative Case Study of English and Scottish Local
Authorities
Kayleigh Lynch
2015
Abstract
England has a much more ‘laissez-faire’ attitude to climate change adaptation compared
to Scotland. This dissertation explores the role in which urban local governmenthas in
adapting to climate change, focusing in particular on adaptation within the planning
function of local authorities. A comparative case study method was employed and indepth interviews were conducted with nine officials placed within local authorities in
England and Scotland. The study found that adaptation was still largely missing from
planning policy in both England and Scotland, and the two countries face a lot of the
same barriers to its integration. It’s still unclear to what extent Scotland’s more
stringent requirements actually drive adaptation on the ground, butthis could change in
the near future with the new statutory reporting requirements which the Scottish
Government is bringing in. Therefore similar research to this in the future, and on a
larger scale, is recommended.
1
Table of Contents
Abstract ................................................................................................................................................. 1
List of Tables ........................................................................................................................................ 3
List of Figures ....................................................................................................................................... 3
Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................ 4
1. Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 5
1.1 Structure of Paper .................................................................................................................... 7
2. Literature Review ........................................................................................................................... 8
2.1 A Dis-United Kingdom ............................................................................................................. 8
2.2 The Role of Local Government ............................................................................................... 9
2.3 Climate change adaptation policy integration.................................................................. 11
2.4 Facilitating adaptation .......................................................................................................... 12
3. Methodology .................................................................................................................................. 13
3.1 Case Study Method ................................................................................................................. 13
3.2 Data Collection Method ......................................................................................................... 15
3.3 Data Analysis ........................................................................................................................... 17
3.4 Challenges and Limitations of Research Design ............................................................... 17
4. Results and Discussion ................................................................................................................ 18
4.1 General Recognition of Adaptation within Planning Policies and Strategies ............. 18
4.2 Drivers for the Integration of Adaptation in Planning Policies and Strategies .......... 20
4.2.1 Statutory Duties, Legislation, Policy and Guidance .................................................. 20
4.2.2 Geographical Situation ................................................................................................... 22
4.2.3 Experiencing Extreme Weather Events and their Impacts ..................................... 23
4.2.4 Working and Communicating with Others ................................................................. 25
4.2.5 Voluntary Declarations .................................................................................................. 27
4.3 Barriers for the Integration of Adaptation in Planning Policies and Strategies ........ 29
4.3.1 Lack of Statutory Duties, Regulations and Frameworks ......................................... 29
4.3.2 Prioritisation .................................................................................................................... 31
4.3.4 Viability ............................................................................................................................. 32
2
4.4 Will we see the end of the adaptation-mitigation dichotomy? ...................................... 33
5. Does Scotland set an example for England? The Conclusion................................................ 35
References Cited ................................................................................................................................ 36
Appendix 1.......................................................................................................................................... 45
Appendix 2............................................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
List of Tables
Table 1 - The main Scottish and English legislation and national planning policy and
guidance.
Table 2 - The main functions which were originally devolved to the Scottish Parliament
(Keating 1998).
Table 3 - Scottish local authority case studies
Table 4 –English local authority case studies
Table 5 - Local Authority planning policies or strategies which directly acknowledge
climate change adaptation
List of Figures
Figure 1 - A conceptualisation of the links between adaptive capacity and adaptation in
an adaptation readiness framing (Ford and King 2015).
3
Acknowledgements
Firstly I would like to express my sincere gratitude to all the respondents who took the
time to participate in this research,I realise how stretched those who work in local
government are at the moment.
I would also like to thank my dissertation supervisor David Demeritt for all of his
guidance and tips on how to carry out this research project. I would also like to thank
Kristen Guida of Climate South East who also kindly offered guidance and thoughts,
especially at the beginning of the project.
Finally, I would like to thank all of my family and friends who have offered endless
amounts of support and love throughout this whole year; I probably would not have
been able to do this without you!
4
1. Introduction
Both human and natural systems are at risk from future climate change (Walker et al.
2014). Evidence shows that it is highly likely that there will be significant unavoidable
climatic changes throughout this century regardless of the success of any efforts to curb
greenhouse gas emissions (Wilson 2006). Traditionally, the scientific and political
attention surrounding the development of climate change policy has focused primarily
on mitigation efforts rather than adaptation despite the growing body of evidence
which emphasises the urgent requirement for adaptation strategies (Biesbroeket al.
2009). However, climate change policy is now starting to shift, as governments are
being forced to re-think about the way they are managing their environmental resource
management systems and focus not only on mitigation but also adaptation (Porter et al.
2014; Rijkeet al. 2012).
The recognition of the need for adaptation is present in a number of statutory
requirements and regulatory frameworks in the UK. The Climate Change Act (2008) was
seen as world leading, as it was the first piece of legislation to create a statutory
framework which covered adaptation actions (Massey and Huitema 2013). A year later
the Scottish Government used its devolved legislative powers to produce the parallel
Climate Change (Scotland) Act 2009; a piece of slightly more ambitious legislation
which places additional climate change duties on public bodies in Scotland (Jackson and
Lynch 2011). These Acts and the documents that came out of them aim to facilitate
adaptation.
Adgeret al. (2005, p78) defines adaptation as having the following two dimensions:
(1) “Building adaptive capacity thereby increasing ability of individuals, groups
and organisations to adapt to changes,
(2) Implementing adaptation decisions i.e. transforming that capacity into
action.”
It is the urban areas across the UK which are particularly vulnerable to the risks
associated with the impacts of climate change and these areas need to build their
adaptive capacity and implement adaptation actions (Mees and Driessen 2011). Boyd
5
and Juhola (2014) stress how urban areas are key players in this unprecedented change,
as both contributors to the processes which are causing climate change and sufferers
from the impacts. Careful planning is needed in urban areas so that the people, buildings
and infrastructure are impacted by climate change as little as possible (den Exteret al.
2014).
England and Scotland both have their own primary planning legislation which
subsequently informs the development planning policy and guidance for each of the
regions (Cave et al. 2013). Table 1 shows the legislation and the national planning policy
and guidance which inform the planning policies made by Local Authorities (LA’s). Both
England and Scotland have a planning system that is ‘plan-led’ where planning
applications are accepted on the basis that they conform to what is set out in the LA’s
formal development plans (Cave et al. 2013).
Table 1.The main Scottish and English legislation and national planning policy
and guidance.
Scotland
England
 Town and Country
Planning (Scotland) Act
1997
Planning Act 1990
 Planning and Compulsory
 Planning etc. (Scotland)
Act 2006
Legislation
 Town and Country
Purchase Act 2004
 Planning Act 2008
 Planning (Listed Buildings
and Conservation Areas)
(Scotland) Act 1997
 Historic Environment
(Amendment) Scotland
Act 2011
6
 Localism Act 2011
National planning
 Scottish Planning Policy
policy and
guidance
(SPP)
 The National Planning
Policy Framework (NPPF)
 National Planning
Framework 3 (NPF)
2012
 London Plan*
*for London Boroughs to conform to only
There is a clear gap in the literature for this research project to contribute to. To date
the majority of studies have tended to focus on climate change at a global or
international scale rather than at a local level (Stone et al. 2012), on mitigation rather
than adaptation (Pellinget al. 2008) and it was only recently that the urban climate
change adaptation discourse had gained any kind of momentum in the political and
scientific arena (Birkmannet al. 2010). Furthermore, whilst there have been studies
comparing local level adaptation in England with various other countries (e.g. Mees and
Driessen 2011; Bulkeley and Kern 2006), there have been few detailed studies
conducted comparing Scottish and English climate change adaptation at local levels.
The aim of this research is to compare how, why and to what extent climate change
adaptation is integrated into the planning policies and strategies of Scottish local
authorities compared to that in English local authorities. It is hoped that this research
will identify the differences and similarities in the various drivers and barriers that local
authorities are faced with. To reach this aim the following objectives were set out:
(1) To identify the level of adaptation policy integration within planning policies
and strategies of Scottish and English LA’s,
(2) To identify and explore the main drivers and barriers to integrating adaptation
into LA planning policy and strategies in Scotland and England,
(3) To assess the value of Scotland’s more stringent approach compared to
England’s more ‘laissez-faire’ attitude to climate change adaptation.
1.1 Structure of Paper
This research is split up into five chapters. Chapter two will delve into the existing
literature surrounding the role local government in Scotland and England has in
7
adapting to climate change, the increasingly disunited kingdom and the concept of
adaptive capacity. Following this the rationale for exploring the integration of
adaptation within the planning sector at a local level will be identified. Chapter three
explains how the research was carried out and the associated methodological
limitations. Chapter four will present the findings of the research and a subsequent
analysis of this data. This is followed by a final discussion and some concluding remarks
in chapter five.
2. Literature Review
2.1 A Dis-United Kingdom
In 2014 Scotland’s deciding vote on a referendum for their independence from the UK
was ‘no’ (Clifford and Morphet 2015b) but the process drew attention to the dramatic
restructuring the UK has seen over the last fifteen years and led to David Cameron
promising to deliver further devolution for Scotland (Clifford and Morphet 2015a). In
1999 the UK saw the establishment of the Scottish Parliament and elected Assemblies
for Wales, Northern Ireland and Wales, which was the biggest change to the UK’s
structure since the Acts of Union in 1707. (Goodwin et al. 2006).
