Justice for Resilient Development in Climate-Stressed Cities

Cover image: Dar es Salaam, View Of Port And Indian Ocean (Year 2009) (Kypros/ Moment/Getty Images) Series Editors William Solecki New York Minal Pathak Ahmedabad Martha Barata Rio de Janeiro Aliyu Salisu Barau Kano Maria Dombrov New York Cynthia Rosenzweig New York About the Series This Elements series, published in collaboration with the Urban Climate Change Research Network (UCCRN), provides essential knowledge on climate change and cities for researchers, practitioners, policymakers, and students. Bridging the gap between theory and practice, the series invites readers to engage with the latest advances in the field. Focusing on urban transformation, cross-cutting themes, and urgent research areas, it empowers stakeholders to drive impactful climate action in rapidly-evolving urban contexts. Climate impacts, within and across cities, are distributed unequally. Cities located in low latitudes are more vulnerable than in high latitudes due to the often-larger proportion of informal settlements relative to the housing stock. Human vulnerability intersects with underserved communities within cities; frequently affected groups include women, single parents, and low-income elders. Responses to climatic events are conditioned by informality of the social fabric and institutions, and by inequitable distribution of impacts, decision-making, and outcomes. This Element discusses climate-resilient development and the need for adaptation and mitigation actions to account for the broader urban considerations of informality, equity, and justice principles. This title is also available as open access on Cambridge Core. Learn more at uccrn.ei.columbia.edu. Justice for Resilient Development in Climate-Stressed Cities RECkiEn AnD JuholA ISSN 2976-9116 (online) ISSN 2976-9108 (print) Coordinating Lead Authors Diana Reckien and Sirkku Juhola Justice for Resilient Development in Climate-Stressed Cities Climate Change and Cities Third Assessment Report of the urban Climate Change Research network available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of Elements in Climate Change and Cities: Third Assessment Report of the Urban Climate Change Research Network Series Editors William Solecki New York Minal Pathak Ahmedabad Martha Barata Rio de Janeiro Aliyu Salisu Barau Kano Maria Dombrov New York Cynthia Rosenzweig New York JUSTICE FOR RESILIENT DEVELOPMENT IN CLIMATE-STRESSED CITIES Coordinating Lead Authors Diana Reckien Enschede and Berlin Sirkku Juhola Helsinki Lead Authors Anika Nasra Haque York Heba Allah Khalil Giza Maria Fernanda Lemos Rio de Janeiro Shuaib Lwasa Rotterdam Leila Niamir Laxenburg Juan Camilo Osorio New York City Cristina Visconti Naples use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of Shaftesbury Road, Cambridge CB2 8EA, United Kingdom One Liberty Plaza, 20th Floor, New York, NY 10006, USA 477 Williamstown Road, Port Melbourne, VIC 3207, Australia 314–321, 3rd Floor, Plot 3, Splendor Forum, Jasola District Centre, New Delhi –110025, India 103 Penang Road, #05–06/07, Visioncrest Commercial, Singapore 238467 Cambridge University Press is part of Cambridge University Press & Assessment, a department of the University of Cambridge. We share the University’s mission to contribute to society through the pursuit of education, learning and research at the highest international levels of excellence. www.cambridge.org Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9781009587129 DOI: 10.1017/9781009587105 © Diana Reckien, Sirkku Juhola, Anika Nasra Haque, Heba Allah Khalil, Maria Fernanda Lemos, Shuaib Lwasa, Leila Niamir, Juan Camilo Osorio, Cristina Visconti and contributors 2025 This publication is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements, with the exception of the Creative Commons version the link for which is provided below, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press & Assessment. An online version of this work is published at doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 under a Creative Commons Open Access license CC-BY-NC 4.0 which permits re-use, distribution and reproduction in any medium for non-commercial purposes providing appropriate credit to the original work is given and any changes made are indicated. To view a copy of this license visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 When citing this work, please include a reference to the DOI 10.1017/9781009587105 First published 2025 A catalogue record for this publication is available from the British Library ISBN 978-1-009-58712-9 Hardback ISBN 978-1-009-58711-2 Paperback ISSN 2976-9116 (online) ISSN 2976-9108 (print) Additional resources for this publication at www.cambridge.org/reckien Cambridge University Press & Assessment has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of URLs for external or third-party internet websites referred to in this publication and does not guarantee that any content on such websites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate. use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of Justice for Resilient Development in Climate-Stressed Cities Elements in Climate Change and Cities: Third Assessment Report of the Urban Climate Change Research Network DOI: 10.1017/9781009587105 First published online: June 2025 Coordinating Lead Authors Diana Reckien Enschede and Berlin Sirkku Juhola Helsinki Lead Authors Anika Nasra Haque York Heba Allah Khalil Giza Maria Fernanda Lemos Rio de Janeiro Shuaib Lwasa Rotterdam Leila Niamir Laxenburg Juan Camilo Osorio New York City Cristina Visconti Naples Author for correspondence: Diana Reckien, [email protected] Abstract: Climate impacts, within and across cities, are distributed unequally. Cities located in low latitudes are more vulnerable than in high latitudes due to the often-larger proportion of informal settlements relative to the housing stock. Human vulnerability intersects with underserved communities within cities; frequently affected groups include women, single parents, and low-income elders. Responses to climatic events are conditioned by informality of the social fabric and institutions, and by inequitable distribution of impacts, decision-making, and outcomes. This Element discusses climate-resilient development and the need for adaptation and mitigation actions to account for the broader urban considerations of informality, equity, and justice principles. This title is also available as open access on Cambridge Core. Keywords: equity, climate justice, climate-resilient development, informality, vulnerability © Diana Reckien, Sirkku Juhola, Anika Nasra Haque, Heba Allah Khalil, Maria Fernanda Lemos, Shuaib Lwasa, Leila Niamir, Juan Camilo Osorio, Cristina Visconti and contributors 2025 ISBNs: 9781009587129 (HB), 9781009587112 (PB), 9781009587105 (OC) ISSNs: 2976-9116 (online), 2976–9108 (print) use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of Contents List of Contributors v Series Preface 1 Foreword I –Sheela Patel, Founder Director, Society for the Promotion of Area Resource Centres (SPARC) Founder, Slum Dwellers International Global Ambassador, Race to Resilience 8 Foreword II –Eddie Bautista, Executive Director, New York City Environmental Justice Alliance Visiting Assistant Professor, Pratt Institute Graduate Center for Planning and the Environment 9 Series Editors’Introduction to Justice for Resilient Development in Climate-Stressed Cities 10 Major Findings and Key Messages 11 1 Framing Urban Justice with Equity, Informality, and Development in the Changing Climate 15 2Differential Exposure: Risks and Impacts by Hazard Type 20 3Differential Vulnerability: Drivers of Vulnerability and Intersectionality 35 4 The State of Urban Adaptation and Equity, Development, and Informality Interactions 39 5 The State of Urban Mitigation and Equity, Development, and Informality Interactions 49 6 Equitable Urban Transitions and Transformations 59 7 Challenges and Future Research 74 8 Conclusions 75 Appendix: Stakeholder Sounding 77 References 79 use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of Contributors * Contributing Authors / Case Study Authors Aditya Bahadur London Chiara Camponeschi York Belen Olaya García Mexico City Alejandra Marcela Vanegas Díaz Bariloche Gerard Martínez Görbig Enschede Michelle Mycoo St. Augustine Wilma S. Nchito Lusaka Basirat Oyalowo Lagos Sheetal Patil Bengaluru Emma Porio Quezon City Paula Presser Enschede Chandni Singh Bengaluru UCCRN Editorial Board Shepherd Sean O’Donoghue Durban * ARC3 authors are associated solely with their cities or metropolitan regions. use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of Series Preface Urban Climate Change Research Network Third Assessment Report on Climate Change and Cities (ARC3.3) William Solecki (New York), Minal Pathak (Ahmedabad), Martha Barata (Rio de Janeiro), Aliyu Salisu Barau (Kano), Maria Dombrov (New York), and Cynthia Rosenzweig (New York) Cities and the urbanization process itself are at a crossroads. While the world’s urban population continues to grow, cities are increasingly pressed by chronic and acute stresses like increasing inequity, polluted air and waters, limited governance, and financial capacities along with entrenched spasmodic crime and conflict –and nonetheless, global pandemics. Climate change has now exacerbated these problems and in many cases created new ones, at a time when cities are asked to be the bulwark of climate solutions. The advent and application of new technologies and strategies associated with the internet, environmental sensing, multimodal transport, and new planning and design strategies portend a new golden age of sustainable cities. Some cities provide glimmers of this possible future, but persistent stresses and crises, along with climate change, push against progress. In the Urban Climate Change Research Network’s (UCCRN’s) Third Assessment Report on Climate Change and Cities (ARC3.3), we directly address these issues head-on and present stateof-the-art knowledge on how to bring all cities and their residents forward to a more sustainable future. An absolute necessity now exists for all cities, both in the Global North and Global South, to aggressively work to fulfill their potential as leaders in climate change action. In the Global North, the task is for cities to address the emerging challenges from the changing climate and the exigencies of compliance with the United Nations (UN) Framework Convention on Climate Change Paris Agreement. For cities in the Global South, there is the double challenge of climate-resilient development, that is, meeting increasing demand for housing, energy, and infrastructure for burgeoning populations, while confronting simultaneous challenges of reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and adapting to a changing climate (UNEP & UN-Habitat, 2021). In all geographies, the implementation of transformative mitigation and adaptation in cities can be an instrument to generate livelihoods for those with lower purchasing power and can enhance capacity to better respond to shocks like future pandemics, energy supply chain spasms, and food security emergencies (UNDP, 2022). 1Justice for Resilient Development in Climate-Stressed Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of Foreword I –Sheela Patel, Founder Director, Society for the Promotion of Area Resource Centres (SPARC) Founder, Slum Dwellers International Global Ambassador, Race to Resilience The world turned urban over two decades ago, and over 55% of the global population now lives in large, medium, and small towns and cities, more so in southern countries and regions. Despite Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 11, we have lost the critical point in decision-making, to address the challenges of today’sdeficits to include informality and basic infrastructure through inclusive planning “norms.”This further creates an additional burden on those who live and work in cities as well as on those who migrate to cities due to extreme weather, destroyed habitats, and diminished livelihoods. The challenge is to create a democratized knowledge base to identify the challenges that we face and to look at solutions we need universally that are inclusive, climate science-based, and accessible to all. Thus, the only way forward is to develop a process that will help all of us become much more resilient for the future. As cities around the world are experiencing increasing Figure 1 Cross-cutting themes (CCTs) associated with the overall ARC3.3 assessment (middle) and the first six Elements and their CCTs. 8Climate Change and Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of rates of informality, urban slums are facing the blunt force of climate change, frequently and intensely. Hundreds of millions of informal dwellers are grappling with the various challenges of unbearable heat, disastrous flooding, and damaging winds. Cities are also the location for climate migrants to seek refuge and are further densifying informal settlements. These communities are turning to locally led adaptation to make the necessary modifications with limited means and relief aid. The ARC3.3’sJustice for Resilient Development in Climate-Stressed Cities Element provides vital information about the disproportionate impacts of climate events on marginalized urban populations and offers climate-resilient development strategies to address these pressing challenges. If we are to inclusively and justly come together, we would enhance the resilience of not just the cities’most vulnerable and underserved groups, but also improve overall capabilities of cities. Informal settlements deserve equal access to clean water, proper sanitation, fair health care, quality education, and safe transportation. The people living in informal settlements deserve the right to be heard. We must interweave the needs and perspectives of the informal into our urban climate change solutions so that justice and equality can be at the core of the cities of tomorrow. Foreword II –Eddie Bautista, Executive Director, New York City Environmental Justice Alliance Visiting Assistant Professor, Pratt Institute Graduate Center for Planning and the Environment We’ve often heard the refrain “climate change will affect everyone, but its impacts won’t be evenly felt.”Nowhere is that observation more obvious, more quantifiable –yet more maddening –than in cities. The disparities of climate impacts in cities are observable and actionable. Unfortunately, climate impact disparities in cities are insufficiently addressed by municipal governments –even by Global North cities like New York City. Here are a few examples of the climate environmental disparities in New York City. •Extreme heat disproportionately kills Black and Brown New Yorkers, with an estimated 370 New Yorkers dying annually because of heat-related or exacerbated illnesses. Heat-related mortality is expected to increase by 70% by 2050, with heat waves expected to triple. •Over half of public housing residents live in the most heat-vulnerable neighborhoods. 9Justice for Resilient Development in Climate-Stressed Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of •Communities of color have access to 33% less park space than residents in largely white neighborhoods –even though green infrastructure has proven cooling and air benefits. •In New York City, transportation represents 28% of GHG emissions. COVID-19 generated an explosion of e-commerce “last mile”delivery warehouses, attracting thousands of additional truck trips daily, significantly increasing air pollution in communities of color. •75% of the New York Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s twenty-eight bus depots are sited in communities of color. Yet despite these disproportionate traffic air burdens, Governor Hochul recently capriciously killed congestion pricing after years of planning. •Over 75% of New York City’s solid waste stream is trucked into a handful of communities of color. •A recent New York City Environmental Justice Alliance report revealed that hyperlocal air quality measurements in some communities of color showed levels of PM2.5 pollution up to eighteen-times greater and forty–nine-times greater than the nearest government-run monitors that report hourly values. Of the four dimensions of urban climate justice presented in this Element (distributive, recognitional, procedural, and restorative), the most common and easily manipulated is procedural. For transformative urban climate justice to emerge, policymakers would be well served to read this Element and learn more comprehensive –and multidimensional –approaches. Series Editors’Introduction to Justice for Resilient Development in Climate-Stressed Cities Justice for Resilient Development in Climate-Stressed Cities is the second Element in the Urban Climate Change Research Network’s (UCCRN’s) Third Assessment Report on Climate Change and Cities (ARC3.3). † It addresses the crucial and ubiquitous exigency of justice, informality, and equity in climatestressed cities, a foundational component to the entire ARC3.3 assessment. The Element provides critical evidence for the highly unequal distribution of climate impacts, vulnerabilities, and risks within and across cities. Global maps show how cities located in low latitudes are more exposed to climate risks and impacts than in high latitudes, due to the presence of greater proportions of informal settlements as well as more frequent climate extremes. † Suggested Citation: Reckien, D., S. Juhola, A.N. Haque, H.A. Khalil, M.F. Lemos, S. Lwasa, L. Niamir, J.C. Osorio, C. Visconti. 2025. Justice for Resilient Development in Climate-Stressed Cities. In Solecki, W., M. Pathak, M. Barata, A. Barau, M. Dombrov, and C. Rosenzweig (Eds.), Climate Change and Cities: Third Assessment Report of the Urban Climate Change Research Network. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10 Climate Change and Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of The Justice Element incorporates important recommendations for improving adaptation and mitigation planning in cities by recognizing rights of vulnerable groups and enhancing justice for climate-resilient development in cities. For example, it calls for including climate justice in the monitoring and evaluation of adaptation. The Justice Element presents the state of just urban adaptation and mitigation and provides a roadmap for how cities can ensure equitable transitions and transformations, concluding with a discussion of future research and constraints. The Element provides concrete ways to achieve equitable and just urban transformations for climate-resilient development. While many cities are successfully implementing measures to reduce emissions and enhance sustainability, there is an increasing awareness that these efforts may inadvertently exacerbate energy poverty and existing inequalities, especially given that the contribution of certain groups to greenhouse gas emissions is low. There is an increasing interest in equity dimensions of low carbon transitions and decarbonization as they influence development and informality, both positively and negatively. To successfully scale up and speed up, urban transformational approaches should address the root causes of risk that engage with the drivers of vulnerability including an engagement with issues of power, justice, and agency. The Justice Element issues a call to action for cities to conceptualize the “just”in just urban transformations by embedding equity implications in all climate actions. These approaches need to endure over long time periods and bridge multiple spatial scales. For an initiative to be transformational and improve the conditions under which justice can be realized, it should be significant in depth, scale, and speed, that is, affect a significant number of residents, work across governance scales, use innovation, and be rapidly implementable. The goal is to catalyze a “domino effect”that links city transformations in any one city with many others. Urban transformations of societal development in urban areas are seen as more and more needed to move away from increased unsustainable and unjust practices that result in high emissions, heightened risks of climate change, and inequity. Major Findings and Key Messages Major Findings 1. Analysis of EM-DAT, 4 the International Disaster Database, reveals that riverine floods, extreme heat waves, and landslides are associated with 4 EM-DAT: the International Disaster Database. www.emdat.be. 11Justice for Resilient Development in Climate-Stressed Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of most deaths due to environmental disasters (33%, 33%, and 22% of deaths, respectively) in cities. Fatalities due to heat waves and landslides are a particularly concern for urban justice. Heat risk in cities is exacerbated by the phenomenon called the Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect. However, it is important to assess hazards not only in terms of death, but also by way of other damage categories (e.g., impacts such as injured, homeless, or otherwise affected people, or monetary damage). Hazards that cause the largest number of impacted people in cities are cold waves and droughts (42% and 39% of all people, respectively) (Section 2.6). 