30
The frequency of these measures is perhaps not surprising giving that they result in the
enhancement of green areas, which is a typical objective that planners pursue to
improve the urban space for a variety of purposes that go beyond climate change adaptation (e.g., providing recreation opportunities, improving air quality) (Tzoulas et al.
2007). So, their frequency could be explained by the fact that these measures rely on
actions that are part of the standard approaches applied by planners for decades.
A general conclusion suggested by the review is that EbA measures are finding
their way in climate adaptation plans, in response to a broad range of climate change
challenges. However, a critical issue that we detected is that the proposal of these
EbA measures in the plans is rarely backed-up by specific information on the
expected outcomes, as well as the target beneficiaries. For example, the enhancement of green areas to reduce heat or to prevent floods is typically proposed as a
general measure that will do some good, without providing details and justification
for critical decisions, such as the design and the location of these interventions, and
the distribution and vulnerability of the expected beneficiaries. Most plans are
affected by a lack of specificity and details that may hamper the possibility for these
measures to be actually implemented, as well as their overall effectiveness.
The baseline information upon which EbA measures are proposed and designed
needs to be enhanced. Methods to assess the existing stock of green/blue infrastructures, and their potential to provide climate adaptation services must be mainstreamed in planning practice. Particularly, assessments of the flow of ES at local
scales are often missing, given that many climate change impact and vulnerability
studies provide results at larger scales, which limits their usefulness for developing
local adaptation strategies (Vignola et al. 2009). A better knowledge base, including
information on spatial pattern of vulnerability, would allow better targeting the
design and implementation of EbA measures. The limited knowledge base used to
design ES-related actions, as well as the lack of information about ES beneficiaries,
have emerged as critical issues also in the review of urban plans presented in
Chap. 2. The next two chapters address these issues. Chapter 4 illustrates a model
that can help planners to assess the provision of a specific ES (micro-climate regulation), and to design urban green space accordingly. In Chap. 5, the outcomes of this
and other ES models are combined with information on the potential beneficiaries
to support urban planning interventions.
Open Access This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/
licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, duplication, adaptation, distribution and
reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original
author(s) and the source, a link is provided to the Creative Commons license and any changes
made are indicated.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the work’s Creative
Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in the credit line; if such material is not included in
the work’s Creative Commons license and the respective action is not permitted by statutory regulation, users will need to obtain permission from the license holder to duplicate, adapt or reproduce
the material.
3 Reviewing Ecosystem Services in Urban Climate Adaptation Plans
The frequency of these measures is perhaps not surprising giving that they result in the
enhancement of green areas, which is a typical objective that planners pursue to
improve the urban space for a variety of purposes that go beyond climate change adaptation (e.g., providing recreation opportunities, improving air quality) (Tzoulas et al.
2007). So, their frequency could be explained by the fact that these measures rely on
actions that are part of the standard approaches applied by planners for decades.
A general conclusion suggested by the review is that EbA measures are finding
their way in climate adaptation plans, in response to a broad range of climate change
challenges. However, a critical issue that we detected is that the proposal of these
EbA measures in the plans is rarely backed-up by specific information on the
expected outcomes, as well as the target beneficiaries. For example, the enhancement of green areas to reduce heat or to prevent floods is typically proposed as a
general measure that will do some good, without providing details and justification
for critical decisions, such as the design and the location of these interventions, and
the distribution and vulnerability of the expected beneficiaries. Most plans are
affected by a lack of specificity and details that may hamper the possibility for these
measures to be actually implemented, as well as their overall effectiveness.
The baseline information upon which EbA measures are proposed and designed
needs to be enhanced. Methods to assess the existing stock of green/blue infrastructures, and their potential to provide climate adaptation services must be mainstreamed in planning practice. Particularly, assessments of the flow of ES at local
scales are often missing, given that many climate change impact and vulnerability
studies provide results at larger scales, which limits their usefulness for developing
local adaptation strategies (Vignola et al. 2009). A better knowledge base, including
information on spatial pattern of vulnerability, would allow better targeting the
design and implementation of EbA measures. The limited knowledge base used to
design ES-related actions, as well as the lack of information about ES beneficiaries,
have emerged as critical issues also in the review of urban plans presented in
Chap. 2. The next two chapters address these issues. Chapter 4 illustrates a model
that can help planners to assess the provision of a specific ES (micro-climate regulation), and to design urban green space accordingly. In Chap. 5, the outcomes of this
and other ES models are combined with information on the potential beneficiaries
to support urban planning interventions.
Open Access This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/
licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, duplication, adaptation, distribution and
reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original
author(s) and the source, a link is provided to the Creative Commons license and any changes
made are indicated.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the work’s Creative
Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in the credit line; if such material is not included in
the work’s Creative Commons license and the respective action is not permitted by statutory regulation, users will need to obtain permission from the license holder to duplicate, adapt or reproduce
the material.
3 Reviewing Ecosystem Services in Urban Climate Adaptation Plans