The devolution has allowed the Scottish government to develop policies that meet their
specific needs (Mackinnon 2015) and some of the devolved functions can be seen in
Table 2. In agreement, Keating (2002) also argues that the decentralisation from central
government in Westminster does provide the scope for policy differentiation, allowing
divergence to policy that is more tailored for the specific needs of Scotland.
Although the devolution was meant to stabilise the UK, Jeffrey (2012) says it has instead
seen the four nations drift further apart. On the contrary the Commission on Scottish
Devolution state that “the devolution has been a ‘remarkable and substantial success’”
(Scotland Office 2009).
Table 2.The main functions which were originally devolved to the Scottish
Parliament (Keating 1998).
Health including National Health Service in Scotland
Education and training
8
Local government, social work and housing including local government structure and
finance; housing policy; area regeneration; building control; and the statutory planning
framework
Economic development and transport
The law and home affairs including most civil and criminal law and the criminal justice
and prosecution system
The environment including environmental protection policy and matters relating to air,
land and water pollution; the natural and built heritage; and water supplies, sewerage,
flood prevention and coastal protection
Agriculture, fisheries and forestry including the Scottish Office's existing responsibilities
for promoting agriculture and fisheries in Scotland and those of the Forestry
Commission in Scotland
Sport and the arts including the Scottish Sports Council, the Scottish Arts Council and
the national institutions
Research and statistics in relation to devolved matters
Emerging from the powers enabled by the decentralisation, are some legal
requirements placed on Scottish local authorities which differ to those requirements
placed on English LA’s. The planning and environmental functions of local government
are two devolved functions which have seen different or more advanced legislation
being created (Mackinnon 2015). The Climate Change (Scotland) Act 2009 currently
places a duty on all Public Bodies to act in ways ‘best calculated to deliver any
adaptation programme’ (Scottish Government 2009, pg 27). No such duty is placed on
English Public Bodies in the parallel UK Climate Change Act 2008.
Research has identified the planning system as a key public policy area; bringing
significant opportunities in its abilities to aid the anticipation and prevention of adverse
impacts of climate change (Wilson 2006). Research often brings up questions about how
the planning reformis helping with climate change risks such as flooding and
overheating (TCPA 2011).
2.2 The Role of Local Government
9
Government “has traditionally been seen as the locus of governing – defining and
orchestrating collective goals and actions – within society” (Bulkeley and Kern 2006,
p2238). In the UK, government is comprised of a number of hierarchal levels and
devolved nations, which includes the devolved nation of Scotland (DCLG 2015). The
traditional relationship that central government has with local government within the
UK is governed by the legal doctrine ‘ultra vires’ where LA’s are not allowed to do
anything they aren’t statutorily authorised to do (Bulkeley and Kern 2006; Wilson and
Game 2002).
In Scotland there is a very much centralised political system, and local government is a
devolved responsibility there (Porter et al. 2014; DCLG 2015 ). In England however, the
increasing attention on local government action has been demonstrated by the Localism
Act introduced in 2011 by the coalition government (Revell 2013). The Localism Act
intends to transfer powers away from central government towards local government
and the local people, enabling LA’s to innovate during tough financial times, whilst
weakening the traditional ‘ultra vires’ doctrine (DCLG 2011; Kuhlmannet al. 2015).
However there are criticisms about the localism movement, mainly resulting from a
continuing lack of clarity about what the term ‘localism’ actually means (Padley
2013).There are also arguments that there has been a failure to recognise that central
government itself is the main barrier to the development of localism and no financing
system to sustain localism (Jones and Stewart 2012).
In Scotland all of the LA’s are single-tier Unitary Authorities whereas in England the
structure varies more with LA’s divided into single-tier authorities, which consist of
Metropolitan Authorities, London Boroughs and Unitary Authorities, and two-tier
authorities which consist of County Councils and District Council (FOE 2002).
Adaptation is an issue which is relevant at international, national and local levels
(Adgeret al. 2005) and there is a substantial body of literature in agreement; stating that
adaptation it is a multi-level problem (Bulkeley and Newell 2010) and a multi-sectoral
problem (Walker et al. 2014).
Atkinson (2013) states how LA’s in particular can play a key and crucial role in
promoting sustainability overall at a local level, which was particularly recognised at
the Rio Summit in 1992 which saw the creation of the Local Agenda 21 initiative
10
(Atkinson 2013). It is therefore well recognised that local government itself has a vital
role to play in how society adapts to climate change (Hoppe et al. 2014; den Exteret al.
2014). LA’s are well placed to deliver key adaptation actions (ref needed). They serve as
leaders and decision-makers of the local community, as employers for a significant
percentage of the local population, and as providers or procurers of local services and
goods (Wilson 2006).
The importance of LA’s in addressing climate change has also been seen in both
Scotland and England in the form of voluntary declarations; the Scottish Climate Change
Declaration and the Nottingham Declaration, which has now been succeeded by Climate
Local (Revell 2013).
2.3 Climate change adaptation policy integration
Climate change adaptation is important at all government levels (Raukenet al. 2015).
Mickwitzet al. (2009) argues the importance of incorporating the aims of both climate
change mitigation and climate change adaptation into both environmental and nonenvironmental policy sectors. Raukenet al. (2015) highlight the importance of this
integrating or ‘mainstreaming’ of climate change adaptation into policy. ‘Mainstreaming’
originated from the concept of Environmental Policy Integration (EPI) which involves
the movement of environmental issues so that they are at the centre of decision making
(EEA 2005). Climate Policy Integration (CPI) then emerged alongside EPI although has
received a lot less attention in the literature (Adelle and Russel 2013).
There is a growing recognition that for the successful implementation of adaptation
measures, cross-sectoral integration of adaptation policies is required (Klein et al.
2005). Walker et al. (2013) suggest that cross-sectoral policy integration is a central
element in increasing institutional capabilities for dealing with climate change
effectively. Likewise Raukenet al. (2015) found that municipalities that chose a crosssectoral approach for developing climate change adaptation policy, ended up with more
robust policy development than those municipalities that chose a vertical sector
approach. Robust policy development is important in order to achieve coherence
(Raukenet al. 2015).
11
2.4 Facilitating adaptation
Adaptive capacity is a concept which underlies the adaptation research and policy
debate (Ford and King 2015) and there have been a number of key studies undertaken
regarding the elements of adaptive capacity and how it is defined (e.g. Smit and Wandel
2006; Pellinget al. 2008; Hinkel 2011). An organisation may have adaptive capacity but
translating that into actual adaptation action is often a challenge as demonstrated by
Figure 1 from a study by Ford and King (2015).
Figure 1.A conceptualisation of the links between adaptive capacity and
adaptation in an adaptation readiness framing (Ford and King 2015).
There are various factors which facilitate or limit adaptation (Amundsen et al. 2010).
12
Studies which look into how adaptation is facilitated in local government have found a
number of commonly occurring factors. Frequently documented facilitating factors
include strong political support (Allman et al. 2004), working in partnership (Allman et
al. 2004) and external shocks (Amundsen et al. 2010). On the other hand, commonly
documented factors which limit adaptation include a lack of statutory framework to
incentivise (Revell 2013), lack of resources (Porter et al. 2014), lack of information
(Meashamet al. 2011) and lack of commitment from councillors (Allman et al. 2004). It
is limiting factors such as these which are the possible reasons for low adaptive capacity
to begin with or for adaptive capacity not being successfully translated into adaptation
action (Eisenacket al. 2014).
3. Methodology
The research design chosen for this study was qualitative in nature, using both primary
and secondary sources which included semi-structured interviews, policy and strategy
document content analysis and a review of the available literature. The comparative
case study design of the research sought cases to bring to light the differences and
similarities in drivers and barriers to integrating climate change adaptation into
planning policies across both Scottish and English local government. Studies such as
Eisenacket al. (2014) have highlighted the significant contribution that comparative
case study research can have on increasing understanding of adaptation dynamics such
as the barriers to climate change adaptation. A grounded theory approach was applied
as an alternative to testing a hypothesis which meant that data collection and analysis
went hand in hand, each referring back to the other on a number of occasions (Bryman
2012).
3.1 Case Study Method
This research uses a purposive sampling method in order for specific cases that were
seen as of particular interest in both Scotland and England, to be looked at in depth
(Cloke et al. 2004). Cases were selected to address the research questions in hand,
ensuring that certain local authorities displaying certain attributes were included in the
study (Berg 2001). Human geography research involving the use of case studies has
become increasingly prominent ever since the mid-1980’s and the method is an
13
excellent way for researchers to retain the holistic and meaningful characteristics of
real-life situations (Castree 2005; Yin 2002).
The desired criteria for each local authority case to meet were as follows:
(1) Single-tier authority,
(2) Urban.
It was important that all cases were of the same local government system because
Scotland is solely made up of Unitary Authorities; therefore English cases were chosen
of the same nature to enable close comparison. It was also decided that only urban local
authorities would be studied, not only to focus the comparison but also because urban
areas are a hotspot of high risk (Birkmannet al. 2010). Particular cases were chosen in
order to display the wide spectrum of climate change adaptation progress seen in local
authorities across England and Scotland. Table 3 shows the rationale for each of the
Scottish local authorities that were chosen, which largely came about through the sifting
through of the most recent Scottish Climate Change Declaration reports and the
environment and planning strategies and policies of the council which could be found
on each individual local authority website.
Table 3. Scottish local authority case studies
Local Authority
Type
Rationale for Case Study
Dundee City Council
Unitary
Appeared to lag behind in terms of
Authority
commitments to climate change
adaptation.