2. On a global level, current climate impacts and risks across cities are distributed highly unequally. Cities located in low latitudes are more vulnerable to climate risks and impacts than in high latitudes, mainly due to the large proportion of informal settlements relative to the entire housing stock and the interaction with climate extremes. Differential access to infrastructure, services, and safe housing, particularly in cities in the Global South and within those in low-income communities, entail an increase in climate risks. Particularly hot areas coincide with large urban informal settlement populations in cities in West and Southwest Africa, the Gulf Coast and the Horn of Africa, the Middle East, and Central and South America. Populations in these cities are currently and in the near term at particular risk of impacts from heat and heat extremes (Sections 2.1,2.2). 3. In the future, climate change is expected to exacerbate urban inequalities and injustices in as well as across cities, on both national and international levels, and mostly in cities of the Global South. Increasing climate extremes (e.g., heat waves, high precipitation events, and coastal storms) heighten risks in many cities; for example, more frequent heavy downpours are projected to intersect with risk of landslides in informal urban settlements. Including scenarios of future warming, increasing humidity and rapid population growth, most people at risk of deadly heat live in Subsaharan Africa and India. For Northern India and Pakistan, a high risk of death due to flooding is also projected. For West Africa, heat extremes are causes for concern. Overall, urban residents of West African cities and cities in Northern India and Pakistan face the largest risk of climate impacts in the future (Sections 2.2,2.3,2.4, 2.5,2.6). 4. Within cities, human vulnerability intersects with hazardous locations and underserved areas and leads to specific populations with extremely heightened vulnerability (to increasing extreme heat, heavy downpours, and coastal flooding) such as women, single parents, and lonely elderly 12 Climate Change and Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of in low-income housing. Women living in urban informal settlements fall at the intersection of both social and economic inequality, which makes them one of the most exposed and vulnerable groups to climate risks. Sociocultural norms further restrict their access to (already) limited available resources. This is where distributive (in)justice, recognitional (in)justice, and procedural (in)justice overlap (Sections 1.1,3). 5. Justice is increasingly considered in public adaptation planning and policy fora, mostly focused on distributive justice with particular attention to how climate change impacts are differentiated across social strata, economic assets, or geographical space. In addition, planning and policy documents are beginning to consider procedural justice (i.e., how civil society stakeholders are engaged in planning and implementation processes). The majority of cities where sufficient data of a representative sample are available fall short in focusing adaptation actions and measures on vulnerable populations and in aligning monitoring and evaluation systems to integrate the needs of the most vulnerable. When implemented, policy measures target reducing the impacts on economic assets instead of impacts on vulnerable populations. Furthermore, apart from a few progressive cities, recognitional and restorative justice are rarely addressed in adaptation processes (Section 4.2). 6. Planned relocation programs are being implemented in some cities, though relocation from exposed areas mainly takes place autonomously without support from the public authorities. Programs are often concentrated in more affluent areas. Planned relocation programs can compensate for climate impacts but can have justice implications. There is evidence that these programs often occur in economically more affluent neighborhoods, thus overlooking more vulnerable ones. Particularly in the Global South, cases of Lagos and Metro-Manila show that some relocation programs have been forced, resulting in great social costs to the residents, whose rights are often not considered. The societal costs of planned relocation can exceed relocation benefits, though these estimates are often drawn from econometric modeling rather than calculated costs (Sections 2.4,4.2). Key Messages 1. Adaptation and mitigation planning can cater to justice aspirations by recognizing the benefits and burdens of climate actions, increasing procedural justice of vulnerable groups, and including justice considerations in the monitoring and evaluation of adaptation. Adaptation planning predominantly accounts for distributive and 13Justice for Resilient Development in Climate-Stressed Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of procedural justice, meaning that some cities identify who is disproportionately affected by climate change impacts through vulnerability and risk assessments and pay attention to engagement of various stakeholders in adaptation planning. The other two dimensions of justice, recognitional and restorative, are less considered in city adaptation plans. 2. While many cities are successfully implementing measures to reduce emissions and enhance sustainability, there is an increasing awareness that these efforts may inadvertently exacerbate energy poverty and existing inequalities, especially given that the contribution of vulnerable social groups to emissions is low. Cities’mitigation policies target electrification of mobility systems, promotion of solar power uptake for business and households, increased use of sustainable biomass and nature-based solutions (NbS). There is evidence that urban green spaces tend to disproportionately favor predominantly white and more affluent communities, resulting in highly stratified access within cities based on income, ethnoracial characteristics, gender, age, and (dis)abilities. Opportunities for equitable development of mitigation solutions need to expand to embrace vulnerability and informality by scaling up emerging technologies, pathways, and economic systems. 3. Transformations of societal development patterns are seen as needed to move away from unsustainable practices that result in high emissions and heightened risks of climate change. Scaling up transformations is critically important for climate-resilient development. However, to date, there is very little empirical documentation of justice implications of transformations. For an initiative to be transformational and to improve the conditions under which justice can be realized, it should be significant in depth, scale, and/or speed (i.e., affect a large number of people, should work across scales, and/or be implemented fast). Conceptualizing the “just”in just urban transformations means considering what equity implications transformations might have and in what ways transformation processes affect the rights of those involved, negatively or positively. 4. An empirical evidence gap exists regarding the justice implications from private-sector urban climate adaptation and mitigation. Overall, much of the documented adaptation and mitigation in urban areas is planned and implemented by the public sector, with much of the adaptation actions taken by individuals and the private sector remaining unaccounted for. This lack of empirical knowledge means that it is not certain how the burden and benefits of adaptation and mitigation are distributed in cities. 14 Climate Change and Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of 1 Framing Urban Justice with Equity, Informality, and Development in the Changing Climate This ARC3.3 Element examines climate risks and responses in urban areas through the prisms of equity, justice, and informality for climate-resilient development. We recognize that the way in which climate risks emerge and are being responded to in cities are conditioned by the informality of existing social fabrics, institutions, and activities, and by the inequitable distribution of impacts, decision-making, and outcomes. To ensure climate-resilient development, climate responses by public and private urban institutions and individuals –both adaptation and mitigation – need to be viewed in the broader urban context through the prisms of informality and justice. Scholarship on equity, justice, and fairness related to climate change in cities and urban areas, including a focus on informality and development, is highly dynamic, with deepening awareness of their importance. Climate risks are complex, that is, they consist of hazard, exposure, and vulnerability, as well as the climate change response (Simpson et al., 2021) (see Figure 2). Hazards occur due to natural variation and anthropogenic climate change. Exposure is defined as the nature and degree to which a system is exposed to significant climatic variation. Vulnerability is the degree to which a system is susceptible to, or unable to cope with, adverse effects of climate change, including climate variability and extremes (IPCC, 2022a). A response is any action taken in anticipation of current or future climate change, including adaptation and mitigation. Hazard, vulnerability, and exposure interact with responses, both mitigation and adaptation, that may lead to a change in risk with either negative or positive outcomes (Simpson et al., 2021). Figure 2 Placing justice, development, and informality in the context of climate risk, adaptation, and mitigation. Adapted from IPCC (2023b). 15Justice for Resilient Development in Climate-Stressed Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of Exposure and vulnerability are features of the socioecological and sociocultural system and their dynamics through which climate change are distributed (Janssen et al., 2007). The positive or negative outcomes of adaptation or mitigation responses are conditioned by a consideration of mainly four equity and justice dimensions (see Box 1). Here, equity, justice, and fairness are used interchangeably, although differences exist, but these differences are not consistently applied across the literature (Reckien et al., 2018a). We also note that there is an extensive body of literature on justice and equity, which links to many political considerations. See ARC3.2., Chapter 6 on equity, environmental justice, and urban climate change for a more detailed discussion (Rosenzweig et al., 2018). Informality has been a contested concept, used in many academic fields with different connotations. In terms of economic development, “[I]nformality’is a term used to describe the collection of firms, workers and activities that operate outside the legal and regulatory system”(Loayza, 2016, p. 1). Further, it has either been viewed as pent-up economic potential or a hindrance to economic development (la Porta & Shleifer, 2014; Ulyssea, 2020). In the urban context, informality –in its wide range of features and levels –is often defined by what it is not –that is, in a spatial sense and in accordance with permit requirements, urbanization, and building codes (informal settlements and non-informal settlements), groups of people (labor), and governance (monitoring, naming, and intervening), as well as formal and informal practices (McFarlane, 2012). Multiple dimensions and factors that promote informality, namely inequality, physically shape the urban territory, resulting in segregated spaces in certain cases. A tendency exists to associate informality with marginality in a negative sense. However, informal urban areas are increasingly understood as a particular dynamic of urbanization with positive attributes, which still require robust efforts for effective inclusion in the official/governmental system of planning and governance (Alfaro d’Alençon et al., 2018). The association with a condition of marginality can often have perverse consequences, particularly in the intersection with the distribution of power and decision-making processes (Alfaro d’Alençon et al., 2018). Thus far, literature shows that the role of climate adaptation and mitigation in the upgrading of informal settlements has been ignored. There are nevertheless cases in Latin America, for example, where adaptation and mitigation have contributed to security of land tenure, enabled relocation from exposed areas, improved land management practices, provided public spaces and energy efficient housing, and enhanced connectivity for those living in informal settlements (Collado & Wang, 2020). While the issue of informal settlements has been gaining traction in recent years, more action by municipalities and governments must be taken to fully address this issue. Here, we define informality as a characteristic of processes and systems that have emerged where there is inadequacy or lack of formal systems of urban 16 Climate Change and Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of governance, often, but not in all cases, creating opportunities for innovation and experimentation. Informality cuts across climate risk and development, conditioning the way in which climate risk emerges and how it can be responded to. Informality permeates all dimensions of the urban system, including physical infrastructure, institutional procedures, economy, housing, and land use in many cities across the globe. For example, informality in housing (i.e., populations living in urban informal settlements) is a widespread phenomenon, particularly in cities of lowand middle-income countries, characterized by lack of land tenure, lack of ownership, and access to basic infrastructure. Informality affects and shapes vulnerability (how vulnerable people are) and exposure (where vulnerable people live) and their ability to respond (conditioned by informal and formal institutions). However, informality can also be a positive force through which opportunities emerge for expanding possibilities for complementarity and leapfrogging the path dependencies in urban systems. Development in this framework can be understood as the objective of responses leading whereby both adaptation and mitigation are needed to secure the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) (Schipper et al., 2022). In this vein, both adaptation and mitigation need to be integrated into climate-resilient development processes. Values of equity, justice, equality, engagement, common good, and sustainability come together as central elements of transformational adaptation and mitigation (Moser et al., 2019). Transformations of current societal development patterns are seen as increasingly needed to move away from continued unsustainability and GHG emissions toward a “positive trajectory where society acts rapidly to avoid deepening vulnerability, uncontrollable impacts and extensive, even existential losses”(Moser et al., 2019, p. 1). In the following sections, this Element discusses dimensions for urban climate justice in detail and connects those to findings from ARC3.2 and other cross-cutting topics within the broader literature. •Section 2 reports on differential exposure, highlighting impacts and risks by hazard type (in and across cities), and urban and rural areas. •Section 3 focuses on differential vulnerability, synthesizing the evidence on drivers of vulnerability and intersectionality in cities. •Section 4 presents the state of adaptation and equity, development, and informality in cities, spotlighting urban adaptation planning and implementation and their implications for justice and equity in an urban world. •Section 5 explores similar aspects related to mitigation that is, mitigation planning and implementation in cities to date as well as their justice and equity implications. 17Justice for Resilient Development in Climate-Stressed Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of Moreover, heat risk is diffused and varies across intra-urban space. Due to location characteristics (e.g., the amount of green space versus impervious surfaces; proximity to a water body) and building stock characteristics (e.g., availability of air conditioning or thick walls) –and the combination of these –certain areas of a city are hotter than others (Kotharkar & Bagade, 2018). Global assessments of long-term high-resolution daytime surface UHI find that Figure 5 Warm-season three-day surface UHI maximum (2003–2020) (SUHI18y) for all urban pixels in the functional urban areas 6 for the fourteen world megacities. 7 Adapted from Mentaschi et al. (2022). 6 Functional urban areas consist of a densely inhabited city and a less densely populated commuting zone (European Environment Agency, 2023). 7 “A megacity is an urban agglomeration with a total population of 10 million people or greater, consisting of a continuous built-up area that encompasses one or more city centers and suburban areas, economically and functionally linked to those centers”(Safarik et al., 2018, p. 1). 24 Climate Change and Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of intra-urban hotspots can have surface UHI intensity of up to 10–18 K higher compared to relatively cooler city parts (Mentaschi et al., 2022) (see Figure 5). Studies have investigated the exposure of informal areas and poor urban areas to climate change, many of which have focused on temperature-related issues including temperature variation, extreme heat, and heat waves (Borg et al., 2021). Informal areas are specifically prone to UHI effects and increased heat due to their physical conditions of housing and infrastructure. The hyper density, lack of green spaces, and use of low albedo materials within informal settlements increase residents’exposure to extreme heat. For example, uninsulated corrugated iron roofs and poor ventilation often present in informal settlement areas in the Global South contribute to increased heat stress, in turn increasing residents’vulnerability to climate change–induced overheating and associated health hazards (Ehebrecht, 2014; Satterthwaite et al., 2020). Developing urban climate maps can be a useful tool to identify the overheating characteristics of different parts of the city, including in informal areas (Ren et al., 2011; Khalil et al., 2018). The climate map of the Greater Cairo Region (GCR) shows that most extreme heating zones coincide with the distribution of informal areas (Khalil et al., 2018) (see Case Study 1). CASE STUDY 1GREATER CAIRO REGION:URBAN HEAT VULNERABILITY AND CITY STRUCTURE 8 Heba Allah Khalil The Greater Cairo Region is the biggest arid zone worldwide suffering from increased heat stress due to both climate change–induced incidents as well as its own urban structure and development trends. With more than 60% of the city living in informal areas, the relation between formal and informal areas becomes pivotal in identifying needed interventions for climate resilience. The underlying absence of both distributive justice as well as recognitional justice is evident in the current everyday realities of the city inhabitants. The current urban heating risks faced by GCR are influenced by its urban structure, both formal and informal, and the increased vulnerabilities to climate change, particularly within informal areas. Further, the case study examines the resulting inequitable distribution of greenery within the city accentuated by a continuous diminishing of green spaces and increased distributive injustice. The climate map of the Greater Cairo Region shows that the majority of overheating zones coincide with the distribution of informal areas (Khalil et al., 2018). Greenery is often removed from informal areas 8 See extended version of case study at https://uccrn.ei.columbia.edu/case-studies. 25Justice for Resilient Development in Climate-Stressed Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of CASE STUDY 1 (cont.) to extend roads, and the remaining green spaces are being commodified into commercial spaces to generate revenue, depriving lower-income groups who cannot afford access to private clubs or ticketed gardens. Investigation of lack of greenery and its unjustdistribution has a direct effect on the proliferation of physical and mental health issues among the most vulnerable groups within both formal and informal areas. Hence, any action toward climate resilience must consider environmental justice/equity with its four facets. (a) Patterns of formal/planned and informal/unplanned areas in the Greater Cairo Region, Egypt (Gad et al., 2022). (b) Climatopes in Cairo, with heat accumulation zones and overheating zones occurring in informal/unplanned areas, Geographic Information Systems (GIS) analysis (Khalil et al., 2018). 26 Climate Change and Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of Heat impacts trigger several knock-on effects to water, health, food, and livelihoods. Higher water demand and limited water availability in turn impact agricultural production in peri-urban and rural areas and thus food provision in urban areas (Dodman et al., 2019). Agriculture and food-based livelihoods are threatened, and health impacts ensue. Health impacts of heat stress include heatinduced morbidity and mortality when temperature and humidity increases exceed thresholds that are city-dependent (Mora et al., 2017). Moreover, the decrease in cold days extends some disease vectors’range and activity (e.g., mosquito and related tick-borne diseases [de Sherbinin et al., 2007; Dodman et al., 2019]) (see additional resources and the ARC3.3 Health and Well-Being Element). 