One of the four large cities in Scotland.
Responsible for a regional Strategic
Development Plan.
East Renfrewshire
Unitary
Appeared to lag behind in terms of
Council
Authority
commitments to climate change
adaptation.
Renfrewshire Council
Unitary
Appeared to lead ahead in terms of
Authority
commitments to climate change
adaptation.
West Dunbartonshire
Unitary
Appeared to lead ahead in terms of
14
Council
Authority
commitments to climate change
adaptation.
Table 4 shows the rationale for each of the English local authorities that were chosen.
Due to the larger number of LA’s in England, sifting through each one’s environment
and planning strategies and policies was not feasible. Therefore English LA’s choices
were originally steered by consulting the climate change adaptation NI-188 levels from
before the framework was abolished. Although NI-188 data is outdated, it offered a
starting point for finding LA’s that either stood out as making significant progress in
planning to adapt to climate change or stood out as having there was little evidence of
progress at all.
Table 4. English local authority case studies
Local Authority
Type
Rationale for Case Study
Hull City Council
Unitary
Appeared to lead ahead in terms of
Authority
commitments to climate change
adaptation.
Climate Local signatory.
London Borough of
London
A London Borough that appeared to lag
Barnet
Borough
behind in terms of commitments to
climate change adaptation.
Not a signatory of Climate Local.
Royal Borough of
London
A London Borough that appeared to lead
Kensington & Chelsea
Borough
in terms of its commitments to climate
change adaptation.
Climate Local Signatory.
Reading Borough
Unitary
Appeared to lag behind in terms of
Council
Authority
commitments to climate change
adaptation.
Not a signatory of Climate Local
3.2 Data Collection Method
15
Local authority policies and strategies from the environmental and planning divisions of
the council were gathered and in fashion with grounded theory, the content analysis of
the policy and strategic documents began towards the beginning of the research process
and continued until the end.
Nine in-depth interviews focusing on climate change adaptation and planning policy
were conducted with participants from suitable departments within the local
authorities. Interviews were requested with officials with influencing powers from the
local authority’s planning teams and also the environmental or climate change teams if
there was a team of that nature present within the LA. Initial contact was made with
participants via phone calls rather than through email, as the volume of emails that
officials in local authorities receive meant there was a high likelihood of a very low
response rate. Phone call enquiries were followed up with an email to organise a
suitable time for the telephone interview to take place and further information was
provided in the form of a participant information sheet and a participant consent form.A
semi-structured interview protocol was used to allow a focus on the issues deemed
important for the research whilst allowing leeway for following up on what the
participant deemed as important, therefore making better use of the knowledgeproducing potentials of dialogue (Brinkmann 2013).
Telephone interviews were conducted for general ease as participants were located
across the whole of the UK and conducting face-to-face interviews would have been
timely and less cost-effective (Sturges and Hanrahan 2004). Other reported advantages
of using this method are that it increases the participant’s perception of anonymity and
also allows them to “remain on their own turf” which ensures they are relaxed and
comfortable (Greenfield et al. 2000; McCoyd and Kerson 2006, p. 399). The interviews
were audio-recorded so that they could be transcribed at a later stage and verbatim
quotes from the interview could be used in the analysis as well as allowing full
concentration on the conversation rather than having to write notes (Cloke et al. 2004).
Verbatim quotes are important in order to ensure that the richness of the participants
own language and wording is not lost (Punch 2001).The interviews lasted between 2050 minutes and were largely dependent on the amount of time the participant had
available to talk. It is also worth noting that some participants were significantly more
enthusiastic than others, and wanted to talk for longer than prescribed.
16
3.3 Data Analysis
As one of the key proponents of the grounded theory approach, analysis was
undertaken throughout the data collection stage (Bryman 2012). The individual local
authority policy and strategic documents, which were easily accessible from the website
of the local authority in question, and were analysed for climate change adaptation
content.
Interviews were transcribed by hand immediately after the interview occurred which
meant that analysis occurred almost immediately as themes started to emerge. After
transcription, the data was sifted and sorted (Cloke et al. 2004), coding was undertaken
to highlight certain words and phrases for further analysis and subsequently commonly
occurring themes were identified and significant parallels and contrasts were noted
(Jackson 2001). It was decided that computer aided qualitative data analysis software
(CAQDAS) such as NVivo would not be used to aid analysis of the data (Bryman 2012).
Although there are ample reported advantages for its use, CAQDAS can result in the decontextualisation of the data collected through forced categorisation of the data (St John
and Johnson 2004).
3.4 Challenges and Limitations of Research Design
Various limitations of this methodology design need to be carefully considered. The
most prominent criticism of the case study method is that it has restricted external
validity outside of the cases involved and therefore findings from the research are
unable to be generalised (Bryman 2012).
There were many challenges associated with the recruitment of participants, which was
to be expected given the straining budget cuts and restructurings that UK local
government has faced in recent years (Porter et al. 2014). Originally the preferred
method was to have fewer cases but multiple interviews per case. Getting the
perspective of both an environmental official and a planning official in each local
authority was desired however apart from one instance, it was near impossible to get
more than one participant from each local authority. Many of the potential participants
who were approached apologised and said they would not have the time to participate
17
due to workload commitments, or had to cancel because of unexpected meetings.
Another factor that made recruitment a challenge was that the research was being
carried out in the summer months which meant either the suitable participants were on
annual leave themselves or the team were stretched in terms of resources and time due
to absence of team members. It was also much harder to recruit participants from the
local authorities which appeared to be lagging behind, as there was often nobody
involved in climate change adaptation altogether or, if there was, they were less likely to
want to participate in research of this nature.
Both Novick (2008) and Berg (2001) express concerns that telephone interviews
deprive the researcher of the non-verbal visual cues that face-to-face interviews
provide, fearing that it could compromise rapport and interpretation of responses
given. Therefore there could have been some merit in undertaking face-to-face
interviews, however due to geographical location this was not a viable method.
Fortunately it was found that various verbal cues picked up over the telephone, such as
changes in expression, hesitation and laughter, were adequate for determining the
direction the interviews should move in (Berg 2001).
4. Results and Discussion
4.1 General Recognition of Adaptation within Planning Policies and Strategies
The development plans and strategies of each LA case were reviewed to see the extent
of the inclusion of adaptation and resilience within the planning function. Table 5 shows
the policies and strategies relating to adaptation that were present. The policies and
strategies included in the table below are those that directly mention climate change
adaptation and it doesn’t include the policies that could be indirectly applied to the
concept of adaptation.
Table 5. Local Authority planning policies or strategies which directly
acknowledge climate change adaptation
Local Authority
Planning Document
Policy
Dundee City
Dundee Local Development
18

Policy 7: High Quality Design
Council
Plan 2014-2019
East
East Renfrewshire Local
Renfrewshire
Development Plan 2015

Policy E4: Flooding

Economic Development
Council
Renfrewshire
Renfrewshire Local
Development Plan New
Criteria
Development

Places Development Criteria
Supplementary Guidance

Environment Development
2014
Criteria
West
The proposed Local
Dunbartonshire
Development Plan 2015
Hull City

Policy DS1: Developing
Sustainability
New Local Plan currently in development
London Borough
Barnet’s Local Plan
of Barnet
(Development Management
Barnet’s character and
Policies) 2012
amenity

The London Plan

Policy DM01: Protecting
Policy 5.3 Sustainable
Design and Construction
Royal Borough
Consolidated Local Plan 2015

Policy CE 1 Climate Change
The London Plan

Policy 5.3 Sustainable
of Kensington
and Chelsea
Design and Construction
Reading
None
Wilson (2006) found that the analysis of development plans in Scottish and English LA’s
showed that the acknowledgement of climate change impacts was mainly restricted to
issues of flood risk which is still the case now demonstrated by the findings in this
research ten years on from the Wilson study. Likewise the results of this research can
conclude the same thing. Whilst as can be seen from Table 5 there are few policies
which actually integrate adaptation into them, every LA in both Scotland and England
had flooding policies and Strategic Urban Drainage polices – they just didn’t necessarily
say they were there as a result of climate change.
19
The Flood Risk Management (Scotland) Act 2009 places a statutory duty on Scottish
LA’s to reduce flood risk, which has led to the inclusion of flooding policy within Scottish
LA development plans (The Scottish Government 2015b). Likewise in England, the Lead
Local Flood Authorities which are County councils and Unitary Authorities, have a
statutory duty under the Flood Water Management Act 2010 to undertake a number of
local flood risk management activities (LGA 2012).
The interviews with officials within the local authorities of Scotland and England
provided a subsequent in-depth understanding of the reasons behind the extent of the
integration of adaptation into the planning function within their LA’s.
4.2 Drivers for the Integration of Adaptation in Planning Policies and Strategies
The in-depth interviews shed light on the drivers and motivations that Scottish and
English LA’s are faced with. The main drivers, some of which are common to both
Scotland and England, are as follows:
4.2.1 Statutory Duties, Legislation, Policy and Guidance
The findings show that respondents from all of the Scottish LA’s reported that the
Climate Change (Scotland) Act 2009 is a key driver in ensuring adaptation is somewhat
of a priority. The Act works well, adding more stringent requirements to the UK-wide
Climate Change Act 2008 and ensuring “development choices are more resilient” (R4).
However R1 states “some of the terminology in the Act is a bit woolly to say the least”
with its vagueness leaving things up for interpretation and “how the Act is enacted or
driven at a local level is another issue”. However this issue may start to be resolved with
a new set of reporting requirements for LA’s which are being introduced primarily as a
means to improve the quality and consistency of climate change information (The
Scottish Government 2015a).
All respondents mentioned the recent consultation on the introduction of a statutory
climate change reporting requirement which when passed will come into action in 2016
(The Scottish Government 2015a). Whilst there is still some uncertainty surrounding
how the new statutory duties will unfold (R4), this new mandatory reporting should
make the Act even stronger and iron out any doubts some of the respondents had about
its abilities to positively influence LA’s to adapt. R2 believes that the new mandatory
20
reporting requirement will drive adaptation forward as all of the LA’s will want to
report as positively as possible each year. The reporting requirement will give the
legislation “a bit more credence” (R1).
R3 states how they feel the main motivation for their LA – Dundee – to integrate
adaptation into planning policy is the strong legislative process involved in the national
planning policies as well as the Climate Change (Scotland) Act to a certain extent.
TheScottish respondents were in agreement that the NPF and SPP are doing a sufficient
job in raising the awareness of the need for climate change adaptation policy
integration. However R2 does voice concerns:
“Whether that [the increased awareness of the need for adaptation] is actually translating
into the policies of the local plans, I’m not sure (…) it’s just not really filtering down.”
Unlike Scotland which has stronger statutory duties for climate change, England simply
has the Climate Change Act 2008. All of the respondents from English LA’s think that the
Climate Change Act 2008 is a good Act, though some were more enthusiastic than
others. This Act could be seen as having provided the impotentpush to make sure
climate change is recognised and addressed. It is worth noting the good things that have
come about as a result of the Act, the Climate Change Risk Assessment (CCRA) and the
National Adaptation Programme (NAP), “which both could be stronger but they are very
effective documents” (R6).
However in terms of the Climate Change Act’s ability to directly influence planning
policy, there were mixed views. R9 feels the Act does something positive but “it’s mainly
seen as guidance rather than something statutory or a legally binding obligation” for LA’s
to follow. R8 expresses the view that the Climate Change Act hasn’t made adaptation a
priority within the planning function of LA’s.
The NPPF is lacking a specific adaptation requirement (R8) but R7 argues that by simply
putting the topic of adaptation in the framework, it is going to increasingly catch the
attention of LA’s as they now know they have an obligation now to meet particular
standards. There is lots of room for improvement regarding the NPPF for example it
could push the integration of adaptation into planning policy by having “a closer link
between the National Adaptation Programme and the NPPF” (R6). R9 however speaks
positively of the NPPF stating that the reason adaptation is included within Reading
21
Borough Council’s Local Development Framework is because of the guidance which is
set out in the NPPF.
The two London borough cases, Barnet and RBKC, have to abide by the requirements
set out in the London Plan in addition to the national requirements. The view on the
effectiveness of the London Plan in ensuring adaptation is integrated into planning
policy, was mixed. Interestingly, R7 of Barnet thinks the London Plan is effective and it
acts as a good marker and will become especially useful given the abolishment of Code
for Sustainable Homes (CfSH). On the other hand, R8 argues that its’ effectiveness is
pretty poor and it has no influence in ensuring adaptation is integrated into their LA
planning policy. This difference in opinion could be due to the differing job roles of the
respondents. R7 is a Senior Planning Officer whilst R8 is an Environmental Projects
Officer and the latter would probably be more adaptation focused as that is there
primary role.
4.2.2 Geographical Situation
The findings show that the geographical situation of the area in which the LA resides is
a motivation for increased adaptation efforts. The location of a populated settlement
determines the vulnerability and risk to individuals, communities and the local
economy (Laukkonenet al. 2009). The LA cases chosen across both Scotland and
England display a variety of geographical characteristics ranging from being situated on
coastal fronts, in river flood plains, and in low lying areas compared to some LA cases
which sit a distance away from those higher risk areas. The LA’s that are situated in
close proximity to the coast, rivers and estuaries tend to have already experienced
flooding in the past. This has given them a “historical knowledge on flood management”
(R1) and there is an awareness that they are at risk from the well documented impacts
of climate change such as the flooding which is associated with sea level rises and heavy
rainfall events.
LA’s which particularly stressed the importance of their geographical location as a
driver for the integration of adaptation into planning policy include Dundee City in
Scotland and Hull City in England. R1 of Dundee City emphasises throughout their
interview the issue of having a coastal front location. R6 of Hull City emphasises that
“The whole city is a flood re zone apart from one hill we have in the city so we’re very low
22
lying, we have a high water table so that creates particular problems for the city”.
Consequently this has led to Hull City council to having a very specific requirement for
development set within their planning policy that buildings have to be a certain height
above AOD (Above Ordnance Datum) (R6).
4.2.3 Experiencing Extreme Weather Events and their Impacts
Studies show that urban areas tend to wait until after they are impacted by extreme
weather events in order to develop adaptation policies and strategies because they then
have a sound scientific basis for pushing adaptation up the agenda (Kern and Alber
2008; Lindseth 2005; Walker et al. 2014). This research produces similar findings,
showing ‘reactive adaptation’ in both Scotland and England with the LA’s that have had
either a history of flooding or had experienced extreme weather events in recent years,
having more resources invested in adaptation.
The Scottish LA’s which were originally seen as leading in terms of their efforts towards
adapting, were the ones whose respondents emphasised the experiences the LA’s had
had with flooding in the past (R4; R5). R4 recalls a “particularly bad [flooding] episode
about twenty years ago in a particularly deprived area of Paisley which really brought
adaptation up the agenda”. This trend was not exclusive to LA’s in Scotland, as in the
English cases which were seen as leading ahead – the Royal Borough of Kensington and
Chelsea and Hull City - the respondents reported past experiences of flooding as being a
driver for their investment of resources in adaptation. R8 of the Royal Borough of
Kensington and Chelsea stated that a major flood in 2007 drove their policy on flooding
and R6 of Hull City identified the main challenge of climate change for them as being
flooding, having experienced significant wide-spread impacts of flooding in 2007 as well
as around thirty businesses being affected by the tidal surge in 2013.
In comparison, the English cases which were originally seen as lagging behind on the
adaptation front were the ones that hadn’t experienced any significant impacts from
extreme weather events. In particular the London Borough of Barnet had made the least
adaptation efforts and it could be attributed to an absence of historical flooding
23
experiences or affects from any extreme weather events. R6 mentioned that there are
flood risk areas within Barnet but exclaims:
“Unfortunately we haven’t got an up to date map of where those flood risk areas are!
We’ve got old maps (…) but they need to be updated. They haven’t been updated for some
years now (…), there may be some new ones [flood risk areas] in the Borough which we are
unaware of.”
If there had been significant floods in the area, this would likely not be the scenario.
Similar results to these qualitative findings were produced in a larger quantitative
study, where Amundsen et al. (2010) found there was a clear statistical correlation
between experiencing extreme events and adaptation activity within Norwegian
municipalities and identified it as the key driver for adaptation efforts.
Respondents in this study tended to draw attention to past flooding experiences in the
area more than any other extreme weather impacts, which is similar to what Walker et
al. (2013) found in their study. However the issue of overheating was brought to
attention in a number of the in-depth interviews. Overheating, rather than excessive
cold, is becoming a growing issue for both existing and new buildings and has received
increasing attention over the years (see Roberts 2008b; Gupta and Gregg 2012; Lomas
and Ji 2009). It was identified as a growing key issue only by respondents from English
LA’s, which is likely due to the slightly more temperate climate that England has over
Scotland.
Hull City were the LA that drew the most attention to the overheating issue, and this LA
hasn’t yet had any particular issues around heat waves within the city, though they are
aware that over the coming century it will become a growing issue for them (R6). This
need for an increased awareness of the issue of overheating and that they need to
increase their understanding of how that works was expressed by R6:
“I think in terms of the overheating – because it depends on the type of property/the
occupant all those kind of things it’s a lot harder to develop a clear adaptation solution for
those (….) I think we’re only just starting to understand the extent of overheating within
our homes and what kind of solutions we need to put in place.”
24
To date, most work in the planning and building sectors has been around how buildings
can be made warmer and a worry is emerging regarding the high thermal performance
and airtightness requirements of the zero carbon homes which have been built, raising
particular concerns of overheating risks (Yao and Yu 2012). This lack of attention given
to the problem of overheating is evidenced by the distant lack of its mention within the
planning policy of any of the cases looked at in this research.
4.2.4 Working and Communicating with Others
Working sufficiently with others and communicating effectively both internally within
the LA and externally with key stakeholders, was noted by all respondents in both
England and Scotland as being important for driving forward the integration of
adaptation into planning policy.
Coordination across sectors within LA’s is extremely important in facilitating policy
integration (Walker et al. 2013). To explore the levels of coordination across sectors
within the LA all respondents were asked about the working relationships and levels of
communication between the environmental or climate change team and the planning
team. It was recognised by all respondents that there was room for improvement in the
current coordinating climate within their LA’s.
It seems dialogue and cross sector coordination is improving especially in Scottish LA’s.
It is becoming more common to put across questions from the climate change team to
other areas of the LA such as planning policy and risk and resilience, which is instigating
an improved level of dialogue between some LA areas (R1).In Scotland, this increasing
dialogue is being encouraged through the Scottish Climate Change Declaration (SCCD)
when the yearly reports are produced. Respondents mentioned how this reporting
requirement of the SCCD has increased the dialogue with other colleagues from
different sectors.