2.2 Precipitation and Inland Flooding Across the globe precipitation patterns are changing, increasing the risk for inland flooding. Cities are at risk of inland flooding, in particular when they are located along rivers, in valleys, and on or at the bottom of steep slopes. Changes in the amount of annual precipitation across the world over the last fifty years are bi-directional and patchy with the frequency of extreme precipitation events often increasing (IPCC, 2021, Atlas figures 11e and 11f). Of 241 urban areas surveyed worldwide from 1973 to 2012, 17% encountered statistically significant increases in frequencies of extreme precipitation events (Mishra et al., 2015). Most of them are in South Asia and South America. Less than 5% of the cities studied showed a statistically significant decrease, some of them found in the Mediterranean and Eastern Europe, as well as Central Asia. However, some evidence shows that high-intensity short duration rainfall events also increase in areas with a decrease of total annual precipitation in the coming decades (IPCC, 2022b). For cities, increases in precipitation and heavy rainfall can lead to flooding when the amount of rainwater exceeds carrying (natural or built drainage systems) and infiltration capacities. This is due to large areas in cities covered with impermeable surfaces such as roads and buildings and/or accumulation of rainwater in low-lying areas without storage or drainage capacities. Impacts of extreme precipitation events and flooding are exacerbated within informal residential areas because of their hyper-density and location in hazard areas. These are often associated with lower land value and lower likelihood of eviction (Satterthwaite et al., 2018). In addition to location, the structure of informal housing contributes to exposure to flooding. Poor-quality housing, in absence of risk-reducing infrastructure, is less able to withstand flooding (Dodman et al., 2019). 27Justice for Resilient Development in Climate-Stressed Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of Secondary impacts of precipitation and inland flooding comprise infrastructural interruptions as well as social and economic consequences, such as damages of energy supply, transport, information technology, urban services, and social infrastructure, potentially including damages or loss of property and disruption to livelihoods (Dodman et al., 2019). Secondary impacts extend from infrastructural interruptions and damages to social and economic services in cities, to causing health impacts including morbidity and mortality (Borg et al., 2021). These can be brought about by mediators (e.g., water contamination and waterborne diseases), but also more directly through accidents with damaged energy and other infrastructure (Jurgilevich et al., 2023). Several studies investigated the correlations between health impacts with flooding and increased precipitation and yield key associative relationships in the cities of Shashemene (Ethiopia) (Bambrick et al., 2015), Lima (Peru) (Contreras et al., 2018), and Dhaka (Bangladesh) (Khan et al., 2014). Deaths due to flooding are concentrated in Southeastern Africa (Mozambican and Zimbabwean cities), and along the slopes of the Andes in Western South America, but also in South Asia (Indian cities), and some parts of Western Africa (Namibian cities) and the Middle East (cities of Iraq and Syria) (EMDAT, 2023). All these areas, apart from the slopes of the Andes, contain cities with a large population living in informal settlements and show substantial increases in daily precipitation. Hence, deaths due to flooding clearly relate to flood risk as a combination of the meteorological/climatological and the structural/housing conditions. 2.3 Extreme Rainfall and Landslides Landslides are a particular threat to cities in hilly areas under climate change as they are conditioned by extreme rainfall and certain slope conditions such as slope stability and gradient (Foilleau et al., 2023; Marengo et al., 2023). Landslides occur as fast-moving and slow-moving phenomena, both strongly related to urban activities such as settlement, road building, housing, or storm drainage (Dille et al., 2022). In urban areas where demand for space and related pressure on land is high, areas with high landslide susceptibility are often used, legally or illegally, for housing, such as in Recife, Brazil (Marengo et al., 2023) or the Caribbean islands (Bozzolan et al., 2023). A study in urban areas of the Caribbean islands shows that the landslide susceptibility rises by 40% considering past rainfall-intensive hurricanes plus illegal housing and informal settlements, compared with only 20 and 6%, respectively, when independently modelling the expansion of informal housing, deforestation, and rainstorms due to climate change (Bozzolan et al., 2023). 28 Climate Change and Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of Impacts of landslides, in particular fast-moving landslides, often cause a large number of human fatalities, such as in Italian cities (Franceschini et al., 2022; Esposito et al., 2023), cities in the Andean mountains (Zambrano & Rey, 2022; Marengo et al., 2023),Chinesecities(Huangetal.,2022; Wang et al., 2022), and South Asian cities (Mukherjee et al., 2022). A review by Petrucci (2022)found that landslide fatalities worldwide are underestimated. While new landslide detection methods using machine learning promise better early warning, the continuing growth of settlements in mountainous areas and the associated reduction offorestarea remain a concern inmany hilly urban areas worldwide (Youseff et al., 2023). Figure 6 shows a global overview of the greatest susceptibility to heavy precipitation and consequent landslides along with large proportions of inhabitants living in informal settlements. Susceptible cities are found in the Andean and Himalayan region, in Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan, along with areas of Northern Thailand, Laos, Myanmar, and Western China, in particular. 2.4 Sea Level Rise and Flooding in Coastal Cities The rate of global mean sea level (GMSL) has increased from about 0.20 m between 1901 and 2018 to 3.7 mm/yr from 2006 to 2018 and is virtually certain to continue to rise throughout the twenty-first century –between another 0.18– 0.23 m by 2050, and 0.38–0.77 m by 2100 (Fox-Kemper et al., 2021; IPCC, 2021). This is due to anthropogenic climate change as well as natural and human-induced subsidence and other land water shortage changes (Frederikse et al., 2020; Cao et al., 2021). Many coastal inhabitants are in subsiding locations and are therefore likely to experience an average relative sea level rise up to four times the global average, 7.8–9.9 mm/yr (Nicholls et al., 2021). See additional resources for more information on sea level rise, the quantity of urban populations it impacts, and cascading effects. In general, more cities in the tropics are exposed to severe coastal flooding than those at higher latitudes, but not exclusively (Tebaldi et al., 2021). The top twenty cities with population exposed to coastal flooding in 2070 are spread across high-, middleand low-income populations, including Kolkata, Mumbai, Dhaka, Guangzhou, Ho Chi Minh City, Shanghai, and many other cities in Asia. Outside of Asia, Miami (ranked 9), and Alexandria (ranked 11) were among the most vulnerable cities outside of Asia (Hansen et al., 2011). Ranking by exposed assets in 2070 puts Miami, Guangzhou, New York City, and Kolkata at the top of the vulnerability list globally (Hansen et al., 2011). Effective coastal zone management is important in all these cities, but particularly in the cities of large deltas, flood plains, and low-elevation coastal zones in 29Justice for Resilient Development in Climate-Stressed Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of Figure 6 UN-reported informal areas using twenty-five-mile radius. Change in maximum five-day precipitation (mm) in the near future (2021–2040) relative to 1995–2014 using scenario SSP5-8.5. Landslide susceptibility combines Global Precipitation Measurement data with landscape observations: whether roads have been built, trees have been cut down or burned, a major tectonic fault is nearby, the local bedrock is weak, and/or the hillsides are steep. Vulnerability indicator multiples change in maximum five-day precipitation by landslide susceptibility for each grid cell and is classified by severity (1–5). Sources: Informal settlements, EM-DAT (2023); climate, CMIP6, IPCC, 2021; landslide susceptibility, LHASA 1.1 (2023). use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of lowand middle-income countries, as the lowest parts of these cities are often inhabited by low-income populations (Nicholls, 2015). This is due to the availability of less expensive housing and land or space for informal settlements such as in the eastern Philippines city of Canumay (Cash, 2021). In cities of high-income countries, a similar process has recently been observed –awaveofclimate gentrification has set in. This means that more well-off urban residents are moving away from low-elevation areas to higher ground (Li & Grant, 2022). In Miami, wealthy and well-educated homeowners and buyers are relocating. However, this is mostly due to increases in flood insurance costs for lower-elevation plots and less because of increased awareness of vulnerable locations and projections of increased coastal flooding (Li & Grant, 2022). Often, lower-income people are in a less opportunistic situation and cannot move. In contrast, with falling housing prices, more middleor even low-income households are moving into riskier areas when not prevented by coastal zoning policies (Sherwin, 2019). Sea level rise is associated with flood-related hazards and storm surges (Marcos et al., 2012;Fox-Kemperetal.,2021, ch.9). Flood-related hazards are documented for the cities in the Pearl River Delta in China and other Asian deltaic megacities (Cao et al., 2021). Many Asian deltaic cities are also subsiding, which will expand the area of the 100-year flood zone (Olson & Kreznor, 2021). Figure 7 shows the change in sea level in the near future (2021–2040) and informal settlements in close proximity to coastlines. Singapore, cities of Malaysia and in Sumatra, Indonesia, as well as Central American cities in Guatemala and Ecuador as well as the Caribbean will all be most affected by sea level rise. The coasts along the Pacific and Atlantic Ocean of the United States, the Atlantic Ocean and Baltic Sea of Europe, the Mediterranean coasts of Italy and Gibraltar, and the North Pacific coasts of Japan are projected to also face large increases in centennial sea level rise events, but without large proportions of urban residents living in informal settlements. 2.5 Droughts Droughts in urban areas are not uniformly defined, often referring to “prolonged absence or marked deficiency of precipitation”or “dry conditions relative to normal”(Singh et al., 2021). Drought is a phenomenon that impacts a wider region, not only a single urban center. Hence, drought impacts often affect entire urban regions or metropolitan areas with impact differentials based mainly on vulnerability and adaptive capacity, less on exposure and hazard. Drought-related impacts of climate change are often discussed as a particularly rural phenomenon, with main impacts on agriculture and forests (Frank, 2021). Drought has serious implications for urban residents, although drought 31Justice for Resilient Development in Climate-Stressed Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of Figure 7 UN-reported informal areas using twenty-five-mile radius. Informal areas are classified by proximity to coastline: 25 km, 50 km, and 100 km. Change in sea level in the near future (2021–2040) relative to 1995–2014 using scenario SSP5-8.5. Sources: Informal settlements, EM-DAT (2023); climate, IPCC (2021). use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of in urban areas is not exclusively due to climate change, but also influenced by inequality and other social drivers, such as seen in Southern African cities, or in the 2014 drought that impacted São Paulo, Brazil, in which water scarcity exacerbated existing territorial inequalities and injustices (van Loon et al., 2016; Millington, 2018; Yuan et al., 2018). Drought is particularly severe for urban residents that are dependent on their hinterland for food, energy, and other resources through trickle-down effects, that is, secondary and tertiary impacts of drought on urban residents. Overall, there is a pronounced gap in the literature on empirical and conceptual works on drought impacts in urban areas, particularly regarding impacts in nonagricultural contexts, such as energy and transport infrastructures, industry, and businesses (Singh et al., 2021). Scenarios that explore drought in the context of socioeconomic development in Maputo indicate that future droughts in Southern Africa will probably polarize urban inequalities, cause localized public health crises, and revert improvements of water access (Rusca et al., 2023). Drought in Asian megacities has been associated with severe water stress and related adaptation strategies varying by city, country, and context. For example, in the Indian city of Chennai and the Pakistani city of Karachi, water tankers are used that often use groundwater resources from likewise drought-stricken neighboring rural districts. This raises equity concerns related to the rural poor, women, and children who are responsible for water fetching in many lowand medium-income countries in Asia (Singh et al., 2021). Other secondary impacts of drought are related to food insecurity, morbidity, and mortality. Drought can foster infectious disease outbreaks, which are aggravated by high levels of inequality in relation to poor access to water, sanitation, and hygiene (Charnley et al., 2022). In African cities, for example, the highest cholera burden globally coincides with several drought-prone regions and high levels of inequality (e.g., related to marginalization of refugees and nomadic populations, large informal areas, poor access to water, sanitation, and hygiene), ultimately leading to increased mortality levels during and post drought occurrences (Charnley et al., 2022). Moreover, in thirteen major Brazilian macro-urban areas, drought positively influenced nonexternal, circulatory, and respiratory mortality from 2000 to 2019 (Salvador et al., 2022). In particular, females, the elderly, and children were affected, signified by a robust positive association, illustrating the inequity in experiencing drought impacts (Salvador et al., 2022). However, with increasing global warming, tropical vector-borne diseases are also traveling toward higher latitudes (Adepoju et al., 2023; Lovey & Schlagenhauf, 2023). In the United States, an endemic outbreak of the West Nile Virus in 2012 was connected to a nationwide drought that same year 33Justice for Resilient Development in Climate-Stressed Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of Public adaptation is generally directed at collective needs and provides public adaptation goods in cities (IPCC, 2023b). A global review of over 400 cities shows that the adaptation measures most implemented by city governments apply to the public sector itself (Klein et al., 2018). The instrument mostly used by cities to steer the private sector are different forms of economic incentives, which include financial incentives for companies, for example (Klein et al., 2018). In these cities, citizens and citizen action are mainly steered by information provision (Klein et al., 2018). In cities, private adaptation is generally taken by citizens and other private organizations to prepare or cope with and take advantage of changes in the climate. The action taken is usually in the actor’s self-interest, and sometimes as a response to stimuli other than climate change, for example to diversify livelihoods (Fenton et al., 2017). Much of this private adaptation includes dealing with immediate hazards affecting those taking the action, with or without the support from the public sector. Although there is a wealth of private adaptation actions taking place in cities, very little documentation exists of them as they are taken by organizations, households, and individuals daily with little knowledge or coordination by the public sector. For example, a review of 301 articles covering information from ninety-eight countries found that 63% (178) of articles reported current heat adaptation responses to be largely undertaken by individuals or communities, thereby falling under the category of coping strategies with no long-term plans, including using local knowledge, leveraging social networks, or engaging in community actions (Turek-Hankins et al., 2021). Types of private adaptation in urban areas can be directly related to the prevalent hazard, such as flood adaptations by using homestead and plinth, that is, the wall between ground level and ground floor level (see Figure 10). However, understanding of private adaptation interventions is still limited, as it remains unnoticed, uncoordinated, and lacking support from governmental actors or other public bodies. There are also more general actions to empower communities in coastal cities to adapt (Ehsan et al., 2022). In these, community-level boundary organizations and use of local knowledge, public participation events, and targeted community grants can empower the local community to act (Chapin et al., 2016; Howes, 2018). With increased heat stress the need for altering current housing structures becomes vital in cities, and this is often done privately without public steering or support programs for retrofitting. For example, the use of cool roofs can have a significant effect on reducing indoor temperatures (Borg et al., 2021). 40 Climate Change and Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of In Ahmedabad, standard tin roofs, asbestos/cement sheets, and concrete were altered with installations of solar reflective white paint on tin, a modular roofing system (ModRoof –an interlocking modular roofing system designed for low-income homeowners, and Airlite ventilation sheet with a passage that allows airflow and thermo-cool insulation, thus reducing indoor Figure 10 Private adaptation in households, highlighted in yellow boxes in Dhaka, Bangladesh. (a) Left: Elevating furniture by placing bricks. Middle: Elevated plinth. Right: Construction of shelves near the ceiling to store valuables. (b) Left: Use of polythene in roof and wall to avoid rainwater seepage. Middle: UseofStyrofoamforvegetation. Right:Raisedbarrierondoorstep. (c)Communal adaptation in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Left: Elevated land of settlement by brick structure. Right: Use of bamboo structures to protect land erosion. Source: Haque (2021). 41Justice for Resilient Development in Climate-Stressed Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of temperatures) (Vellingiri et al., 2020). In addition to measures focusing on the dwellings’physical structures, many other types of private measures are taken by households, such as livelihood changes, insurance, money lending for preparedness, and domestic and international migration (Haque, 2021; Noll et al., 2022). Several studies have shown that most of the climate change adaptation take place within the “formal”public sphere of policies, budgets, rules, and regulations, leaving informal areas outside most of such policies and plans (Satterthwaite et al., 2018). Hence, in such areas, it becomes the duty of individuals and community organizations to address the impacts of climate change (Satterthwaite et al., 2020). In addition, public and private adaptation measures naturally differ, and the evidence base on how public adaptation affects private adaptation is relatively scarce. While a distinction is made here between public and private adaptation, this strict classification and a focus on certain adaptation typologies ignores other important dynamics within adaptation processes (Woroniecki et al., 2019). For example, adaptation processes can reinforce existing power dynamics, supporting local elites (Buggy & McNamara, 2016). Furthermore, adaptation of Indigenous people is often ignored since it relies on coping and autonomous action, in contrast to planned adaptation. The impact of climate change on urban Indigenous people is largely lacking in literature but there are some cases where this has been highlighted. For example, anendeavorin Porirua in Aotearoa, New Zealand focused on imagining beyond the current constraints of urban form, focusing on how cities might reflect the diverse realities of the Māori (Partington & Pedersen Zari, 2020;Kiddleetal.,2023). An urban design competition, workshops, and a symposium can be seen as first steps to build capacity at practical levels. 