The smaller the sizes of the LA’s in Scotland make it easier to speak to people (R1).
However this has a downfall as the smaller the size of the LA, the smaller the budget it
receives. Therefore even though the barrier of lack of communication is overcome by
the size dynamics of the council in question, it will face another barrier in terms of
25
financial constraints. It is the larger LA’s such as Edinburgh and Glasgow which have
access to more resources allowing them to widen out their climate change remit (R1).
The English LA’s which have more adaptation action, have increased coordination and
dialogue between the Environmental or Climate Change team and the Planning team,
with an overall higher understanding of the importance of cross-sector coordination
and dialogue. The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea have applied for funding
for a project which will support LA’s to increase resilience and implement new
adaptation measures and have increased coordination with the planning and housing
departments of the council (R8). Projects such as those as well as regular cross-sectoral
meetings would improve dialogue and be more proactive than the adhoc meetings that
most LA’s claim they have. (R5). The LA’s in England which lack adaptation activity
report that “people just know about their own area, they don’t really know anything about
any other areas at all” (R7). Improving dialogue and coordination internally between
teams ultimately leads to the transferal of knowledge. This has been the case for some
LA’s. Interaction between the Environmental or Climate Change team and Planning
team has decreased over the years as planners have gathered knowledge about
sustainability issues however there is still some level of dialogue but mainly for
technical support or if there is a conflict of interest (R9).
The importance of working in partnership in order to tackle climate change has been
emphasised by central government (HM Government 2010). Whilst all of the
respondents from the Scottish and English cases identified increased dialogue and
greater partnership work as a driver for adaptation, the findings show that Scottish LA’s
undertake partnership work to a much greater extent than English LA’s.R5 states the
importance of partnership work for adaptation:
“It can help raise it on the council’s agenda and those partnership organisations can
maybe lead an area which the council aren’t as comfortable leading or wouldn’t naturally
lead themselves”.
In Scottish LA’s more and more actions on climate change adaptation are being
undertaken in partnership with other public sector bodies and charities in the area
(R1). This was seen less so in the English cases within this study, however research
does state the importance of partnership work in English LA’s as working alongside
26
local businesses, community groups and third sector organisation can lead to the
development of cohesive strategies (Atkinson 2013). Although in Scotland overall there
is still not much more adaptation seen within the planning policy, adaptation action in
general is a lot higher than in England. This could be largely down to their increased
partnership work. Working in partnership cold eventually lead to conditions that enable
adaptation to be pushed up the agenda and included in planning policy. A study by
Imperial (2005) concluded that collaboration is essential for enhancing effective
governance and that organisations very rarely accomplish their missions when they act
alone. English LA’s are therefore unlikely to enhance climate change adaptation
integration if they don’t increase their partnership work. Partnerships are easier in
mitigation efforts than adaptation efforts (R1), mainly because of the greater businesscase that mitigation can offer, especially the short-term economic benefits (H M
Government 2010). However it does mean that the knowledge and skills in how to form
effective partnerships is evidently there, it now just needs to be translated across from
mitigation to adaptation.
4.2.5 Voluntary Declarations
All 32 local authorities in Scotland have signed the voluntary SCCD which was
developed in 2006 by the Sustainable Scotland Network (Keep Scotland Beautiful 2015).
All respondents felt that the SCCD was a useful mechanism in aiding cross-sector
coordination of adaptation and resiliency measures. R2 states that “becoming a
signatory is part of the process of raising the profile of the whole climate agenda”. The
SCCD enables coordination at a local level, encouraging dialogue to occur between
different teams within the council, a “synergy” (R4) from the gathering of information.
Both R1 and R4 stressed the successfulness of the declaration due to the annual reports
that the LA’s are required to produce. These reports are a means of detailing the
progress of their individual climate change response within their LA (Keep Scotland
Beautiful 2015). R1 explains the process of the annual reporting:
“[When] we were trying to pull together context and data for the SCCD reports, for a lot of
the questions we didn’t have the data here, so we were speaking to other colleagues and
trying to get some information on what are some of the policies which support climate
change efforts. So what are some of the projects that are ongoing and what is in place,
27
what is planned? So a lot more dialogue came about from having to do those reports, and
(…) then if I need some more detailed case studies or any other data I’ll go to colleagues in
particular [to] get that information.”
The final report allows for many “opportune areas that don’t really meet (…) to be
brought together” (R4), enabling other members of staff within the LA and the
councillors to be able to see how these areas across the breadth of the organisation,
such as planning, biodiversity, flood risk and health, are dealing with adaptation (R1;
R4).
The Nottingham Declaration, a voluntary declaration which was signed by the large
majority of LA’s in England, was succeeded by Climate Local in 2012 (Revell 2013). Two
of the English case studies in this research, Hull City Council and the Royal Borough of
Kensington and Chelsea, are current signatories of this initiative. Coincidentally they are
the two English LA’s which appeared to lead ahead in terms of climate change
adaptation. Climate Local is different to the Nottingham Declaration as it has got more
resources behind it, with the Local Government Association (LGA) closely involved with
it and as well as the Environment Agency (R6). R6 also feels it “has a much more flexible
approach than the Nottingham Declaration which was quite rigid (…) it’s more appealing
to LA’s of different sizes and it has struck a nice balance between being flexible and also
having the requirements that need to be met as a signatory”.
Climate Local is bottom up declaration just like the Nottingham Declaration (Bale et al.
2012) but with only 102 signatories as of April 2015 (UKCIP 2015) it has less than a
third of the signatories that its former had, which means nearly two thirds of English
LA’s have not signed up. This is a stark contrast to Scotland’s version of this declaration,
the SCCD, where every LA in Scotland is a signatory, though it must be noted how fewer
LA’s Scotland has, compared to England. R6 suggests that the reason behind certain LA’s
not signing up to Climate Local, could be an issue of resources where there is simply not
the staffing capacity to look into such activities. This issue of staffing capacity is
evidenced by R9 who was unsure of the reason why their LA hadn’t signed Climate
Local; it just has never even been discussed. However it’s probably likely that it can be
attributed to the fact that Reading BC has been hit by harsh budget cuts and have had to
reduce their capacity for sustainability, with their team consequently being reduced by
28
half (R9). R7 hadn’t even heard of Climate Local but this could be attributed to the fact
that are a planning officer, so dealings of climate change extending beyond that which
impacts planning and development, was probably out of their remit and job description.
One participant described the membership of Climate Local as “very spasmodic across
the country” with “large parts of the country where LA’s are not members [of climate
local]” (R6). They also stated that the declaration provided a benchmark so it is known
where there is, or can be expected to be, adaptation activity taking place within the LA
(R6).
R6 argues that Climate Local is a driver of adaptation and resiliency as the risk
assessments which are part of the requirement of Climate Local gave the LA an “extra
emphasis” to adapt and become resilient as well as giving more of a “physical
endorsement”. R8 explains how due to being a recent signatory of Climate Local, the
declaration itself hasn’t had much of a driving effect on their current planning policy.
However they do believe it will have a positive influence in the future, aiding dialogue
between the Environmental and Planning teams in order to meet the reporting
requirements of Climate Local (R8).
The in-depth interviews reveal there was a lot more positive views about the success of
the voluntary climate change initiative in Scotland than there was for the English
initiative. R6 did emphasis the need to reach out to LA’s in England to increase the
signatories of Climate Local. Perhaps if all LA’s were signatories it would make Climate
Local a more influencing declaration. With the lack of statutory framework in England
(Revell 2013), a successful voluntary initiative has the potential to play an important
role in supporting LA’s in adapting to climate change. A study by Heidrichet al. (2013)
which compared the climate preparedness of urban areas in the UK, attributed the good
scores of the Scottish LA’s to the effectiveness of the reporting requirements of the
SCCD. Voluntary declarations are seen to have a variety of positive characteristics,
primarily their flexible nature and secondarily the non-contractual commitments of the
declaration are much easier to revise than legislation (Thalmann and Baranzini 2004).
4.3 Barriers for the Integration of Adaptation in Planning Policies and Strategies
29
The in-depth interviews also helped to identify the barriers that Scottish and English
LA’s are faced with. The main barriers, some of which are common to both Scotland and
England, are found to be as follows:
4.3.1 Lack of Statutory Duties, Regulations and Frameworks
English LA respondents stated that the lack of statutory requirements was a key barrier
for enabling adaptation actions. However in England it hasn’t always been that way. In
2007 a National Performance Framework was set up with 198 performance indicators
for LA’s to choose their priority indicators as they wished (Cooper and Pearce 2011).
Three of the 198 performance indicators related to climate change with National
Indicator 188 (NI-188) ‘Planning to adapt to climate change’ designed to motivate LA’s
to start prioritising adaptation (Cooper and Pearce 2011). Unfortunately the framework
along with all the indicators was abolished as part of the localism movement brought in
by the coalition government (Porter et al. 2014).
All English LA respondents noted that at the time the NI-188 was a key driver for local
action on adaptation for LA’s, a positive means in mainstreaming adaptation, and that
it’s abolishment was a significant step backwards in getting climate change adaptation
up the agenda. NI-188 “helped LA’s to look into adaptation actions in more detail” (R9)
and without it there is no means to “assess the progress the LA is making” (R7).It “helped
to find which areas needed to incorporate adaptation into their normal policies at an
operational level” (R9) and “the main issue is that it hasn’t been replaced by anything
else!” (R8).