4.2 Advancement of Justice and Equity in Adaptation Planning and Implementation Existing literature shows that equity concerns are beginning to be addressed in the development and planning of official city adaptation, albeit slowly (Reckien et al., 2023b). Much of the literature has examined the planning of adaptation (Reckien et al., 2023b). Studies on the outcomes of implementing adaptation measures are rare and there is a particular lack of empirical studies showing how adaptation measures affect different aspects of justice (Reckien et al., 2023b; UNEP, 2023). Actions that focus on inequality and justice are often piecemeal and not particularly coordinated (Fitzgibbons & Mitchell, 2019). Overall, there is an emphasis on procedural and distributive justice in 42 Climate Change and Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of public adaptation planning, and less attention on recognitional or restorative approaches to justice, although this might be affected by publication bias, with most studies focusing on the distributional and procedural aspects (Coggins et al., 2021). Few systematic reviews exist regarding equity in adaptation responses across regions and sectors. In one review of 1,682 articles, researchers examined to what extent certain marginalized social groups were considered in planning or implementing of adaptation (Araos et al., 2021). The study found that about 60% of the literature on adaptation responses identifies at least one marginalized group in implementing adaptation, and 50% do so in planning for adaptation. Literature covering social equity in adaptation mainly comes from the Global South: Africa (74% of articles), Asia, and the Small Island States (59% of articles); less often from Australasia (28% of articles), Europe (29% of articles), or North America (42% of articles). Low-income groups are most frequently mentioned (37% of articles), followed by gender/women (20% of articles), and Indigenous peoples (10% of articles); migrants are mentioned least (4% of articles). See additional resources for further review of literature. Adaptation plans do not always translate into actions on the ground. A review of thirty Latin American city adaptation plans shows that justice considerations are prominent but do not necessarily result in concrete actions and when they do, they focus on education and capacity building, rather than systemic policy interventions (Kato-Huerta & Geneletti, 2023). Moreover, aiming to contribute to a larger good, public adaptation can at times exacerbate existing injustices and hinder informal adaptation measures (see, for example, a recent review of sixty-eight studies regarding the implementation of public adaptation in Coggins et al., 2021). Distributive justice is the most often considered dimension of equity in citylevel adaptation. In a sample of twenty-two large US cities, distributive justice was a prominent theme in half the plans, with the most focus placed on adaptation actions and identification of vulnerabilities (Fiack et al., 2021). In a representative study of largeand medium-sized cities in Europe, 66% of plans and 34% of cities included a social vulnerability study in their adaptation plans (Reckien et al., 2023a). Similarly, an analysis of the strategies of ten of the Rockefeller Foundation’s 100 Resilient Cities programs shows that eight of the plans in the United States have stated objectives of addressing existing inequalities in income, infrastructure access, and services (e.g., housing, transportation, public areas), environmental amenities and disamenities, and educational and economic opportunities, while others have no mention of it (Meerow et al., 2019). 43Justice for Resilient Development in Climate-Stressed Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of The outcomes of implemented adaptation measures can be viewed through the lens of distributive justice. A review of 136 studies between 2008 and 2020 assesses three adaptation measures that target urban form, green and blue infrastructure, adaptive land uses, and urban design measures, based on indications that adaptation measures may exacerbate existing inequalities or lead to the emergence of new ones (Mohtat & Khirfan, 2021). Outcomes of adaptation are mostly connected to distributive injustice because adaptation is often implemented in areas of high-value real estate rather than marginalized urban areas. A study of 3,466 adaptation actions of 983 US urban counties revealed that adaptation actions over the past five years were highest in counties with large annual expected financial loss, particularly in communities of Black and Asian populations (Liu et al., 2023). This indicates that current adaptation policymaking could be driven by reducing negative economic impacts associated with extreme events rather than prioritizing areas with high socially vulnerable populations (Liu et al., 2023). Distributive justice in private adaptation concerns to what extent public adaptation does not address the unequal distribution of climate change impacts, thus placing an undue burden on some groups in society to act privately in the absence of planned adaptation (see Case Study 2 and additional resources for more information). Meanwhile public adaptation is often done under expert supervision, with hierarchies sometimes resulting in power relations among the actors. Political power and wealth discrepancies have been shown to exacerbate intra-community inequality and exclusion in public, large-scale resettlement projects in the coastal city of Iloilo, Philippines (See & Wilmsen, 2020)as well as coastal city adaptation in Caribbean Small Island Developing states, Bridgetown, Barbados (see Case Study 2). Constrained resources in vulnerable communities can limit access to the benefits of public adaptation, which may be accentuated by an unequal distribution of government programs (Fenton et al., 2017). Procedural justice is centered on fairness in decision-making and planning of public adaptation. While equal participation should be ensured throughout the process, van den Bergh and Keenan (2019) suggest that this alone is not enough. Instead, procedural justice should be linked to vulnerability dynamics by engaging participation across vulnerable populations as these change over time (van den Berg & Keenan, 2019). Initial results from analysis of city plans show that procedural justice is more often accounted for in comparison to the other dimensions of justice (Juhola et al., 2022). Most reviews that assess procedural justice often use the plans themselves as data (e.g., Fiack et al., 2021; 44 Climate Change and Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of CASE STUDY 2FLOOD RISK ADAPTATION AMONG POOR HOUSEHOLDS IN LUSAKA,ZAMBIA 11 Wilma S. Nchito Lusaka has a history of flooding. The increase in the number of unplanned settlements compounded with the effects of climate change has caused an increase in affected households (Chitumbo & Nchito, 2023). It is known that the poor tend to settle in precarious and hazardous zones in and around cities as these areas are more affordable. Upon an initial analysis of various adaptive measures, as residents in Kanyama and Kalikiliki settlements in Lusaka undertake to cope with frequent flooding, it becomes apparent that climate adaptation has become a newfound way of life. Some adaptive measures include changes in the architectural style of homes, unblocking drainage, and adapting informal businesses to suit flood conditions. Another prominent action is raising the foundation of homes, which presents additional costs to homeowners (Nchito, 2019). It is such proactive measures that enable people to continue living in conditions that are considered harsh, unhealthy, and stressful. Residents believe that they play an important role in mitigating floods by unblocking drains and disposing of waste properly. It is often assumed that communities cannot participate in preventing flooding and mitigating impacts. The responsibility is seen as being the preserve of government institutions and NGOs, which often do not take into consideration efforts of individuals and communities. Homeowners construct their houses with an advanced knowledge of terrain and the changing climate. The local municipal government would benefit by learning from Lusaka residents and replicating these community efforts on a broader, city-wide scale. Left: Flooding in an unplanned settlement in Lusaka. Right: Abandoned housing in Lusaka. (Source: Wilma S. Nchito, 2017). 11 See extended version of case study at https://uccrn.ei.columbia.edu/case-studies. 45Justice for Resilient Development in Climate-Stressed Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of Reckien et al., 2023b), which does not necessarily reflect all actions taken by a city government. The twenty-two biggest US cities mainly address procedural justice in terms of defining participation in adaptation actions and initiatives, followed by defining adaptation goals and calculating climate change vulnerabilities (Fiack et al., 2021). Studies documenting participation in climate adaptation have mixed results. A study of US cities participating in the Rockefeller Foundation’s 100 Resilient Cities Program shows that most climate adaptation plans were developed with public consultation, with many partner organizations listed as having taken part in the process (Fitzgibbons & Mitchell, 2019). Likewise, most local adaptation plans of largeand medium-sized cities in Europe (80% of plans) include some form of participation (Reckien et al., 2023a). However, the scope of that participation varies significantly between cities (Meerow et al., 2019). See additional resources for examples of procedural justice and how participation is facilitated. Particularly among vulnerable citizens, procedural justice is seen as the most important part of increasing equity and justice in climate adaptation decision-making, as a study in the City of Lake Macquarie, Australia, highlights (McManus et al., 2014). Likewise, procedural and recognitional justice was of crucial importance to users of NbS in the Hague, Netherlands (Snep et al., 2023). And, based on a review of the literature, Cattino and Reckien (2018) found that the level of participation is associated with transformative potential of adaptation, that is, the higher the level of participation (Arnstein, 1969), the higher the transformative potential of adaptation projects reviewed. Recognitional justice is a relatively new issue, and overall, plans are weaker in addressing recognitional justice. For example, in a review of ten US cities, Boston and Pittsburgh’s plans specifically note systemic racism while New Orleans recognizes persistent racism and its far-reaching effects (Meerow et al., 2019). In the same review, intergenerational justice, sometimes considered a part of recognitional justice, was not a concern in any of the plans analyzed. However, recognitional (and procedural) justice are found to be of crucial importance to make adaptation interventions, such as implementing greenspaces in The Hague, worthwhile and useful to residents (Snep et al., 2023). If recognitional justice is left unfulfilled, that is, already disadvantaged groups are not recognized, then ensuring their rights to participate and guaranteeing procedural justice is challenged. For this reason, recognitional justice is closely tied to procedural justice. This is illustrated in a study of two Indian cities, which shows that a lack of recognition of citizenship rights is 46 Climate Change and Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of compounded by informal livelihood strategies contributing to insufficient social networks, lack of political voice, and heightened exposure (Chu & Michael, 2019). In thirty Global North and South city strategies, there was also a noticeable difference between consultation and engagement, with most cities identifying specific marginalized groups for which specific improvement actions were also identified (Fitzgibbons & Mitchell, 2019). However, only a fifth of those strategies in the two US cities included in the study directly consulted these disadvantaged or disempowered groups regarding their adaptation needs (Fitzgibbons & Mitchell, 2019). In New York City, CBOs together with the New York Panel on Climate Change (NPCC) have addressed this issue by co-developing an engagement model for better inclusion (Leichenko et al., 2023). Restorative justice is the newest dimension of adaptation justice and the least settled in terms of theoretical underpinnings and adaptation planning. While there is continued ambiguity, damage is considered to take place when it is possible to repair or restore negative climate impacts and loss when it is not possible (Boyd et al., 2017). While the Loss and Damage (L&D) mechanism was established at COP27, there continues to be a lack of knowledge of national level financing and effective mechanisms for managing L&D (Boyd et al., 2021; Juhola et al., 2022). Reviews of existing literature show a lack of empirical studies demonstrating L&D occurring overall, with an urban focused research field yet to emerge (McNamara & Jackson, 2019). With cities being particularly affected by sea level rise, due to the location of many cities along the coasts based on historical trade routes, the L&D fund will be majorly important for coastal cities, where adaptation will not suffice. There is evidence of water insecurity and drought leading to L&D in seven Asian countries in the form of tangible losses (groundwater over extraction) and intangible losses (conflict) (Singh et al., 2021). Planning measures for restorative justice thus would be the acknowledgment of the need to compensate for diverging impacts of climate change, as well as compensation for maladaptation and redistribution of resources for adaptation. These have been taken up in some cities. For example, Vancouver has acknowledged the need to reallocate resources to develop adaptive capacity (Juhola et al., 2022). Planned relocation programs can also be considered to compensate for climate impacts (see additional resources for more information). Generally, a co-production approach when planning and implementing adaptation is purported to lead to more just outcomes (Tubridy et al., 2022). Waller (2023) posit that in order to advance justice in adaptation: (1) ownership of climate adaptation and infrastructural needs must benefit all populations; (2) 47Justice for Resilient Development in Climate-Stressed Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of communities must be empowered to petition for climate adaptation and infrastructural needs, thereby increasing their resilience; (3) the coping, adaptation, and recovery capacity of underserved communities must be increased; and (4) transparency to the allocation adaptation benefits from specific individual adaptation measures must be improved. CASE STUDY 3COASTAL CITY ADAPTATION IN GREATER BRIDGETOWN,BARBADOS 12 Michelle Mycoo The case of Greater Bridgetown, Barbados highlights the importance of effective climate-resilient development for overcoming barriers such as weak governance, lack of local stakeholder engagement, and a centralized top-down planning approach. Small Island Developing States are extremely vulnerable and exposed, as is the case of the Caribbean islands and particularly Barbados which, with a huge population concentration in low elevation coastal zones, are threatened by rising sea levels and tropical cyclones. These events lead to flooding, coastal retreat, and loss and damage to key infrastructure, housing, health, and economic activities, including the numerous institutional, financial, and human resource capacity barriers that characterize these areas (Mycoo et al., 2022). Formal urban planning in Barbados, particularly Physical Development Plans (PDPs) of 2017 (several plans carried out and few implemented), seeks to reduce climate risk with a focus on regulatory and physical-structural measures, offering guidance to public and private actors through regulation and control instruments for urban occupation (Town and Country Development Planning Office, 2017). Plans such as these prioritize solutions based on ecosystems, with preservation and recovery of green areas on the coast and a positive impact on drainage, cobenefits for mitigation and adaptation, in addition to the retreat of urban populations in relation to the line of high tide and cliffs. These measures are typically rejected by real estate agents, pressuring the government for permits to keep investing in high commercial value risky locations, covered by the insurance system (Mycoo et al., 2021). Despite being a rather small nation, population and area-wise (though size judgment differs according to context), the centralized government of Barbados ends up promoting top-down actions, weakening local networks and the adaptive capacity of communities, and their ability to contribute local knowledge to climate-resilient development. Despite some recent 12 See extended version of case study at https://uccrn.ei.columbia.edu/case-studies. 48 Climate Change and Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of 5 The State of Urban Mitigation and Equity, Development, and Informality Interactions Cities are responsible for both direct and indirect GHG emissions. Direct emissions (Scope 1) arise from activities within their jurisdictions; indirect emissions (Scope 2 and Scope 3) 13 are embodied emissions CASE STUDY 3 (cont.) efforts, the nonparticipation of local institutions and the community remains a barrier to effective adaptation in Barbados (Robinson, 2020). Likewise, the appropriation of knowledge about the interaction between adaptation and mitigation to inform adaptation design and planning is still weak, and knowledge gaps, along with weakened governance, are consistent barriers for actions that effectively contribute to climate justice and sustainable development (Mycoo et al., 2021). Flood hazard map of Bridgetown showing some of the key coastal assets. (Source: Mycoo et al., 2022). Low elevation coastal zone and flooding in Holetown and Trent based on climate change. (Source: Mycoo et al., 2022). 13 Scope 2 refers to indirect GHG emissions linked with production of electricity, heat, steam, and/ or cooling. Scope 3 encompasses all other indirect emissions, including emissions connected 49Justice for Resilient Development in Climate-Stressed Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of While top-down mitigation strategies can benefit informality and improvement in equity, the opportunities for equitable development must embrace informality by expanding possibilities of emerging technologies, pathways, and economic systems (Adegun, 2019). Informality in the literature is largely still treated as problematic, requiring replacement and disabling urban governance, but recent literature is enabling a shift in the way informality is seen within urban systems (Banks et al., 2019). Bottom-up mitigation initiatives offer opportunities to enhance equity, transition urban development pathways, and reduce informality (Quaye et al., 2022). Achieving equity within mitigation requires deliberate action to ensure that vulnerable populations are not disproportionately burdened, can fully participate, and benefit from these initiatives. By integrating equity and justice, development pathways can be redirected toward sustainability, avoiding excessive burdens on marginalized communities and cities, and promoting a shared commitment to addressing climate issues (Johnson et al., 2022). A comprehensive study of ethical guidance for improving social justice in urban climate change planning is still limited (Pratt, 2023). Drawing from studies, several key dimensions emerge as relevant to this context: recognition, inclusion, fair and equitable distribution of resources and opportunities, and transformative change (Healy et al., 2019; IPCC, 2022a; Niamir & Pachauri, 2023; Pratt, 2023). In the context of mitigation, the following issues emerge when viewed from the perspective of the four dimensions of climate justice (refer to Box 1). When considering distributive justice, there is an unfair burden of policies and measures to reduce GHG emissions, which is often realized in the costs and benefits of mitigation policies and management (Sovacool et al., 2019). The concept of “Well-being for All”and “Leave No One Behind”acknowledges the unequal burden placed on certain individuals and groups, which can be exacerbated by climate impacts. Wealthy individuals have access to more energy sources, disproportionately contribute to higher emissions, and therefore have a high potential for emissions reductions. Figure 11 shows the disconnection between where annual CO 2 emissions are projected to be highest versus where informal settlements are located. Those with high socioeconomic status have the potential to curtail GHG emissions by pursuing low-carbon lifestyles, directing investments toward low-carbon enterprises, and actively supporting stringent climate policies (IPCC, 2022a; Lamb & Steinberger, 2017). In the transition to a low-carbon economy, distributive justice plays a pivotal role in shaping systems such as energy infrastructure and delivering services like access to renewable energy technology, all with the aim of ensuring equitable distribution of costs and benefits among participants (McCauley et al., 2019;Sovacooletal., 56 Climate Change and Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of Figure 11 UN-reported informal areas using twenty-five-mile radius. Annual anthropogenic CO 2 emissions (kg/m 2 ) in the near future (2021–2040) relative to 1995–2014 using scenario SSP5-8.5. Sources: Informal settlements, EM-DAT (2023); climate, CMIP6, IPCC (2021). use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of 2019). The 2022 Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) in the United States is an example of how legislation can improve access to sustainable energy infrastructure like renewables. The IRA reduces renewable energy costs for businesses, nonprofits, educational institutions, and state, local, and tribal organizations through offering incentives and tax cuts (United States Government, 2022). In terms of distributional benefits, investments in renewable energy can reduce energy poverty by providing alternatives to grid energy, which is expensive and in some parts of cities hard to connect to. Renewable energy systems are also providing jobs and employment of youths, thereby integrating many into the urban labor force and market. Finally, renewable energy is also enabling alternative pathways for urban development including off-grid, heterogeneous pathways (Lakuma et al., 2019) (see additional resources for information related to equitable allocation of social goods and green spaces). In procedural justice, engaging citizens, businesses, investors, consumers, role models, professionals, youth, and Indigenous groups and other marginalized groups in decision processes enhances perceptions of legitimacy of climate change mitigation policy choices and support for policy outcomes, while cultivating social trust (Wood et al., 2018). An examination into four specific cases reveals injustices regarding the closed nature of decision-making in national energy policy and in smaller-scale pilot programs, which may exclude willing participants. Also, the strong power of lobbying groups was noted as a possible source of procedural injustice (Sovacool et al., 2019). A systematic review of the literature shows that most renewable energy policies have negative impacts on customers’energy bills in the short or medium term (Peñasco et al., 2021), meaning that the cost of mitigation is passed onto city dwellers with differing capacities to pay. Legal institutions, gender equality, and income equity tend to foster social trust. This, in turn, paves the way for enabling climate policies, in particular demand-side measures. Furthermore, it is possible to curtail the consumption of high-status goods, which often have a high carbon footprint, by implementing taxes on absolute wealth. Such measures can be enacted without jeopardizing overall well-being (Creutzig et al., 2022a; IPCC, 2022a,2023). Therefore, mitigation policies are more likely to achieve success when they are designed to align with and communicate the values that individuals hold. Approaches that prioritize autonomy, safety, energy security, equity, environmental protection, and fairness tend to resonate effectively within various communities and social groups (Creutzig et al., 2022b). Though many of these policies and taxes are beyond the city governments to design and implement, they can nevertheless support and lobby for these measures to be passed nationally. 58 Climate Change and Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of Recognitional justice refers to the need to acknowledge that there are vulnerable groups in society that may disproportionately be affected by lowcarbon transitions (Hughes & Hoffmann, 2020). These groups may be the chronically poor, ill, or unemployed. Also, low-income people often bear the cost of subsidies of new low carbon energy programs while simultaneously not being able to benefit from them (Sovacool et al., 2019). For example, Sovacool et al. (2019) report that poor housing segments in France, burdened families in Germany, and vulnerable groups in Norway are dependent on inefficient and high-priced electrical heating. In the United Kingdom, the best deals within the energy market have been structurally excluded (Sovacool et al., 2019). Restorative justice, rooted in principles of healing, accountability, and reconciliation has become a topic for academic debate in recent years (Almassi, 2022). The potential lies in leveraging climate change mitigation strategies as catalysts for both environmental sustainability and social restitution. By directing these efforts toward historically marginalized communities, which often bear a disproportionate burden of environmental challenges, cities can simultaneously rectify past wrongs and foster a more equitable and resilient future. There is very little scientific evidence in terms of implementation of restorative policies. The European Union (EU) Green Deal with its ambition of “Leave No One Behind,”may be considered a form of compensation for the loss of employment due to the transition. For example, this may mean compensation or new jobs for more than 230,000 coal workers in thirty-one coal regions in eleven EU member states (Skjærseth, 2021). 6 Equitable Urban Transitions and Transformations Development in this Element is understood as climate-resilient development in which both adaptation and mitigation are needed to secure the achievement of the SDGs (Schipper et al., 2022). Thus, development that is not supported by successful adaptation and mitigation actions is unlikely to yield a sustainable, thriving society. It is broadly recognized that for adaptation and mitigation to be successful, they should transform existing systems rather than propose incremental changes (Heikkinen et al., 2019). Central to this ARC3.3 Element is understanding the role that equity and informality play in just urban transformations and how they can lead toward climate-resilient development. Thus, understanding and conceptualizing the “just”in just urban transformations means considering what equity implications transformations might have and in what ways transformation processes affect the rights of those involved. It is also possible that mitigation and adaptation are not 59Justice for Resilient Development in Climate-Stressed Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of successful and lead to or further contribute to injustices, such as maladaptation (Reckien et al., 2023b). While many adaptation and mitigation measures will be successful in achieving their goals, maladaptation is shown to take place, as well as unintended outcomes of mitigation (Wang, 2021; Reckien et al., 2023b). The concept of “just transition”is a conceptual umbrella that integrates previous scholarship on climate, energy, and environmental justice (Heffron & McCauley, 2018; Hughes, 2020). The emerging concept of “just urban transition”(Hughes & Hoffmann, 2020)and“just climate adaptation”(Castán Broto, 2021; Juhola et al., 2022) conceptualize the pathway toward climate justice especially for cities. In this predominantly theoretical discussion so far, the focus has been to conceptualize transformative capacity inherent to the urban system and its interfaces among stakeholders, places, and processes (Torrens et al., 2021). 6.1 Inclusion of Justice Dimensions The concepts of just urban transitions are emerging in the literature to orient research, policy, and practical actions toward an effective inclusion of justice and equity dimensions into climate-responsive planning and urban design projects. 19 This would be a move away from existing processes that often tend to reproduce inequalities or overlook marginalized, vulnerable communities (Hughes et al., 2020; Torrens et al., 2021). Large-scale, prestige-oriented infrastructure projects and business-oriented interventions are often preferred by climate finance with a focus on representative parts of global cities as centers of climate urbanism, overlooking smalland medium-sized cities, vulnerable communities, most poor settlements in terms of access to climate-safe services, housing, and infrastructures (Anguelovski et al., 2019; Shi, 2020; Lehmann et al., 2021). All four dimensions of equity are addressed in the conceptualization of just urban transformations, highlighting how they need to be addressed and accounted for when climate actions are emerging or facilitated. For recognitional justice, the implementation of planning mechanisms and design tools that can integrate the demands of inclusiveness can overcome systemic inequality, discrimination, and marginalization, and cope with root causes of vulnerability is called for (Collado & Wang, 2020). Community-led innovations need to be reconsidered and considered for just urban transitions as they represent opportunities to develop resilience that already exist in cities (see Case Study 5). In the context of informality, people are adapting constantly to changing urban settings and formulating new models of urban development that may turn into robust coping actions (e.g., autonomous waste collection, energy 19 See ARC3.3 Element, Planning, Urban Design, and Architecture for Climate Action, www.cambridge.org/core/publications/elements/elements-in-climate-change-and-cities. 60 Climate Change and Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of CASE STUDY 5BARRIO INTERCULTURAL,PATAGONIA:ARESILIENT INITIATIVE 20 Belen Olaya García and Alejandra Marcela Vanegas Díaz Barrio Intercultural, in San Martin de los Andes, Patagonia, is an example of a successful community-led initiative for accessible, sustainable, and resilient housing for vulnerable, marginalized groups facing environmental and political-economic pressure. The region was traditionally occupied by the Mapuche community and became of high touristic interest by the 1980s. A housing emergency was declared after a census led by Vecinos Sin Techo (VST), a social organization that has collaborated with the Mapuche Curruhuinca community since 2004, to recover the land for its original occupants expelled in 1880. The area became a National Park in the 1930s and in 2011 the Argentinean Government restored around 400 hectares to the community, comprising Indigenous and non-Indigenous inhabitants, thanks to the VST and Mapuche community movement. The physical and social construction of Barrio Intercultural (92 of 250 houses built) is based on preserving Indigenous–and non-Indigenous identities. Barrio Intercultural is built by the community, self-organized, and financed by the government, which also gives technical assistance, also through partner social organizations. A complex inclusive governance and planning were conceived to achieve a sustainable future focusing on “intersectionality, interdisciplinarity, organizational strengthening, interculturality, environmental and climate awareness, as well as solidarity.” Sustainable and resilience-based building and social and economic solutions were adopted: use of natural lighting and ventilation in homes; reduced soil sealing; prioritizing pedestrians over motorized vehicles; mixed system of solar and electrical energy; efficient stoves (few homes also using gas); water supply mixed system with reduced environmental impact (by the water cooperative and from the Cull Rani stream); community gardens to support food sovereignty (deactivated during the COVID-19 pandemic, impacting community cultivation and meals); recycling waste in the community or in a recycling station; and local sustainable sanitary treatment (not fully implemented due to cost, bioclimatic, and cultural issues). The success of the project also has positive repercussions for tackling the giant housing challenge for vulnerable and marginalized populations, which persists in the context of the environmental and climate crisis. 20 See extended version of case study at https://uccrn.ei.columbia.edu/case-studies. 61Justice for Resilient Development in Climate-Stressed Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of self-sufficiency) (Castán Broto & Robin, 2020). Reconsideration of informality in this perspective is crucial in terms of recognition and procedures (e.g., knowledge and governance) to incorporate aspects of low-carbon development, social network capabilities, circular economies, and low-budget solutions into just urban projects. Recognitional justice is also critical in environmental justice aspirations and for the SDG fulfillment, especially SDG1 (No Poverty), SDG10 (Reduced Inequalities), and SDG13 (Climate Action) (Gomes, 2021). In terms of procedural justice, there is a need to reconfigure understanding of which actors can deliver just urban adaptation and mitigation in contemporary cities. This calls for reshaping the dynamics of power and action currently occurring in cities in which climate interventions are led mostly by business-oriented actors. Recognition of actors in terms of agency, authority, and accountability for just urban transformations needs to be implemented (Hughes et al., 2020). This is also linked to the dichotomy between large-scale investments carried on by private companies versus small-scale innovations led by local communities (Castán Broto et al., 2020;CastánBroto,2021). For distributive justice, the focus is on the community scale. The neighborhood scale is at the forefront in innovating the provision of collective services (e.g., childcare, security, food production, energy production) and the sharing of responsibilities (Castán Broto, 2021). The scale of citizen engagement, small enterprises, local institutions (e.g., schools, neighborhood healthcare centers, civic centers), third-sector organizations, that is, a range of organizations with different structures and functions, belonging neither to the public sector (i.e., the CASE STUDY 5 (cont.) Left: A home in Barrio Intercultural: Community of Change for nonMapuche community members; San Martin de los Andes, Argentina. Right: The rucas, a typical Mapuche-style home, with an octagonal floorplan in Barrio Intercultural; San Martin de los Andes, Argentina. Source: Belén Olaya, 2022. 62 Climate Change and Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of state) nor to the private sector (profit-making private enterprise), and knowledge intermediaries (e.g., universities, nonprofit organizations) should be included in effective planning actions (Wolfram et al., 2019; Castán Broto, 2021). The restorative justice dimension needs to be better understood and integrated in terms of effective measures to ensure responses to loss and damage and recognition of the knowledge, capacity, and desires of marginalized or excluded groups of populations (Chu & Michael, 2019; Hughes et al., 2020). One way to do this is to develop consistent forms of coproduction of knowledge and actions, while acknowledging power imbalances (Vincent et al., 2020). In addition, research and policy agendas should pay more attention to colonial legacies that still have consequences in urban processes and give more space to postcolonial lenses and Global South experiences and their dynamics of change (Robin & Castán Broto, 2021). 6.2 The State of Just Urban Transformations The empirical evidence for ongoing transformations is scarce both, in general, but also in the urban context (Salomaa & Juhola, 2020; IPCC, 2022a). Most literature has focused on identifying potential theoretical and conceptual gaps and leverage points that need to be addressed for just transformations to occur. Thus far, there is little empirical evidence on the equity implications of transformations. Therefore, we rely on identified examples that can serve as entry points but should not be generalized (see additional resources Box 1). First, transformational approaches address the root causes of risk that involve the drivers of vulnerability and engage with issues of power, justice, and agency. Power, justice, and agency are particularly important for cities in developing countries because of rapid rates of urbanization. Poorer rural populations are more likely to face political marginalization and lack adequate representation in host communities, which directly impacts their vulnerability and exposure (Bahadur & Tanner, 2021). Second, for an initiative to be transformational, it needs to deliver outcomes that will endure for a long duration, for example, shifts in institutional structures and policies (Few et al., 2017). In many contexts, sustainable change may result from a reorganization of government systems, the establishment of new organizations, or political and administrative regime reform. This issue is particularly relevant for urban contexts because governance mechanisms and structures tend to be assembled in urban areas, which offers opportunities to embed riskreducing policies and institutions to deliver lasting change. Third, a number of different conceptualizations of transformation underline the critical importance of scale, that is, they embody the need for a large magnitude and intensity of change. For an initiative to be transformational, it should affect a 63Justice for Resilient Development in Climate-Stressed Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of large number of people and work across governance scales (e.g., from local to national level) (Kates et al., 2012; Few et al., 2017). Working across scales is particularly crucial for urban areas in developing countries because these towns and cities are afflicted by fractured decentralization. The power to make key risk reduction decisions may reside with authorities at provincial and federal levels. 21 Fourth, there is a growing understanding of how transformational approaches influence change beyond the direct area of implementation and incorporated cascading impacts (Kates et al., 2012). Pal et al. (2019) argue that “transformational change can result from initiatives that catalyze broader change. Deliberate shifts within systems can be expanded to trigger indirect changes and cascading impacts within structures and systems that are beyond an initiative’s direct mandate or reach”(p. 7). This ability to catalyze a domino effect is particularly important in the context of cities as most countries and regions have CASE STUDY 6AN INTEGRATIVE APPROACH TO COMMUNITY CLIMATE RESILIENCE IN RED HOOK,BROOKLYN 22 Chiara Camponeschi Red Hook is a community in Brooklyn, New York that is particularly vulnerable to climatic events. When Hurricane Sandy struck in October 2012, Red Hook was one of the city’s four hardest-hit areas suffering major service disruptions that left residents with no heat and electricity for seventeen days, and without running water for eleven (New York City Special Initiative for Rebuilding and Resiliency, 2013; Schmeltz et al., 2013). Atthe time, municipal disaster plans did not contemplate nor address “extensive and long-lasting power outages and lack of key services”such as the ones experienced in Red Hook (Schmeltz et al., 2013, p. 7). The Red Hook Initiative (RHI) is a community-based nonprofitwhose doors stayed open 12−14 hours per day for twenty-four consecutive days during Hurricane Sandy to meet the needs of thousands of Red Hook residents and serve as a social and logistical hub for the community. It is from this context of equity and engagement that the Community Disaster Readiness Plan was born, developed to establish a locally relevant protocol to address the critical 72 hours before and after a disaster. What distinguishes this plan from its municipal counterparts is the understanding and integration of lived experience, which allows residents to create a 21 See ARC3.3 Element, Governance, Enabling Policy Environments, and Just Transitions, www.cambridge.org/core/publications/elements/elements-in-climate-change-and-cities. 22 See extended version of case study at https://uccrn.ei.columbia.edu/case-studies. 64 Climate Change and Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of institutions aimed at linking cities with one another (e.g., national mayors’ councils, municipal federations, urban climate networks, etc.) and that can be used for transmitting these cascading shifts. CASE STUDY 6 (cont.) responsive and meaningful intervention framework guided by knowledge of how previous gaps in service failed to keep their community safe and serviced. Red Hook’s readiness framework has seven thematic areas that distribute relief efforts across the community: support services; food and shelter; communications; health and medical; community response team; utilities; and coordination. This community example creates numerous entry points for replicating its participatory approach across many areas of the resilience planning process, providing a valuable case to guide the implementation of scalable and responsive local interventions worldwide. Community Disaster Readiness Plan: Support services map (Ready Red Hook, 2016). 65Justice for Resilient Development in Climate-Stressed Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of The Earth Observations Toolkit use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of SLUMAP, showing greenness of building roofs and citywide indicators in Nairobi use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of 7 Challenges and Future Research There are a number of limitations and constraints to further investigating the complex relations between climate change in cities and equity, development, and informality. Among them is a data gap, particularly in the cities of the Global South, which concerns data on hazards and risks of climate change at the local scale, for the whole urban system (both formal and informal areas). Although mapping informal areas (e.g., by using GIS) has been advancing rapidly over the last two to three years (Georganos et al., 2022; Kühnl et al., 2022), climate change–related data gaps (regarding weather observations, weather stations, scenarios) further widen the existing data gap for informal areas regarding socio-economic, demographic, land use data. The need to access adequate information and downscale climate data in relation to informal city structure and climate projections in an accessible form is vital for climate action. Otherwise, there is a risk that future climate impacts are not considered in relation to existing informal settlements or when planning upgrading initiatives (Satterthwaite et al., 2018). The complexity of informality and lack of local data has been hindering local plans to take climate change action into consideration. Usually conducting a climate change assessment requires expertise that is not available at the local level, which adds to the cost of local planning efforts (GIZ, 2017; Schuck & Eissa, 2018; Eissa & Khalil, 2021). In addition, the lack of relevant expertise is apparent with much of the work focused on country-level issues rather than city level or district/neighborhood levels, especially in the Global South where most of the informal areas exist. 