The loss of the NI-188 process is a “real shame” (R8). It leaves some important gaps that
were previously addressed by the process such as incorporating the use of higher
design specifications and measures to reduce the susceptibility of existing building to
over-heating (CLASP 2011). The indicator used a five-point scale to assess the
performance of LA’s (Porter et al. 2014) and has therefore taken away the ability to
make direct comparisons with other LA’s. However there is a well-documented divide of
opinion regarding the success level of NI-188 when it was around. Pearce and Cooper
(2013) found that officials saw the adaptation indicator as undemanding and reflected
the view that the adaptation agenda wasn’t any sort of priority. Similarly a study by
30
Porter et al. (2014) recorded a divided opinion over whether targets like NI-188 were
useful in overcoming adaptation barriers.
This lack of statutory duties and a poor history of building regulation has encroaching
consequences as overheating in buildings is becoming an increasing problem in the
existing buildings. R6 states that if the right Building Regulations were in place that
could solve the problem of overheating in new build.As a result of the recent Housing
Standards reform, the Code for Sustainable Homes (CfSH) has been removed (Oldfield
2015). The abolishment of the CfSH was noted as an extreme disadvantage with
respondent saying its removal “was a real kick in the teeth (…) especially as it was a
national building standard that everyone knew about (…) and now that the government
has taken it away it’s kind of like a free for all at the moment (…) it’s a major disadvantage
for us” (R7).
R9 argues that unless there were very specific requirements from central government
to make adaptation statutory for example, then none of the barriers that LA’s commonly
face are going to be able to be overcome any time in the near future.
4.3.2 Prioritisation
Unfortunately even if local government in the UK wasn’t facing the extreme budget cuts
that it is, the process of prioritisation would still have to occur in order to allocate
available funds to the areas within the LA which are deemed most important, normally
looking at it in the short term rather than long-term (Walker et al. 2014). The majority
of the respondents across both Scottish and English LA’s identified prioritisation as one
of the main barriers to the inclusion of adaptation within their LA planning policy,
regardless of the level of adaptation action seen within the LA. This is a similar finding
to a study by Walker et al. (2013) who found that the low prioritisation of adaptation
within the transport planning sector was not exclusive to the LA’s which had a low
integration of adaptation action as it was also found to be a key barrier for the LA’s
which were found to have a high integration. There are many areas that are much
higher up the agenda than adaptation presently for LA’s, such as economic development
and regeneration (R5), mitigation (R8; R9) and social care (R9).
31
Getting adaptation noticed as a priority is a challenge as it is a difficult issue to sell to
the councillors (R1); an issue found in Scottish LA’s as well as in England despite the
more stringent requirements in Scotland.“Councillors tend to think in four year cycles so
getting them to think far ahead is very difficult” (R1) therefore getting adaptation high
up on the list of priorities is highly unlikely. Political views within the council therefore
influence the process of prioritisation. In England as there are no statutory duties for
climate change adaptation unlike Scotland, adaptation is an area which is easy to cut the
budget of (Porter et al. 2014) and R9 notes that “unless an adaptation measure produces
very very tangible benefits that can be realised in the very short-term” it’s an issue that is
simply not going to get prioritised.R5 suggests that perhaps an increase in partnership
work could push it higher up the LA’s agenda as a priority forcing politicians to see the
tangible benefits of adaptation.
The lower the priority of adaptation within a council, the less resource and attention
will be given to it compared to other sectors within the LA (Walker et al. 2014). All
respondents highlighted the budget cuts and consequential financial constraints they
are facing with “no significant budgets available at all for adaptation projects” (R5).
Budget cuts have equated to redundancies in Environmental and Climate Change teams
across English LA’s with respondents from the English cases highlighting their
diminishing teams and consequential diminishing capacity to deal with climate change
adaptation. That is also consistent with findings from Green Alliance (2011) who also
report climate-related staff redundancies as a result of budget cuts and competing
agendas. Small teams as a result of redundancies and budget cuts, become a barrier
even if there is adaptation policy in place. This is reiterated by R7 who states “it’s all
well and good frameworks in place but then you need the resources to go and check
whether people are complying with the standards that you are setting out there (…) and
we’re only a small team”.
4.3.4 Viability
The issue of viability was brought up by respondents from both leading and lagging LA’s
in England and Scotland suggesting it is a key barrier that is not exclusive to the LA’s
which are struggling to integrate adaptation into planning policy.It’s an issue where
“there is pressure from the development sector, looking for housing sites that are easier to
32
develop and in more desirable locations” (R4) and LA’s are “under pressure to consider
certain sites” (R4) especially due to low land values. However the decision on which
sites to use for building developments is critical as the siting will affect the occupiers’
lives for businesses for generations to come (Betts 2011).
It’s a question of what policies could be implemented that would actually make a
difference and would benefit the planning process rather than be a restriction for
development. R1 notes that a major issue and stresses that there are “political barriers
with that in terms of some of the policies are seen as too restrictive to attract investment
you may come across barriers from officers before you’ve even got the policies enacted or
councillors at that approval stage.” Having adaptation measures as a compulsory
requirement is difficult to do due to low land values which mean “the ability to make a
profit on new build is squeezed anyway as new build house prices are low (…) which really
effects what you can put in your planning policies” (R6). As R6 argues “you can certainly
encourage and persuade developers to put adaptation measures into developments in
addition” but making it a compulsory requirement brings with it questions of viability.
The planning reform in collaboration with the localism movement (TCPA 2011) and the
recent housing standards review which was launched by the Department for
Communities and Local Government (DCLG) in 2013 was a way to reduce bureaucracy
and the cost of housing development (Manders and Landy 2013). The government
proposes a ‘Building regulations only’ approach in order to reduce complexity and red
tape for builders (Manders and Landy 2013). As a result CfSH has been abolished and
the Zero Carbon Homes standards were scrapped (Oldfield 2015). This is bad news for
dealing with the growing problem of overheating as both those standards included
provisions to tackle overheating in buildings (Zero Carbon Hub 2015).
4.4 Will we see the end of the adaptation-mitigation dichotomy?
The “majority of climate policy developed by urban planners is focused on mitigation”
(Mees and Driessen 2011 p.252). This was certainly the conclusion that could be made
from this research. The most common discussion point throughout the entire run of indepth interviews with the LA respondents, was the issue of more resources being put
into mitigation efforts than adaptation efforts. This skewed attention towards
mitigation and away from adaptation is known in the literature as the ‘adaptation33
mitigation dichotomy’ (Biesbroeket al. 2009) and skew in the direction toward
mitigation is widely reported (Hoppe et al. 2014). Various studies have clarified that
mitigation actions remain more advanced than any adaptation plans (Heidrichet al.
2013).
The findings from this research are consistent with Heidrichet al. (2013) findings where
they analysed climate change documents from thirty urban areas across the UK found
that adaptation activity was less advanced than mitigation activity throughout all the
urban areas in the sample. However Hoppe et al. (2014) argue that LA’s should be
spending significant time, effort and portions of their budgets on local climate change
policy efforts which pay sufficient attention to both mitigation and adaptation,
especially as adaptation is widely regarded as a much more local issue than mitigation
is.
Klein et al. (2005) stress that due to the characteristics of the climate change problem,
striking the balance between mitigation and adaptation will be particularly challenging.
Striking a business case for adaptation that is on a similar level to the mitigation
business case is hard but many of the respondents were in agreement that framing
climate change adaptation as resiliency or something else altogether may present a way
to facilitate an increasing business case. Furthermore some respondents stated that
they felt their LA had utilised this method of framing adaptation differently in order to
aid policy integration. Interestingly R1 recalls:
“I did a briefing to the climate change board, chaired by a chief executive and other
councillors sit on the board I took a very brief paper to them and what adaptation means
to them. The comment that I got back from the council is that it’s very useful to have that
and lets do the presentation to other councils but don’t call it adaptation, try and think of
something that’s a bit more interesting.”
Building up a business-case for a plan or project which is long-term in nature is hard
given the seriousness of the short-term housing problems the government are facing at
the moment. To overcome this, some LA’s such as Hull City are making use of a Severe
Weather Impacts Monitoring System (SWIMS) to build a business case for adaptation
(R6). SWIMS was originally developed by Kent County Council and is available
34
nationally for LA’s to use to develop a business case by measuring the costs associated
with severe weather events (Climate UK 2015).
5. Does Scotland set an example for England? The Conclusion
Similar to the findings of Porter et al. (2014) it seems that despite Scotland’s much more
stringent climate change legislation this research project found that it didn’t often
equate to climate change adaptation being enacted on the ground, especially within the
planning function. Scottish and English LA’s shared many of the same drivers for
adapting; the geographical situation, experience of extreme weather events and
voluntary declarations. In Scotland however, the legislative process,the SCCD and their
partnership work are much stronger drivers for adaptation than their English
counterparts. Scottish and English LA’s also shared the majority of the same barriers;
prioritisation and viability of developments being the main ones. A lack of statutory
duties for England was commonly noted as a main barrier for English LA’s which was
not similar to the Scottish case.
In England especially, without the support of central government, adaptation is not
likely to increase as a priority as budget stricken LA’s do not have the resources to focus
a sufficient amount on any non-statutory duties. Mitigation remains bounds ahead of
adaptation, largely because of the business-case for the measures associated with it. It
seems that experiencing the loss and damage incurred from environmental impacts
could be the biggest driver for adaptation. It means that once the LA has faced the brunt
of extreme weather and flood events they would be more likely to invest in the longterm given the climate projections for a higher occurrence of those events in the future
35
(Roberts 2008a).There could perhaps be a lot to learn from Scandinavian countries like
Copenhagen who have very cold winters but very warm summers. However with the
pressures on the government to provide housing for the rapidly growing population it is
unlikely any housing standards will be placed on the building sector.
There is a distinct lack of literature on the situation in Scotland in terms of the role local
government has there and more specifically about how climate change adaptation is or
isn’t being done. This hampers the ability to make certain valid conclusions from this
research as there is little to compare the results of this to. The sample size of this
research is also too small to make any generalisations. However the case study method
allows for a small number of unique cases to be looked at in more depth and contributes
to a growing understanding in a research area which needs to be expanded.
References Cited
Adelle, C., andRussel, D. (2013) Climate Policy Integration: A Case of Déjà
Vu?.Environmental Policy and Governance, 23 (1), 1-12.
Adger, W. N., Arnell, N. W., and Tompkins, E. L. (2005) Successful Adaptation to Climate
Change Across Scales. Global Environmental Change, 15 (2), 77-86.
Allman, L., Fleming, P., and Wallace, A. (2004) The Progress of English and Welsh Local
Authorities in Addressing Climate Change. Local Environment, 9 (3), 271-283.
Amundsen, H., Berglund, F., and Westskogô, H. (2010) Overcoming Barriers to Climate
Change Adaptation - Question of Multilevel Governance?. Environment and
Planning C: Government and Policy, 28, 276-289.
Atkinson, H. (2013) English Local Authorities and the Fight against Climate
Change.Journal of Management and Sustainability, 3 (3), 46-54.
Bale, C. S. E., Foxon, T. J., Hannon, M. J. and Gale, W. F. (2012) Strategic Energy Planning
Within Local Authorities in the UK: A Study of the City of Leeds. Energy Policy,
48, 242-251.
Berg, B. L. (2001) Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences. 4th ed. Needham
Heights: Allyn and Bacon.
36
Betts, R. (2011) Can Climate Science Help?.Solace, July 2011, 6-8.
Biesbroek, G. R., Swart, R. J., and Van der Knaap, W. G. (2009) The Mitigation–
adaptation Dichotomy and the Role of Spatial Planning. Habitat
International,33 (3), 230-237.
Birkmann, J., Garschagen, M., Kraas, F., andQuang, N. (2010) Adaptive Urban
Governance: New Challenges for the Second Generation of Urban Adaptation
Strategies to Climate Change. Sustainability Science, 5 (2), 185-206.
Boyd, E., and Juhola, S. (2014) Adaptive Climate Change Governance for Urban
Resilience. Urban Studies, 1-31.
Brinkmann, S. (2013) Qualitative Interviewing. New York: Oxford University Press.
Bryman, A. (2012) Social Research Methods. 4thed. New York: University Press.
Bulkeley, H., and Kern, K. (2006) Local Government and the Governing of Climate
Change in Germany and the UK. Urban Studies, 43 (12), 2237-2259.
Castree, N. (2005) The Epistemology of Particulars: Human Geography, Case Studies and
"Context". Geoforum, 36 (5), 541-544.
Cave, S., Rehfisch. A., Smith, L. and Winter, G. (2013) Comparison of the Planning Systems
in the Four UK Countries. Research Paper 13-39. 19 June 2013.
CLASP (2011) Why Bother to do Climate Change Adaptation without NI-188? 1-5.
Clifford, B., andMorphet, J. (2015a) Introduction to Devolution and the Geographies of
Policy. The Geographical Journal, 181 (1), 2-5.
Clifford, B., andMorphet, J. (2015b) A Policy on the Move?Spatial Planning and State
Actors in the Post‐devolutionary UK and Ireland. The Geographical Journal, 181
(1), 16-25.
Climate UK (2015) Severe Weather Impacts Monitoring System (SWIMS.)[Online].
Available at: http://climateuk.net/resource/severe-weather-impactsmonitoring-system-swims [Accessed 26 August 2015].
37
Cooper, S., and Pearce, G. (2011) Climate Change Performance Measurement, Control
and Accountability in English Local Authority Areas. Accounting, Auditing &
Accountability Journal, 24 (8), 1097-1118.
denExter, R., Lenhart, J., and Kern, K. (2014) Governing Climate Change in Dutch Cities:
Anchoring Local Climate Strategies in Organisation, Policy and Practical
Implementation. Local Environment, 20 (9), 1062-1080.
Department for Communities and Local Government (2015) Local Government Financial
Statistics England No. 25 2015. London: DCLG.
denExter, R., Lenhart, J., and Kern, K. (2014) Governing Climate Change in Dutch Cities:
Anchoring Local Climate Strategies in Organisation, Policy and Practical
Implementation. Local Environment, 20 (9), 1062-1080.
Department for Communities and Local Government(2011) A Plain English Guide to the
Localism Bill. Update. London: Department for Communities and Local
Government.
EEA (2005)Environmental Policy Integration in Europe: State of Play and an Evaluation
Framework.Copenhagen: European Environment Agency, EEA Technical Report
No 2/2005.
Eisenack, K., Moser, S. C., Hoffmann, E., Klein, R. J., Oberlack, C., Pechan, A., Rotter, M. and
Termeer, C. J. (2014) Explaining and Overcoming Barriers to Climate Change
Adaptation. Nature Climate Change, 4 (10), 867-872.
FOE (2002) Beginners Guide to Local Authorities in England. London: Friend of the Earth.
Ford, J. D., and King, D. (2013) A Framework for Examining Adaptation
Readiness.Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 20(4), 505526.
Goodwin, M., Jones, M., and Jones, R. (2006) Devolution and Economic Governance in the
UK: Rescaling Territories and Organizations. European Planning Studies, 14 (7),
979-995.
38
Green Alliance (2011) Is Localism Delivering for Climate Change. Emerging Responses
from Local Authorities, Local Enterprise Partnerships and Neighbourhood Plans.
Green Alliance: London.
Greenfield, T.K., Midanik, L.T. and Rogers, J.D. (2000) Effects of Telephone versus Faceto-Face Interview Modes on Reports of Alcohol Consumption, Addiction,95(20),
277–84.
Gupta, R., and Gregg, M. (2012) Using UK Climate Change Projections to Adapt Existing
English Homes for a Warming Climate. Building and Environment, 55, 20-42.
Heidrich, O., Dawson, R. J., Reckien, D., and Walsh, C. L. (2013) Assessment of the Climate
Preparedness of 30 Urban areas in the UK. Climatic Change,120 (4), 771-784.
H.M. Government. (2010) Shaping Our Future- The Joint Ministerial and Third Sector
Task Force on ClimateChange. The Environment and Sustainable Development.
London: HMSO.
Hinkel, J. (2011) “Indicators of vulnerability and adaptive capacity”: Towards a
clarification of the science–policy interface. Global Environmental Change,21
(1), 198-208.
Hoppe, T., van der Berg, M. M. and Coenen, F. H. (2014)Reflections on the Uptake of
Climate Change Policies by Local Governments: Facing the Challenges of
Mitigation and Adaptation. Energy, Sustainability and Society.4 (8), 1-16.
Imperial, M. T. (2005) Using Collaboration as a Governance Strategy Lessons from Six
Watershed Management Programs. Administration & Society, 37 (3), 281-320.
Jackson, P. (2001) Making Sense of Qualitative Data. In: M. Limb, and C. Dwyer, eds.
Qualitative Methodologies for Geographers: Issues and Debates. London: Arnold,
2001, 199-214.
Jackson, T., andLynch, W. (2011) Public Sector Responses to Climate Change: Evaluating
the Role of Scottish Local Government in Implementing the Climate Change
(Scotland) Act 2009. Commonwealth Journal of Local Governance, (8/9) 112135.
39
Jeffery, C. (2012) Dis‐United Kingdom?. Public Policy Research, 19 (1), 14-16.
Jones, G., and Stewart, J. (2012) Local Government: the Past, the Present and the
Future. Public Policy and Administration, 27 (4), 346-367.
Keating, M. (1998) Reforging the Union: Devolution and Constitutional Change in the
United Kingdom. Publius: The Journal of Federalism, 28 (1), 217-234.
Keating, M. (2002) Devolution and Public Policy in the United Kingdom: Divergence or
Convergence?In: J. Adams and P. Robinson, eds. Devolution in Practice: Public
Policy Differences within the UK. Institute for Public Policy Research. 2002, 3-24.
Keep Scotland Beautiful (2015) Scotland Climate Change Declaration. [Online]. Available
from: http://www.keepscotlandbeautiful.org/sustainability-climatechange/sustainable-scotland-network/climate-change/scotlands-climatechange-declaration/ [Accessed 13 August 2015].
Kern, K. and Alber, G. (2008) Governing Climate Change in Cities: Modes of Urban
Climate Governance in Multi-level Systems. Competitive Cities and Climate
Change, 171.
Klein, R. J., Schipper, E. L. F., and Dessai, S. (2005) Integrating Mitigation and Adaptation
into Climate and Development Policy: Three Research Questions.Environmental
Science & Policy, 8 (6), 579-588.