25 Moreover, lack of access to data and data sharing exacerbates the data gap even when relevant data are available as responsive actions become unattainable (Hardoy et al., 2019). Urban contexts pose challenges because of the dynamism that is a key characteristic of urban contexts across the world, but especially in the Global South. For example, in South Asia in the period 2000–2010, the population of those living in urban areas grew by almost 130 million (Ellis & Roberts, 2016). This means that land use patterns and urban geo-morphology are changing very rapidly, making it virtually impossible to capture the variables necessary for effectively modeling hazard impacts. Investment and massive application of remote sensing technologies and GIS are now gaining prominence to address this highly dynamic challenge. Much of this expansion is taking the form of informal settlements, which means that the most vulnerable urban populations are represented least in these forms of data collection. 25 See ARC3.3 Element, Governance, Enabling Policy Environments, and Just Transitions, www.cambridge.org/core/publications/elements/elements-in-climate-change-and-cities. 74 Climate Change and Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of Urban areas are also highly diverse where people from different classes, ethnic backgrounds, linguistic groups, and professions reside near one another. This can lead to the emergence of disputes about justice, making the adoption of policies a challenge. This in turn poses challenges for the use of participatory approaches that are predicated on the generation of consensus and therefore require a degree of social homogeneity to deliver valid results (Bahadur & Tanner, 2021). Participatory or collaborative processes require investment in training the population for inclusion to be effective and require time that governments often cannot or do not want to spend on the initiatives they lead. This means that the reality of vulnerable urban citizens is not captured effectively. Towns and cities are also dense where homesteads, especially in informal settlements, merge into one another. This poses challenges, for instance, making it difficult to ascertain the level of exposure to hazards in urban informal settlements using satellite pictures. Frequent assessments are essential. Informal areas are often found on the fringes of planned urban settlements or in abandoned locations inside urban agglomerations. However, different relations could be found between informal areas and planned areas. There are limited studies that investigate the interand intra-relationships between planned and informal/unplanned areas around cities. Reciprocal relationships can be deduced based on studying aspects such as boundaries and borders, mobility and connectivity, and waste collection networks. Several overlaps, contradictions, and intersections can be drawn from such juxtapositions. In a study conducted in the Greater Cairo Region, the identified neighboring typologies showed the complexity of relations among one of the biggest metropolitan areas in the Global South and the biggest arid city worldwide (Gad et al., 2022). Such relationships are very much related to resilience to climate change as it manifests in the responsiveness of existing infrastructures and urban systems with their formal and informal parts to various incidents. Relationship typologies also govern how interventions and deployment of solutions can address urgent vulnerabilities. 8 Conclusions This Element explores the ways in which climate change risks and policy influence cities from the perspective of justice and informality (see additional resources Figure 7). Our findings show that vulnerable marginalized groups, often living in informal urban areas, pay a disproportionately heavier burden in terms of experiencing the impacts of climate change as well as outcomes from adaptation and mitigation responses. Those who are marginalized are often not 75Justice for Resilient Development in Climate-Stressed Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of recognized, nor do they participate in formal adaptation or mitigation planning processes, further exacerbating their situation. While there is initial discussion on loss and damage and restorative justice in the urban context, almost no measures exist to compensate for the unfair burden. Empirical evidence of how transformations affect justice and equity and the context of informality is largely missing. Any transformative initiatives that support climate-resilient development need to address the rights of all citizens and actively account for them during change. This Element has found: 1) The literature stresses that procedural justice is a key component of transformation in climate-stressed cities. The inclusion of marginalized communities in public planning processes –with transparency and fairness –can set in motion a transformational approach to justice in cities that accounts for distributive, procedural, and potentially restorative justice. 2) Investing in monitoring and evaluation is a necessity to identify intended and unintended consequences of past and current adaptation policies and actions. 3) Including vulnerable communities and social groups in documenting, monitoring, and evaluating is vital, as their inclusion may help avoid or course-correct unintended consequences of climate-related adaptation and mitigation responses in cities. 4) Enabling learning from in-point adaptation, mitigation, and monitoring activities institutionalizes principles of equity and justice in the urban management, administration, and policy realm. When doing so, take the bureaucracy of an urban setting into account. 5) Regarding distributive justice, prioritize funding and resources for vulnerable, particularly low-income and marginalized groups, especially for those living in informal settlements, and build socio-technical capacities in these communities to understand climate science, early warning, climate impacts and response outcomes (e.g., by increasing access to easy-to-comprehend information, promoting networking, and sharing of good practices). 6) For recognitional and restorative justice, less information is documented in scientific literature. However, evidence points toward the importance of identifying the most significant contributors of urban emissions as well as the most impacted social groups in urban environments and to include both in decision-making processes. The inclusion of currently vulnerable and marginalized groups would support a move toward restorative justice with the goal of climate-resilient development for all. 76 Climate Change and Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of This Element identifies the need to accumulate the evidence base of how justice and equity mediate the development of urban areas, particularly in terms of informality. While there is increasing evidence of unequal distribution of climate impacts globally, further steps need to be taken at the city-scale to document, through citizen science methodologies, not only the impacts of climate change but also the implementation and outcomes of adaptation and mitigation. For adaptation, this means to go beyond low-hanging fruit such as urban green solutions, for example, that tend to favor more affluent areas, demonstrating the unequal distribution of benefits of climate responses. For mitigation, this means turning the research agenda toward questions of fairness and well-being in terms of GHG reduction measures and going beyond emissions calculations. Transforming urban areas to support climate-resilient development also means monitoring and evaluating systematic evidence in terms of what implications these have for vulnerable groups and how transformative processes may alter power balances in urban areas. Appendix: Stakeholder Sounding Stakeholder Sounding Workshops are vitally important aspects of the Assessment Reports on Climate Change and Cities series. They are essential to every assessment we do as part of UCCRN. On April 21, 2022, the Justice Coordinating Lead Authors met with city stakeholders from Copenhagen, Durban, Grandquevilly, Gujarat, Lagos, Philadelphia, Rio de Janeiro, and São Paulo. In that workshop, we discussed the preliminary findings of the Element and received critical feedback as regards scope and breadth of the presented information as well as relevance and applicability for implementation. Insights from Stakeholders •Understanding the legacy of environmental injustice –In some cities, public development is aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals (e.g. SDG 16 on Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions), and building stronger public-private partnerships can accelerate progress. Cities, such as Philadelphia, are using place-based initiatives and assessing economic development of specific neighborhoods to consider the interconnectedness between historical injustices and environmental justice. In Bogotá, the city’s master plan includes the creation of “Care Blocks”which will enhance women’s access to city services in their respective neighborhoods, including professional development, wellness promotion, and income-generation. 77Justice for Resilient Development in Climate-Stressed Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of •Working across government sectors –Impactful climate adaptation and mitigation requires strong coordination across government sectors. Cities like Rio de Janeiro recognize that enhancing climate knowledge among political leaders is necessary to advance integrated climate actions across national, subnational, and city levels. •Collecting localized data that enables city planning –There is widespread need for more precise, high-resolution, location-specific data. Stakeholders request actionable data that addresses immediate and acute needs like economic impact data and flood vulnerability information. Cities such as Durban have begun measuring how heavy precipitation and storms affect stream flow but have identified a lack of connectivity between extreme event data and public sector emergency responses. •Monitoring and evaluating climate indicators –By tracking climate indicators, spatially and temporally, cities can evaluate the effectiveness of adaptation actions while ensuring that urban strategies account for changing environmental conditions. Cities like Barcelona stress the need for indicators related to health, for example, the relationships between heat and mortality, and energy poverty and health. 78 Climate Change and Cities use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of References Adegun, O. B. (2019). Green infrastructure in informal unplanned settlements: The case of Kya Sands, Johannesburg. International Journal of Urban Sustainable Development, 11(1), 68–80. Adelekan, I., Cartwright, A., Chow, W., Colenbrander, S., Dawson, R., Garschagen, M., Haasnoot, M., Hashizume, M., Klaus, I., Krishnaswamy, J., Lemos, M. F., Ley, D., McPhearson, T., Pelling, M., Kodira, P. P., Revi, A., Sara, L. M., Simpson, N. P., Singh, C., Solecki, W., Thomas, A., & Trisos, C. (2022). What the Latest Science on Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability Means for Cities and Urban Areas. Karnataka: Indian Institute for Human Settlements. https://doi.org/10.24943/SUPSV209.2022. Adepoju, O. A., Afinowi,O.A.,Tauheed,A.M.,Danazumi,A.U.,Dibba,L.B.S., Balogun, J. B., Flore, G., Saidu, U., Ibrahim, B., Balogun, O. O., & Balogun, E. O. (2023). Multisectoral perspectives on global warming and vector-borne diseases: A focus on Southern Europe. Current Tropical Medicine Reports,10(2),47–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40475-023-00283-y. Ahmed, S., Meenar, M., & Alam, A. (2019). Designing a blue-green infrastructure (BGI) network: Toward water-sensitive urban growth planning in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Land, 8(9), Article 9. https://doi.org/10.3390/land8090138. Akrofi, M. M., & Okitasari, M. (2022). Integrating solar energy considerations into urban planning for low carbon cities: A systematic review of the state-ofthe-art. Urban Governance, 2(1), 157–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j .ugj.2022.04.002. Alfaro d’Alençon, P., Smith, H., Álvarez de Andrés, E., Cabrera, C., Fokdal, J., Lombard, M., Mazzolini, A., Michelutti, E., Moretto, L., & Spire, A. (2018). Interrogating informality: Conceptualisations, practices and policies in the light of the New Urban Agenda. Habitat International, 75, 59–66. https://doi .org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2018.04.007. Almassi,B.(2022).Climatereparations,compensation, and intergenerational restorative justice. In B. Pali, M. Forsyth, & F. Tepper (Eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Environmental Restorative Justice (pp. 201–222). New York: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-042232_9. Amorim-Maia, A. T., Anguelovski, I., Chu, E., & Connolly, J. (2022). Intersectional climate justice: A conceptual pathway for bridging adaptation planning, transformative action, and social equity. Urban Climate, 41(41), 101053. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2021.101053. use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of Anderko, L., Chalupka, S., Du, M., & Hauptman, M. (2020). Climate changes reproductive and children’s health: A review of risks, exposures, and impacts. Pediatric Research, 87 (2), 414–419. Anguelovski, I., Connolly, J. J. T., Pearsall, H., Shokry, G., Checker, M., Maantay, J., Gould, K., Lewis, T., Maroko, A., & Roberts, J. T. (2019). Opinion: Why green “climate gentrification”threatens poor and vulnerable populations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(52), 26139–26143. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1920490117. Araos, M., Jagannathan, K., Shukla, R., Ajibade, I., Coughlan de Perez, E., Davis, K., Ford, J. D., Galappaththi, E. K., Grady, C., Hudson, A. J., Joe, E. T., Kirchhoff, C. J., Lesnikowski, A., Alverio, G. N., Nielsen, M., Orlove, B., Pentz,B.,Reckien,D.,Siders,A.R.,... & Turek-Hankins, L. L. (2021). Equity in human adaptation-related responses: A systematic global review. One Earth, 4(10), 1454–1467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2021.09.001. Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners,35(4),216–224. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 01944366908977225. Bader,D.A.,Blake,R.,Grimm,A.,Hamdi,R.,Kim,Y.,Horton,R.,& Rosenzweig, C. (2018). Urban climate science. In C. Rosenzweig, W. Solecki, P. Romero-Lankao, S. Mehrotra, S. Dhakal, & S. Ali Ibrahim (Eds.), Climate Change and Cities: Second Assessment Report of the Urban Climate Change Research Network (pp. 27–60). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bahadur, A. V., & Tanner, T. (2021). Resilience Reset: Creating Resilient Cities in the Global South. Abingdon: Routledge. Bambrick, H., Moncada, S., & Briguglio, M. (2015). Climate change and health vulnerability in informal urban settlements in the Ethiopian Rift Valley. Environmental Research Letters, 10(5), 054014. https://doi.org/10.1088/ 1748-9326/10/5/054014. Banks, N., Lombard, M., & Mitlin, D. (2019). Urban informality as a site of critical analysis. The Journal of Development Studies, 56(2), 223–238. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2019.1577384. BeznerKerr,R.,Hasegawa,T.,Lasco,R.,Bhatt,I.,Deryng,D.,Farrell,A.,GurneySmith, H., Ju, H., Lluch-Cota, S., Meza, F., Nelson, G., Neufeldt, H., & Thornton, P. (2022). Food, fibre, and other ecosystem products. In H.- O. Pörtner, D. C. Roberts, M. Tignor, E. S. Poloczanska, K. Mintenbeck, A. Alegría, M. Craig, S. Langsdorf, S. Löschke, V. Möller, A. Okem, & B. Rama (Eds.), Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability (pp. 713–906). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1017/9781009325844.007. 80 References use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of Borg, F. H., Greibe Andersen, J., Karekezi, C., Yonga, G., Furu, P., Kallestrup, P., & Kraef, C. (2021). Climate change and health in urban informal settlements in lowand middle-income countries: A scoping review of health impacts and adaptation strategies. Global Health Action, 14(1), 1908064. https://doi.org/10.1080/16549716.2021.1908064. Boyd, E., Chaffin, B. C., Dorkenoo, K., Jackson, G., Harrington, L., N’guetta, A., Johansson, E. L., Nordlander, L., Paolo de Rosa, S., Raju, E., Scown, M., Soo, J., & Stuart-Smith, R. (2021). Loss and damage from climate change: A new climate justice agenda. One Earth, 4(10), 1365–1370. Boyd, E., Ghosh, A., & Boykoff, M. (2015). Climate change adaptation in Mumbai, India. In The Urban Climate Challenge (pp. 149–65). Abingdon: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315772981-15. Boyd, E., James, R. A., Jones, R. G., Young, H. R., & Otto, F. E. (2017). A typology of loss and damage perspectives. Nature Climate Change, 7(10), 723–729. Bozzolan, E., Holcombe, E. A., Pianosi, F., Marchesini, I., Alvioli, M., & Wagener, T. (2023). A mechanistic approach to include climate change and unplanned urban sprawl in landslide susceptibility maps. Science of the Total Environment, 858(Pt. 1), 159412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv .2022.159412. Brown, C. M., & DeMaria, A. (2012). The resurgence of West Nile virus. Annals of Internal Medicine, 157(11), 823–823. https://doi.org/10.7326/ 0003-4819-157-11-201212040-00543. Buggy, L., & McNamara, K. E. (2016). The need to reinterpret “community”for climate change adaptation: A case study of Pele Island, Vanuatu. Climate and Development, 8(3), 270–280. Bulkeley, H., Carmin, J., Castan Broto, V., Edwards, G. A. S., & Fuller, S. (2013). Climate justice and global cities mapping the emerging discourses. Global Environmental Change, 23, 914–925. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.gloenvcha.2013.05.010. Butsch,C.,S.Kumar,P.D.Wagner,M.Kroll,L.N.Kan-takumar,E. Bharucha, K. Schneider, and F. Kraas, 2017: Growing “Smart”? Urbanization processes in the Pune urban agglomeration. Sustain., 9, 1–21. doi:10.3390/su9122335. Cantoni, R., Caprotti, F., & de Groot, J. (2022). Solar energy at the peri-urban frontier: An energy justice study of urban peripheries from Burkina Faso and South Africa. Energy Research & Social Science, 94, 102884. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.erss.2022.102884. Cao, A., Esteban, M., Valenzuela, V. P. B., Onuki, M., Takagi, H., Thao, N. D., & Tsuchiya, N. (2021). Future of Asian Deltaic megacities under sea level 81References use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of Galuszka, J., Martin, E., Nkurunziza, A., Achieng’Oginga, J., Senyagwa, J., Teko, E., & Lah, O. (2021). East Africa’s policy and stakeholder integration of informal operators in electric mobility transitions –Kigali, Nairobi, Kisumu and Dar es Salaam. Sustainability, 13 (4), 1703. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/su13041703. Garrick, D., De Stefano, L., Yu, W., Jorgensen, I., O’Donnell, E., Turley, L., Aguilar-Barajas, I., Dai, X., De Souza Leão, R., Punjabi, B., Schreiner, B., Svensson, J., & Wight, C. (2019). Rural water for thirsty cities: A systematic review of water reallocation from rural to urban regions. Environmental Research Letters, 14 (4), 043003. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab0db7. Geels, F. W., Schwanen, T., Sorrell, S., Jenkins, K., & Sovacool, B. K. (2018). Reducing energy demand through low carbon innovation: A sociotechnical transitions perspective and thirteen research debates. Energy Research & Social Science, 40, 23–35. Georganos, S., Hafner, S., Kuffer, M., Linard, C., & Ban, Y. (2022). A census from heaven: Unraveling the potential of deep learning and Earth Observation for intra-urban population mapping in data scarce environments. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation,114, 103013. Georgiadou, Y., & Reckien, D. (2018). Geo-information tools, governance, and wicked policy problems. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information,7 (1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi7010021. GIZ. (2017). Climate Change Adaptation and Urban Resilience. Participatory Development Programme in Urban Areas. www.egypt-urban.net/climatechange-adaptation-and-urban-resilience/. Glavovic, B., Dawson, R., Chow, W., Garschagen, M., Haasnoot, M., Singh, C., Thomas, A., Aerts, J., Blackburn, S., Catt, D., Chu, E., Solecki, W., StijnTemmerman, & Winter, G. (2022). Cities and settlements by the sea. In WGII Contribution the Sixth Assessment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Geneva: IPCC. www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg2/downloads/ report/IPCC_AR6_WGII_CCP2.pdf Gomes, C. (2021). Trusted land: Land deals, climate vulnerability and adaptation in Northern Mozambique. Climate and Development, 13 (8), 685–696. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17565529.2020.1852909. Hansen, J., Sato, M., Kharecha, P., & von Schuckmann, K. (2011). Earth’s energy imbalance and implications. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics,11 (24), 13421–13449. https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-13421-2011. Haque, A. N. (2020). A “Whole Systems”View of Vulnerability to Climatic Risks: The Case of the Urban Poor in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Progress in Development Studies,20(2),101–118. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464993420908094. 88 References use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of Haque, A. N. (2021). Climate risk responses and the urban poor in the Global South: The case of Dhaka’sflood risk in the low-income settlements. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 64, 102534. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102534. Haque, A. N. (2021). Private adaptation in households in Dhaka, Bangladesh [Photograph]. Personal Collection. Hardoy, J., Gencer, E., & Winograd, M. (2019). Participatory planning for climate resilient and inclusive urban development in Dosquebradas, Santa Ana and Santa Tomé. Environment and Urbanization, 31 (1), 33–52. https:// doi.org/10.1177/0956247819825539. Healy, N., Stephens, J. C., & Malin, S. A. (2019) Embodied energy injustices: Unveiling and politicizing the transboundary harms of fossil fuel extractivism and fossil fuel supply chains. Energy Research & Social Science, 48, 219–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2018.09.016. Heffron, R. J., & McCauley, D. (2018). What Is the “Just Transition”? Geoforum, 88, 74–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2017.11.016. Heikkinen, M., Ylä-Anttila, T., & Juhola, S. (2019). Incremental, reformistic or transformational: What kind of change do C40 cities advocate to deal with climate change? Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning,21(1),90–103. Holland, B. (2017). Procedural justice in local climate adaptation: Political capabilities and transformational change. Environmental Politics, 26 (3), 391–412. Howarth, C., Lane, M., Morse-Jones, S., Brooks, K., & Viner, D. (2022). The “co”in co-production of climate action: Challenging boundaries within and between science, policy and practice. Global Environmental Change, 72, 102445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2021.102445. Howes, M. (2018). Transforming climate change policymaking: From informing to empowering the local community. Communicating Climate Change Information for Decision-Making,139–148. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74669-2_10. Huang, F., Tang, C., Jiang, S. H., Liu, W., Chen, N., & Huang, J. (2022). Influence of heavy rainfall and different slope cutting conditions on stability changes in red clay slopes: A case study in South China. Environmental Earth Sciences, 81 (15), 384. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-022-10466-x. Hughes, S. (2020). Principles, drivers, and policy tools for just climate change adaptation in legacy cities. Environmental Science & Policy, 111, 35–41. Hughes, S., Chu, E. K., & Mason, S. G. (2020). Climate Change and Cities. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hughes, S., & Hoffmann, M. (2020). Just urban transitions: Toward a research agenda. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 11 (3), e640. Hummel, M. A., Griffin, R., Arkema, K., & Guerry, A. D. (2021). Economic evaluation of sea-level rise adaptation strongly influenced by hydrodynamic 89References use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of feedbacks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118 (29), e2025961118. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2025961118. Hunter, L. M., Castro, J., Kleiber, D., & Hutchens, K. (2016). Swimming and gendered vulnerabilities: Evidence from the Northern and Central Philippines. Society & Natural Resources,29(3),380–385. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 08941920.2015.1046097. Hurlbert, M., & Gupta, J. (2015). The split ladder of participation: A diagnostic, strategic, and evaluation tool to assess when participation is necessary. Environmental Science & Policy, 50, 100–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j .envsci.2015.01.011. IPCC. (2014). Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (O. Edenhofer, R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, E. Farahani, S. Kadner, K. Seyboth, A. Adler, I. Baum, S. Brunner, P. Eickemeier, B. Kriemann, J. Savolainen, S. Schlömer, C. von Stechow, T. Zwickel, & J. C. Minx [Eds.]). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. IPCC. (2021). Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis (V. MassonDelmotte,P.Zhai,A.Pirani,S.L.Connors,C.Péan,S.Berger,N.Caud,Y.Chen, L.Goldfarb,M.I.Gomis,M.Huang,K.Leitzell,E.Lonnoy,J.B.R.Matthews, T. K. Maycock, T. Waterfield, O. Yelekçi, R. Yu, & B. Zhou [Eds.]). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896. IPCC. (2022a). Summary for policymakers. In H.-O. Pörtner, D. C. Roberts, M. Tignor, E. S. Poloczanska, K. Mintenbeck, A. Alegría, M. Craig, S. Langsdorf, S. Löschke, V. Möller, A. Okem, & B. Rama (Eds.), Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability (pp. 3–33). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/9781009325844.001. IPCC. (2022b). Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability: WorkingGroupIIContributiontotheSixthAssessmentReportofthe Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,first ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009325844. IPCC. (2023a). Annex I: Glossary. In Climate Change 2022—Mitigation of Climate Change (1st ed., pp. 1793–1820). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157926.020. IPCC. (2023b). Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Core Writing Team, H. Lee, & J. Romero [Eds.]). Geneva: IPCC. http://dx.doi.org/10.59327/IPCC/AR6-9789291691647. Ishtiaque, A., Eakin, H., Vij, S., Chhetri, N., Rahman, F., & Huq, S. (2021). Multilevel governance in climate change adaptation in Bangladesh: 90 References use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of Structure, processes, and power dynamics. Regional Environmental Change, 21, 75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-021-01802-1. Islam, M. S. (2018). A techno-economic feasibility analysis of hybrid renewable energy supply options for a grid-connected large office building in southeastern part of France. Sustainable Cities and Society, 38, 492–508. Janssen, M. A., Anderies, J. M., & Ostrom, E. (2007). Robustness of social-ecological systems to spatial and temporal variability. Society and Natural Resources, 20 (4), 307–322. Jay,O.,Capon,A.,Berry,P.,Broderick,C.,deDear,R.,Havenith,G.,Honda,Y., Kovats,R.S.,Ma,W.,Malik,A.,Morris,N.B.,Nybo,L.,Seneviratne,S.I., Vanos, J., & Ebi, K. L. (2021). Reducing the health effects of hot weather and heat extremes: from personal cooling strategies to green cities. The Lancet,398 (10301), 709–724 . https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(21)01209-5. Johnson, L., Krisko, P., Malik, M., O’Donnell, C., Pendleton, N., Ahn, D., Bizberg, A., Chafe, Z. A., Kim, D., McCormick, S., Naidoo, S., & Anenberg, S. C. (2022). Environmental, health, and equity co-benefits in urban climate action plans: A descriptive analysis for 27 C40 member cities. Frontiers in Sustainable Cities, 4 (869203). http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/frsc.2022.869203. Juhola, S., Heikkinen, M., Pietilä, T., Groundstroem, F., & Käyhkö, J. (2022). Connecting climate justice and adaptation planning: An adaptation justice index. Environmental Science & Policy, 136, 609–619. Jurgilevich, A., Käyhkö, J., Räsänen, A., Pörsti, S., Lagström, H., Käyhkö, J., & Juhola, S. (2023). Factors influencing vulnerability to climate change-related health impacts in cities-a conceptual framework. Environment International, 107837. Kabisch, N., Korn, H., Stadler, J., & Bonn, A. (Eds.) (2017). Nature-Based Solutions to Climate Change Adaptation in Urban Areas: Linkages between Science, Policy and Practice. New York: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/9783-319-56091-5_1. Kaijser, A., & Kronsell, A. (2014). Climate change through the lens of intersectionality. Environmental Politics, 23, 417–433. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/09644016.2013.835203. Kaku, K. (2019). Satellite remote sensing for disaster management support: A holistic and staged approach based on case studies in Sentinel Asia. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 33, 417–432. Karjalainen, L. E., & Juhola, S. (2021). Urban transportation sustainability assessments: A systematic review of literature. Transport reviews, 41 (5), 659–684. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2021.1879309. Kates, R. W., Travis, W. R., & Wilbanks, T. J. (2012). Transformational adaptation when incremental adaptations to climate change are insufficient. 91References use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109 (19), 7156–7161. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1115521109. Kato-Huerta, J., & Geneletti, D. (2023). Analysing the treatment of environmental justice and nature-based solutions in the Urban Climate Action Plans of Latin American metropolitan areas. Local Environment, 28 (11), 1388–1409. https:// doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2023.2221431. Kelly, C., Kasperavicius, D., Duncan, D., Etherington, C., Giangregorio, L., Presseau, J., Sibley, K. M., & Straus, S. (2021). “Doing”or “using”intersectionality? Opportunities and challenges in incorporating intersectionality into knowledge translation theory and practice. International Journal for Equity in Health, 20, 187. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-021-01509-z. Khalil, H. A. E. E., Ibrahim, A., Elgendy, N., & Makhlouf, N. (2018). Could/ should improving the urban climate in informal areas of fast-growing cities be an integral part of upgrading processes? Cairo case. Urban Climate, 24, 63–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2018.01.007. Khan, M. M. H., Gruebner, O., & Krämer, A. (2014). Is area affected by flood or stagnant water independently associated with poorer health outcomes in urban slums of Dhaka and adjacent rural areas? Natural Hazards, 70 (1), 549–565. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-013-0829-1. Kiddle, R., Elkington, B., Ross, M., Mercier, O. R., Thomas, A., Gjerde, M., Smeaton, J., Arona, T., & Mawer, C. (2023). Imagining a decolonized city in and from Aotearoa New Zealand. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 47, 146–154. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.13132. Klein, J., Araos, M., Karimo, A., Heikkinen, M., Ylä-Anttila, T., & Juhola, S. (2018). The role of the private sector and citizens in urban climate change adaptation: Evidence from a global assessment of large cities. Global Environmental Change, 53, 127–136. Kotharkar, R., & Bagade, A. (2018). Evaluating urban heat island in the critical local climate zones of an Indian city. Landscape and Urban Planning, 169, 92–104. Kühnl, M., Sapena, M., Wurm, M., Geiß, C., & Taubenböck, H. (2022). Multitemporal landslide exposure and vulnerability assessment in Medellín, Colombia. Natural Hazards, 119 (2), 883–906. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069022-05679-z. la Porta, R., & Shleifer, A. (2014). Informality and development. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 28 (3), 109–126. Lager, F., Coninx, I., Breil, M., Bakhtaoui, I., Branth Pedersen, A., Mattern, K., van den Berg, H., Sini, E., Gallucio, G., Klein, R., & Vierikko, K. (2023). Just Resilience for Europe: Towards Measuring Justice in Climate Change Adaptation. Copenhagan: European Environment Agency. https://doi.org/ 10.25424/CMCC-BATP-3M95. 92 References use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of Lakuma, C. P., Marty, R., & Muhumuza, F. (2019). Financial inclusion and micro, small, and medium enterprises (MSMEs) growth in Uganda. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 8, 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13731019-0110-2. Lamb, W. F., & Steinberger, J. K. (2017). Human well-being and climate change mitigation. WIREs Climate Change, 8 (6), e485. https://doi.org/10.1002/ wcc.485. Lee, T., & Painter, M. (2015). Comprehensive local climate policy: The role of urban governance. Urban Climate, 14, 566–577. https://doi.org/10.1016/j .uclim.2015.09.003. Lehmann, M., Major, D. C., Fitton, J. M., Doust, K., & O’Donoghue, S. (2021). Towards a typology for coastal towns and small cities for climate change adaptation planning. Ocean & Coastal Management, 212, 105784. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2021.105784. Leichenko, R., Foster, S., & Nguyen, K. H. (2023). Bringing equity into climate change: Adaptation planning in New York City. In J. Rice, J. Long, & A. Levenda (Eds.), Urban Climate Justice: Theory, Praxis, Resistance (pp. 127–147). Athens: University of Georgia Press. Li, H., & Grant, R. J. (2022). Climate gentrification in Miami: A real climate change-minded investment practice? Cities, 131, 104025. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.cities.2022.104025. Linton, S., Clarke, A., & Tozer, L. (2022). Technical pathways to deep decarbonization in cities: Eight best practice case studies of transformational climate mitigation. Energy Research & Social Science, 86, 102422. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2021.102422. Liu, Z., Fang, C., Liao, X., Fan, R., Sun, B., & Mu, X. (2023). Adaptation and adaptability: Deciphering urban resilience from the evolutionary perspective. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 103, 107266. LHASA 1.1. (2023). NASA Landslide Team Projects. https://gpm.nasa.gov/ landslides/projects.html. Loayza, N. V. (2016). Informality in the process of development and growth. The World Economy, 39 (12), 1856–1916. Lovey, T., & Schlagenhauf, P. (2023). Rising temperatures and the threat of malaria in Europe: An unwanted return?, Rev Med Switzerland, 9 (825), 849–852. https://doi.org/10.53738/REVMED.2023.19.825.849. Lucas, B. (2021). Urban Flood Management in Nigeria. K4D Helpdesk Report 948. Brighton: Institute of Development Studies. http://dx.doi.org/10.19088/ K4D.2021.018e. Lwasa, S., Buyana, K., Kasaija, P., & Mutyaba, J. (2018). Scenarios for adaptation and mitigation in urban Africa under 1.5°C global warming. 93References use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability,30,52–58. https://doi .org/10.1016/j.cosust.2018.02.012. Marcos, M., Chust, G., Jordà, G., & Caballero, A. (2012). Effect of sea level extremes on the western Basque coast during the 21st century. Climate Research, 51 (3), 237–248. https://doi.org/10.3354/cr01069. Marengo, J. A., Alcantara, E., Cunha, A. P., Seluchi, M., Nobre, C. A., Dolif, G., Goncalves, D., Assis Dias, M., Cuartas, L. A., Bender, F., Ramos, A. M., Mantovani, J. R., Alvalá, R. C., & Moraes, O. L. (2023). Flash floods and landslides in the city of Recife, Northeast Brazil after heavy rain on May 25– 28, 2022: Causes, impacts, and disaster preparedness. Weather and Climate Extremes, 39, 100545. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wace.2022.100545. Markkanen, S., & Anger-Kraavi, A. (2019). Social impacts of climate change mitigation policies and their implications for inequality. Climate Policy,19 (7), 827–844. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2019.1596873. Martin, E., Courtright, T., Nkurunziza, A., & Lah, O. (2023). Motorcycle taxis in transition? Review of digitalization and electrification trends in selected East African capital cities. Case Studies on Transport Policy, 13, 101057. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cstp.2023.101057. McCauley, D., Ramasar, V., Heffron, R. J., Sovacool, B.K., Mebratu, D., & Mundaca, L. (2019). Energy justice in the transition to low carbon energy systems: Exploring key themes in interdisciplinary research. Applied Energy, 233, 916–921. McFarlane, C. (2012). Rethinking informality: Politics, crisis, and the city. Planning Theory & Practice, 13 (1), 89–108. McManus, P., Shrestha, K. K., & Yoo, D. (2014). Equity and climate change: Local adaptation issues and responses in the City of Lake Macquarie, Australia. Urban Climate, 10, 1–18. McNamara, K. E., & Jackson, G. (2019). Loss and damage: A review of the literature and directions for future research. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 10 (2), e564. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.564. Meerow, S., Pajouhesh, P., & Miller, T. R. (2019). Social equity in urban resilience planning. Local Environment,24(9),793–808. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/13549839.2019.1645103. Mentaschi, L., Duveiller, G., Zulian, G., Corbane, C., Pesaresi, M., Maes, J., Stocchino, A., & Feyen, L. (2022). Global long-term mapping of surface temperature shows intensified intra-city urban heat island extremes. Global Environmental Change, 72, 102441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha .2021.102441. Millington, N. (2018). Producing water scarcity in São Paulo, Brazil: The 2014– 2015 water crisis and the binding politics of infrastructure. Political Geography, 65, 26–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2018.04.007. 94 References use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of Mishra, V., Ganguly, A. R., Nijssen, B., & Lettenmaier, D. P. (2015). Changes in observed climate extremes in global urban areas. Environmental Research Letters, 10 (2), 024005. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/10/2/024005. Mitlin, D. (2021). Editorial: Citizen participation in planning: from the neighbourhood to the city. Environment and Urbanization, 33 (2), 295–309. https://doi.org/10.1177/09562478211035608. Moellendorf, D. (2012). Climate change and global justice. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 3 (2), 131–143. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/wcc.158. Mohtat, N., & Khirfan, L. (2021). The climate justice pillars vis-à-vis urban form adaptation to climate change: A review. Urban Climate, 39, 100951. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2021.100951. Mora,C.,Dousset,B.,Caldwell,I.R.,Powell,F.E.,Geronimo,R.C.,Bielecki, C. R., Counsell, C. W. W., Dietrich, B. S., Johnston, E. T., Louis, L. V., Lucas, M. P., McKenzie, M. M., Shea, A. G., Tseng, H., Giambelluca, T. W., Leon, L. R., Hawkins, E., & Trauernicht, C. (2017). Global risk of deadly heat. Nature Climate Change, 7 (7), 501–506. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate3322. Moreno, J., & Shaw, D. (2018). Women’s empowerment following disaster: A longitudinal study of social change. Natural Hazards, 92, 205–224. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s11069-018-3204-4. Moser, S. C., Aldunce, P., Rudnick, A., Rojas, M., & Muñoz, L. (2019). Transformation from Science to Decision-Making, Policy Brief to COP25. Madrid: COP25 Scientific Committee and the Ministry of Science, Technology, Knowledge and Innovation of Chile, the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, the European Union, the Inter-American Development Bank, and the International Science Council. Mukherjee, M., Wickramasinghe, D., Chowdhooree, I., Chimi, C., Poudel, S., Mishra, B., Ali, Z. F., & Shaw, R. (2022). Nature-based resilience: Experiences of five cities from South Asia. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19 (19), 11846. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191911846. Muñoz-Erickson, T., Miller, C., & Miller, T. (2017). How cities think: Knowledge co-production for urban sustainability and resilience. Forests, 8 (6), 203. Mycoo, M. A., Robinson, S., Nguyen, C., Nisbet, C., & Tonkel, R., III. (2021). Human adaptation to coastal hazards in Greater Bridgetown, Barbados. Frontiers in Environmental Science,9.http://doi.org/10.3389/ fenvs.2021.647788. Mycoo,M.,Wairiu,M.,Campbell,D.,Duvat,V.,Golbuu,Y.,Maharaj,S.,Nalau,J., Nunn,P.,Pinnegar,J.,&Warrick,O.(2022).Smallislands.InH.-O.Pörtner, D. C. Roberts, M. Tignor, E. S. Poloczanska, K. Mintenbeck, A. Alegría, M. Craig, S. Langsdorf, S. Löschke, V. Möller, A. Okem, & B. Rama (Eds.), Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Cambridge: 95References use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of Cambridge University Press. www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg2/downloads/report/ IPCC_AR6_WGII_FinalDraft_Chapter15.pdf. Nakstad, B., Filippi, V., Lusambili, A., Roos, N., Scorgie, F., Chersich, M. F., Luchters, S., & Kovats, S. (2022). How climate change may threaten progress in neonatal health in the African region. Neonatology, 119 (5), 644–651. https://doi.org/10.1159/000525573. Narayanan, A., Mets, K., Strobbe, M., & Develder, C. (2019). Feasibility of 100% renewable energy-based electricity production for cities with storage and flexibility. Renewable energy, 134, 698–709. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.renene.2018.11.049. Nchito, W. (2017). Flooding in Lusaka, Zambia [Photographs]. Personal Collection. Nchito, W. (2019). Flooding in Lusaka: A Historical and Endemic problem. Technical Background Report. Lusaka: Lusaka Water Security Initiative. New York City Special Initiative for Rebuilding and Resiliency. (2013). PlaNYC: A Stronger, More Resilient New York. www.nyc.gov/html/sirr/ html/report/report.shtml. Niamir, L., & Pachauri, S. (2023). From social and natural vulnerability to human-centered climate resilient coastal cities. Frontiers in Sustainable Cities, 5, 1137641. Nicholls, R. J. (2015). Adapting to sea level rise. In J. F. Shroder, J. T. Ellis, & D. J. Sherman (Eds.), Coastal and Marine Hazards, Risks, and Disasters (pp. 243–270). Amsterdam: Elsevier. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-3964830.00009-1. Nicholls,R.J.,Lincke,D.,Hinkel,J.,Brown,S.,Vafeidis,A.T.,Meyssignac,B., Hanson, S. E., Merkens, J.-L., & Fang, J. (2021). A global analysis of subsidence, relative sea-level change and coastal flood exposure. Nature Climate Change,11 (4), 4. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-021-00993-z. Nikulina, V., Simon, D., Ny, H., & Baumann, H. (2019). Context-adapted urban planning for rapid transitioning of personal mobility towards sustainability: A systematic literature review. Sustainability, 11 (4), 1007. Noll, B., Filatova, T., Need, A., & Taberna, A. (2022). Contextualizing cross-national patterns in household climate change adaptation. Nature climate change,12(1),30–35. O’Donnell, E. C., Netusil, N. R., Chan, F. K. S., Dolman, N. J., & Gosling, S. N. (2021). International perceptions of urban blue-green infrastructure: A comparison across four cities. Water,13(4),544.https://doi.org/ 10.3390/w13040544. O’Donnell, E. C., Thorne, C. R., Yeakley, J. A., & Chan, F. K. S. (2020). Sustainable flood risk and stormwater management in blue-green cities; an interdisciplinary case study in Portland, Oregon. JAWRA Journal of the 96 References use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of American Water Resources Association,56(5),757–775. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/1752-1688.12854. Odejobi, O. J., Ajala, O. O., & Osuolale, F. N. (2022). Review on potential of using agricultural, municipal solid and industrial wastes as substrates for biogas production in Nigeria. Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery, 14, 1567–1579. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-022-02613-y. Olaya, B. (2022). A home in Barrio Intercultural: Community of Change for non-Mapuche community members; San Martin de los Andes, Argentina [Photograph]. Personal Collection. Olaya, B. (2022). The rucas, a typical Mapuche-style home, with an octagonal floorplan in Barrio Intercultural; San Martin de los Andes, Argentina [Photograph]. Personal Collection. Olson, K. R., & Kreznor, W. (2021). Managing the Chao Phraya River and Delta in Bangkok, Thailand: Flood control, navigation and land subsidence mitigation. Open Journal of Soil Science, 11 (4), 197–215. https://doi.org/ 10.4236/ojss.2021.114011. Pal, U., Bahadur, A. V., Mcconnell, J., Prutha Vaze, Acharya, S., & Kumar, P. (2019). Uma Pal Unpacking Transformation: A Framework and Insights from Adaptation Mainstreaming. Oxford: Action on Climate Today. https:// doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.20256.40962. Pappalardo, S., Zanetti, C., & Todeschi, V. (2023). Mapping urban heat islands and heat-related risk during heat waves from a climate justice perspective: A case study in the municipality of Padua (Italy) for inclusive adaptation policies. Landscape and Urban Planning, 238, 104831. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2023.104831. Partington, J., & Pedersen Zari, M. (2020). NgāiTūhoe’s Te Kura Whare: Our living building. In M. Pedersen Zari, P. Connolly, & M. Southcombe (Eds.), Ecologies Design: Transforming Architecture, Landscape and Urbanism (Chapter 25). Abingdon: Routledge. Peñasco, C., Anadón, L. D., & Verdolini, E. (2021). Systematic review of the outcomes and trade-offs of ten types of decarbonization policy instruments. Nature Climate Change, 11, 257–265. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-02000971-x. Petrucci, O. (2022). Landslide fatality occurrence: A systematic review of research published between January 2010 and March 2022. Sustainability, 14 (15), 9346. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159346. Pietrapertosa, F., Olazabal, M., Simoes, S. G., Salvia, M., Fokaides, P. A., Ioannou, B. I., Viguié, V., Spyridaki, N.-A. de Gregorio Hurtado, S., Geneletti, D., Heidrich, O., Tardieu, L., Feliu, E., Rižnar, K., Matosović,M., Balzan,M.V.,Flamos,A.,Belšak Šel, N., & Reckien, D. (2023). Adaptation to 97References use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of Tapia, C., Abajo, B., Feliu, E., Mendizabal, M., Martinez, J. A., Fernández, J. G., Laburu, T., & Lejarazu, A. (2017). Profiling urban vulnerabilities to climate change: An indicator-based vulnerability assessment for European cities. Ecological Indicators, 78, 142–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind .2017.02.040. Tayarani, M., Nadafianshahamabadi, R., Poorfakhraei, A., & Rowangould, G. (2018). Evaluating the cumulative impacts of a long range regional transportation plan: Particulate matter exposure, greenhouse gas emissions, and transportation system performance. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 63, 261–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2018.05.014. Tebaldi, C., Ranasinghe, R., Vousdoukas, M., Rasmussen, D. J., VegaWesthoff, B., Kirezci, E., Kopp, R. E., Sriver, R., & Mentaschi, L. (2021). Extreme sea levels at different global warming levels. Nature Climate Change, 11 (9), 9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-021-01127-1. Thompson, A., & Otto, F. E. L. (2015). Ethical and normative implications of weather event attribution for policy discussions concerning loss and damage. Climatic Change, 133, 439–451. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-015-1433-z. Torrens, J., Westman, L., Wolfram, M., Broto,V.C.,Barnes,J.,Egermann,M., Ehnert, F., Frantzeskaki, N., Fratini, C. F., Håkansson, I., Hölscher, K., Huang, P., Raven, R., Sattlegger, A., Schmidt-Thomé, K., Smeds, E., Vogel, N., Wangel, J., & von Wirth, T. (2021). Advancing urban transitions and transformations research. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 41, 102–105. Town and Country Development Planning Office. (2017). Bridgetown Community Plan. Bridgetown: Town and Country Development Planning Office. www .townplanning.gov.bb/pdp/Downloads/files/pdp/B-07_Bridgetown.pdf. Tubridy, F., Lennon, M., & Scott, M. (2022). Managed retreat and coastal climate change adaptation: The environmental justice implications and value of a coproduction approach. Land Use Policy, 114, 105960. Turek-Hankins, L. L., Coughlan de Perez, E., Scarpa, G., Ruiz-Diaz, R., Schwerdtle, P. N., Joe, E. T., Galappaththi, E. K., French, E. M., Austin, S. E., Singh,C.,Siña,M.,Siders,A.R.,vanAalst,M.K.,Templeman,S., Nunbogu, A. M., Berrang-Ford, L., Agrawal, T., the Global Adaptation Mapping Initiative team, & Mach, K. J. (2021). Climate change adaptation to extreme heat: A global systematic review of implemented action. Oxford Open Climate Change, 1 (1), kgab005. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfclm/kgab005. Ulyssea, G. (2020). Informality: Causes and consequences for development. Annual Review of Economics, 12, 525–546. UN-Habitat. (2016). World Cities Report 2016: Urbanization and Development: Emerging Futures. Nairobi: UN-Habitat. https://unhabitat .org/world-cities-report-2016. 104 References use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of UNDP. (2022). New Threats to Human Security in the Anthropocene: Demanding Greater Solidarity. New York: UNDP. UNEP & UN-Habitat. (2021). Global Environment for Cities –GEO for Cities: Towards Green and Just Cities. New York: UNEP. UNEP. (2023). Adaptation Gap Report 2023: Underfinanced. Underprepared. Inadequate Investment and Planning on Climate Adaptation Leaves World Exposed. Nairobi: United Nations Environment Programme. https://doi.org/ 10.59117/20.500.11822/43796. United States Government. (2022). Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, Pub. L. No. 117–169, 136 Stat. 1818. Urban Climate Stuttgart. (2025). Climate analysis maps (map-XIII, pages 1 to 12). https://www.stadtklima-stuttgart.de/index.php?climate_climate_atlas_1992_9_ climatopes. van den Berg, H. J., & Keenan, J. M. (2019). Dynamic vulnerability in the pursuit of just adaptation processes: A Boston case study. Environmental Science & Policy, 94, 90–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2018.12.015. van der Meulen, F., IJff, S., & van Zetten, R. (2023). Nature-based solutions for coastal adaptation management, concepts and scope, an overview. Nordic Journal of Botany, 2023 (1), e032. vanLoon,A.F.,Gleeson,T.,Clark,J.,vanDijk,A.I.J.M.,Stahl,K.,Hannaford,J., di Baldassarre, G., Teuling, A. J., Tallaksen, L. M., Uijlenhoet, R., Hannah, D. M., Sheffield, J., Svoboda, M., Verbeiren, B., Wagener, T., Rangecroft, S., Wanders, N., & van Lanen, H. A. J. (2016). Drought in the Anthropocene. Nature Geoscience, 9 (2), 2. https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2646. Vellingiri, S., Dutta, P., Singh, S., Sathish, L. M., Pingle, S., & Brahmbhatt, B. (2020). Combating climate change-induced heat stress: Assessing cool roofs and its impact on the indoor ambient temperature of the households in the urban slums of Ahmedabad. Indian Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 24 (1), 25. https://doi.org/10.4103/ijoem .IJOEM_120_19. Vincent, K., Carter, S., Steynor, A., Visman, E., & Wågsæther, K. L. (2020). Addressing power imbalances in co-production. Nature Climate Change,10 (10), 877–878. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-020-00910-w. Vincent, K., Daly, M., Scannell, C., & Leathes, B. (2018). What can climate services learn from theory and practice of co-production? Climate Services, 12, 48–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cliser.2018.11.001. Visconti, C. (2023). Co-production of knowledge for climate-resilient design and planning in Naples, Italy. Habitat International, 135, 102748. https://doi .org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2023.102748. 105References use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of Waller, J. (2023). Stormwater capital improvement planning: A framework for project identification and prioritization for pluvial flood mitigation. Journal of Critical Infrastructure Policy,3,93–115. https://doi.org/10.18278/jcip.3.2.8. Wang, J., Fleischmann, M., Venerandi, A., Kuffer, M., & Porta, S. (2022). Earth observation + morphometrics: Towards a systematic understanding of cities in challenging contexts. Annual Conference Proceedings of the XXVIII International Seminar on Urban Form. University of Strathclyde, p. 363–370. Wang, Z. H. (2021). Compound environmental impact of urban mitigation strategies: Co-benefits, trade-offs, and unintended consequence. Sustainable Cities and Society, 75, 103284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2021.103284. Wiedmann,T.,Chen,G.,Owen,A.,Lenzen,M.,Doust,M.,Barrett,J.,Steele,K. (2021). Three-scope carbon emission inventories of global cities. Journal of Industrial Ecology,25,735–750. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.13063. Wolfram, M., Borgström, S., & Farrelly, M. (2019). Urban transformative capacity: From concept to practice. Ambio, 48, 437–448. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s13280-019-01169-y. Wood, B. T., Dougill, A. J., Stringer, L. C., & Quinn, C. H. (2018). Implementing climate-compatible development in the context of power: lessons for encouraging procedural justice through community-based projects. Resources, 7 (2), 36. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources7020036. Woroniecki, S., Krüger, R., Rau, A.-L., Preuss, M. S., Baumgartner, N., Raggers, S., Niessen,L.,Holländer,L.,Beyers,F.,Rathgens,J.,Wagner,K.C.,Habigt,L., Krause, T., Wamsler, C., von Wehrden, H., & Abson, D. (2019). The framing of power in climate change adaptation research. WIREs Climate Change,10(6), e617. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.617. Youssef, K., Shao, K., Moon, S., & Bouchard, L.-S. (2023). Landslide susceptibility modeling by interpretable neural network. Communications Earth & Environment, 4, 162. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-023-00806-5. Yuan, X., Wang, L., & Wood, E. F. (2018). Anthropogenic intensification of Southern African flash droughts as exemplified by the 2015/16 season. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 99, S86–S90. Zambrano, J., & Rey, D. M. (2022). Assessment of storm floods in a small tropical Andean basins. Frontiers in Climate, 4, 117. https://doi.org/10.3389/ fclim.2022.760894. Zhou,W.,Huang,G.,Pickett,S.T.A.,Wang,J.,Cadenasso,M.L.,McPhearson,T., Grove, J. M., & Wang, J. (2021). Urban tree canopy has greater cooling effects in socially vulnerable communities in the US. One Earth, 4 (12), 1764–1775. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2021.11.010. 106 References use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of Acknowledgments We thank UCCRN South Africa Hub Director Sean O’Donoghue for his excellent shepherding of this Element. Jaad Benhallam and Natalie Kozlowski of the UCCRN Secretariat provided outstanding editorial and graphic support. We greatly appreciate the constructive reviews of the Element by Katherine Cann, David Dodman, Sofia Fernandes, David Resnik, Hartmut Fünfgeld, and David Satterthwaite. UCCRN acknowledges support from NASA (WBS 509496.02.80.01.16) for this publication. use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of Author List Coordinating Lead Authors Diana Reckien, University of Twente, Enschede and Berlin Sirkku Juhola, University of Helsinki, Helsinki Lead Authors Anika Nasra Haque, University of York, York Heba Allah Khalil, Cairo University, Cairo Maria Fernanda Lemos, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro (PUC-Rio), Rio de Janeiro Shuaib Lwasa, International Institute of Social Studies, The Hague Leila Niamir, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), Laxenburg Juan Camilo Osorio, School of Architecture, Pratt Institute, New York City Cristina Visconti, University of Naples Federico II, Naples Contributing/Case Study Authors Aditya Bahadur, International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED), Delhi Chiara Camponeschi, Institute for Global Health Research, York University, York Belen Olaya García, National Autonomous University of Mexico, Mexico City Alejandra Marcela Vanegas Díaz, National University of Río Negro, Viedma Gerard Martínez Görbig, University of Twente, Enschede Michelle Mycoo, University of the West Indies, Saint Augustine Wilma S. Nchito, University of Zambia, Lusaka Basirat Oyalowo, University of Lagos, Lagos Sheetal Patil, Indian Institute for Human Settlements, Bengaluru Emma Porio, Ateneo de Manila University, Manila Paula Presser, University of Twente, Enschede Chandni Singh, Indian Institute for Human Settlements, Bengaluru UCCRN Editorial Board Shepherd Sean O’Donoghue, eThekwini Municipality, Durban use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of Climate Change and Cities: Third Assessment Report of the Urban Climate Change Research Network Series Editors William Solecki New York William Solecki is a Professor in the Department of Geography at Hunter College, City University of New York (CUNY). From 2006–2014 he served as the Director of the CUNY Institute for Sustainable Cities at Hunter College. He also served as interim Director of the Science and Resilience Institute at Jamaica Bay. He has co-led several climate impacts studies in the greater New York and New Jersey region, including the New York City Panel on Climate Change (NPCC). He was a Lead Author of the Urban Areas chapter in the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), and a Coordinating Lead Author of the Urbanization, Infrastructure, and Vulnerability chapter in the Third National Climate Assessment (US). He is a co-founder of the Urban Climate Change Research Network (UCCRN), co-editor of Current Opinion on Environmental Sustainability, and founding editor of the Journal of Extreme Events. His research focuses on urban environmental change, resilience, and adaptation transitions. Minal Pathak Ahmedabad Minal Pathak is an Associate Professor at the Global Centre for Environment and Energy at Ahmedabad University, India. She is a Senior Scientist with the Technical Support Unit of Working Group III of the IPCC for its Sixth Assessment cycle. She has contributed to two IPCC Special Reports, co-edited the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report, and contributed to the recently published IPCC Sixth Assessment Synthesis Report. She heads the South Asia Hub of the UCCRN, headquartered at the Columbia Climate School. She was a Visiting Researcher at Imperial College London (2017–2023) and a Visiting Scholar at MIT (2016–2017). Her research focuses on climate change mitigation strategies for urban settlements, transport, and buildings, and their co-benefits/interlinkages with development. Martha Barata Rio de Janeiro Martha Barata is Coordinator of the Latin America Hub of the UCCRN, headquartered at Columbia Climate School. Barata is a collaborating researcher at the Oswaldo Cruz Institute (Fiocruz) and CentroClima (COPPE/UFRJ), following retirement from the Oswaldo Cruz Foundation in 2017. She was a Visiting Scholar in the Center for Climate Systems Research at Columbia University in 2014, conducting research on climate risk management in cities. Aliyu Salisu Barau Kano Aliyu Salisu Barau is a Professor in Urban Development and Management at the Department of Urban and Regional Planning and Fifth Dean of the Faculty of Earth and Environmental Sciences at Bayero University in Kano, Nigeria. He is a transdisciplinary use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of researcher with interests in climate change, landscape ecology, clean energy, socio-ecological systems, sustainability agenda setting, informally and formally protected ecosystems, special economic zones, and inclusive and innovative planning. He contributes to the research, policy, and action agenda in Nigeria and globally through engagements with UN Environment, IPCC, Future Earth, IUCN, IPBES, IIED, UNICEF, and UN Habitat. He is also the director of the West Africa Center for the UCCRN at Columbia University in New York. Maria Dombrov New York Maria Dombrov is a Senior Research Associate I at the Climate Impacts Group, co-located at NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies and Columbia University’s Center for Climate Systems Research, in New York City. Ms. Dombrov is UCCRN’s Global Coordinator and the Project Manager of UCCRN’sThird Assessment Report on Climate Change and Cities (ARC3.3). Her work focuses on understanding the risks and vulnerabilities that climate change and extreme events present to cities and their metropolitan regions around the world. Cynthia Rosenzweig New York Cynthia Rosenzweig is a Senior Research Scientist at the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), Adjunct Senior Research Scientist at the Columbia University Climate School, and Adjunct Professor in the Department of Environmental Science at Barnard College. At NASA GISS, she heads the Climate Impacts Group, whose mission is to investigate the interactions of climate on systems and sectors important to human well-being. Dr. Rosenzweig is Co-Founder and Co-Director of the Urban Climate Change Research Network (UCCRN). She was co-chair of the New York City Panel on Climate Change (NPCC). Dr. Rosenzweig has served as coordinating lead author and lead author on several IPCC Assessment Reports. About the Series This Elements series, published in collaboration with the Urban Climate Change Research Network (UCCRN), provides essential knowledge on climate change and cities for researchers, practitioners, policymakers, and students. Bridging the gap between theory and practice, the series invites readers to engage with the latest advances in the field. Focusing on urban transformation, cross-cutting themes, and urgent research areas, it empowers stakeholders to drive impactful climate action in rapidly-evolving urban contexts. use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of Climate Change and Cities: Third Assessment Report of the Urban Climate Change Research Network Elements in the Series Learning from COVID-19 for Climate-Ready Urban Transformation Darshini Mahadevia, Gian C. Delgado-Ramos et al. Justice for Resilient Development in Climate-Stressed Cities Diana Reckien, Sirkku Juhola et al. A full series listing is available at: www.cambridge.org/ECCC use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009587105 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 85.74.136.57, on 10 Dec 2025 at 10:21:50, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of