Kuhlmann, S., Veit, S., and Bogumil, J. (2015) Public Service Systems at Subnational and
Local Levels of Government: A British–German–French Comparison. In: F. M.
van der Meer, J. C. N. Raadschelders and T. A. J. Toonen, eds. Comparative Civil
Service Systems in the 21st Century, 2nd ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan,
2015, 162-184.
LGA (2012) Managing Flood Risk: Roles and Responsibilities. [Online]. Available from:
http://www.local.gov.uk/local-flood-risk-management//journal_content/56/10180/3572186/ARTICLE#lead%20local [Accessed 13
Auguest 2015].
40
Lindseth, G. (2005) Local Level Adaptation to Climate Change: Discursive Strategies in
the Norwegian Context. Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning, 7 (1), 6184.
Lomas, K. J. and Ji, Y. (2009) Resilience of Naturally Ventilated Buildings to Climate
Change: Advanced Natural Ventilation and Hospital Wards. Energy and
Buildings, 41 (6), 629–653.
Laukkonen, J., Blanco, P. K., Lenhart, J., Keiner, M., Cavric, B., andKinuthia-Njenga, C.
(2009) Combining Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation Measures at the
Local Level. Habitat International, 33 (3), 287-292.
MacKinnon, D. (2015) Devolution, State Restructuring and Policy Divergence in the
UK. The Geographical Journal, 181 (1), 47-56.
Manders, I. and Landy, M. (2013) Homes Fit for the Future?. London: Renewable Energy
Association.
Massey, E., and Huitema, D. (2013) The Emergence of Climate Change Adaptation as a
Policy Field: The Case of England. Regional Environmental Change, 13 (2), 341352.
McCoyd, J. L. and Kerson, T. S. (2006) Conducting Intensive Interviews Using Email: A
Serendipitous Comparative Opportunity. Qualitative Social Work, 5, 389–406.
Measham, T. G., Preston, B. L., Smith, T. F., Brooke, C., Gorddard, R., Withycombe, G., and
Morrison, C. (2011) Adapting to Climate Change through Local Municipal
Planning: Barriers and Challenges. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for
Global Change, 16 (8), 889-909.
Mees, H. L. P., and Driessen, P. P. (2011) Adaptation to Climate Change in Urban Areas:
Climate-greening London, Rotterdam, and Toronto. Climate Law, 2 (2), 251280.
Mickwitz, P., Aix, F., Beck, S., Carss, D., Ferrand, N., Görg, C., Jensen, A., Kivimaa, P.,
Kuhlicke, C., Kuindersma, W., Manez, M., Melanen, M., Monni, S., Pedersen, A. B.,
Reinert, H. and van Bommel, S. (2009). Climate Policy Integration, Coherence
41
and Governance Peer Report No. 2. Helsinki: Partnership for European
Environmental Research.
Novick, G. (2008) Is There Bias Against Telephone Interviews in Qualitative Research?
Res Nurs Health, 31 (4), 391-398.
Oldfield, P. (2015) UK Scraps Zero Carbon Homes Plan. The Guardian, Friday 10 July
2015.
Padley, M. (2013) Delivering Localism: The Critical Role of Trust and
Collaboration. Social Policy and Society, 12 (03), 343-354.
Pearce, G., and Cooper, S. (2013) The Challenges of Delivering Climate Change Policy at
the Sub-national Level. Town Planning Review, 84 (4), 441-465.
Pelling, M., High, C., Dearing, J., and Smith, D. (2008) Shadow Spaces for Social Learning:
a Relational Understanding of Adaptive Capacity to Climate Change within
Organisations. Environment and Planning A, 40 (4), 867-884.
Porter, J., Demeritt, D., and Dessai, S. (2014) The Right Stuff. Informing Adaptation to
Climate Change in British Local Government. SRI Papers, 76, 1-30.
Punch, S. (2001) Multiple Methods and Research Relations. In: M. Limb, and C. Dwyer,
eds. Qualitative Methodologies for Geographers. Issues and Debates. London:
Arnold, 2001, 165-180.
Rauken, T., Mydske, P. K., and Winsvold, M. (2015) Mainstreaming Climate Change
Adaptation at the Local Level. Local Environment, 20 (4), 408-423.
Revell, K. (2013) Promoting Sustainability and Pro-environmental Behaviour through
Local Government Programmes: Examples from London, UK. Journal of
Integrative Environmental Sciences, 10 (3-4), 199-218.
Rijke, J., Brown, R., Zevenbergen, C., Ashley, R., Farrelly, M., Morison, P. and van Herk, S.
(2012). Fit-for-purpose Governance: A Framework to Make Adaptive
Governance Operational. Environmental Science & Policy, 22, 73-84.
Roberts, S. (2008a) Effects of Climate Change on the Built Environment. Energy
Policy, 36 (12), 4552-4557.
42
Roberts, S. (2008b) Altering Existing Buildings in the UK. Energy Policy, 36 (12), 44824486.
Scotland Office. (2009) Scotland's Future in the United Kingdom: Building on Ten Years of
Scottish Devolution (Vol. 7738). DERECHO INTERNACIONAL.
St John, W. and Johnson, P. (2004) The Pros and Cons of Data Analysis Software for
Qualitative Research. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 32 (4), 393-397.
Stone, B., Vargo, J., and Habeeb, D. (2012) Managing Climate Change in Cities: Will
Climate Action Plans Work?. Landscape and Urban Planning, 107 (3), 263-271.
Sturges, J. E. and Hanrahan, K. J. (2004) Comparing Telephone and Face-to-Face
Qualitative Interviewing: A Research Note. Qualitative Research, 4 (1), 107-118.
TCPA (2011) Policy Analysis of Housing and Planning Reform. London: Town and
Country Planning Association.
Thalmann. P., and Baranzini, A. (2004) An Overview of the Economics of Voluntary
Approaches in Climate Policies. In: P. Thalmann, and A. Baranzini, eds.
Voluntary Approaches in Climate Policy. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar. 2004, 130.
The Scottish Government (2009) Scotland’s Climate Change Adaptation
Framework.Edinburgh: The Scottish Government.[Online]. Available
from:http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/295110/0091310.pdf
[Accessed 26 August 2015].
The Scottish Government (2015a) The Climate Change (Duties of Public Bodies:
Reporting Requirements) (Scotland) Order 2015. [Online]. Available from:
http://www.gov.scot/Publications/2015/02/5065/2 [Accessed 20 August
2015].
The Scottish Government (2015b) Flood Risk Management Act 2009.[Online]. Available
from:http://www.gov.scot/Topics/Environment/Water/Flooding/FRMAct
[Accessed 17 August 2015].
43
UKCIP (2015) Climate Local – Helping Local Authorities Become Climate
Resilient.[Online]. Available from: http://www.ukcip.org.uk/climate-localhelping-local-authorities-become-climate-resilient/#.Vd1lIPlVikp [Accessed 14
August 2015].
Walker, B. J. A., Adger, W. N. and Russel, D. (2014) Institutional Barriers to Climate
Change Adaptation in Decentralised Governance Structures: Transport
Planning in England. Urban Studies, 1-16.
Wilson, E. (2006) Adapting to Climate Change at the Local Level:The Spatial Planning
Response, Local Environment: The International Journal of Justice and
Sustainability, 11 (6), 609-625.
Wilson. D. and Game, C. (2002) Local Government in the United Kingdom. 3rd ed. London:
Macmillan.
Yao, R and Yu, C W F (2012) Towards ‘Zero-carbon homes’ – Issues of Thermal
Comfort.Indoor and Built Environment, 21 (4), 483-485.
Yin, R. K. (2002) Case Study Research: Design and Methods. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA:
SAGE.
Zero Carbon Hub (2015) Tackling Overheating in Buildings. [Online]. Available from:
http://www.zerocarbonhub.org/current-projects/tackling-overheatingbuildings [Accessed 25 August 2015].
44
Appendix 1
Telephone Interview List
Respondent (R) Country
Number
Local Authority
Role (if consent
given)
Date of
Interview
R1
Scotland
Dundee City
Council
Sustainability and
Climate Change
Manager
22/07/2015
R2
Scotland
Scotland
Senior
Environment
Officer
-
22/07/2015
R3
R4
Scotland
East
Renfrewshire
Council
Dundee City
Council
Renfrewshire
Council
R5
Scotland
West
Dunbartonshire
Council
Team Leader –
Forward Planning
R6
England
Hull City Council
R7
England
R8
England
London Borough
of Barnet
Council
Royal Borough
of Kensington
and Chelsea
R9
England
Reading
Borough Council
45
-
-
23/07/2015
24/07/2015
30/07/2015
30/07/2015
Senior Planning
Officer
31/07/2015
Environmental
Projects Officer
04/08/2015
-
04/08/2015
Appendix2
Interview Topic Guide
Introduction:
Thank you for agreeing to be interviewed today. I endeavour that the interview will last
roughly 30-40 minutes, but can be shorter or longer, for however long you see fit.
During the interview I will ask you some questions, of which should roughly fit in with
this topic guide, however this is an opportunity for you to express your opinions so do
not worry about sticking to the guide too much. If you do not understand what I am
asking do not refrain from asking me to rephrase the question.
1. About you
2. The overall picture of climate change adaptation within the Council
3. The overall picture of the planning function of the Council
4. Statutory duties
5. Drivers and barriers for adaptation in the planning function of the council
(internally and externally)
46