
www.buildingsandcities.org/journal-content/special-issues/transformational-climate-actions-cities.html
This special issue advances understandings of the nature, extent and effectiveness of cities' implementation efforts to realise low-carbon, climate resilient cities.
Papers in this special issue expose ambitious
actions that some municipalities are taking: visioning, target-setting, and
planning (undertaken with community engagement), climate-friendly regulations
(for the built environment and urban infrastructure particularly), innovations
in finance and capital mobilization to fund climate adaptation, novel
institutional configurations, and partnership arrangements with civil society
actors. Despite these progressive steps, these
papers reveal that an implementation gap remains.
Guest Editors: John B. Robinson and Kim R. Slater
Based on the case studies presented, the nature of this gap in large part stems from capacity and jurisdictional limitations, rather than a dearth of ambition or willingness to advance bold moves per se. Multiple insights emerge from the papers in this special issue regarding how local governments might begin to close the gap and meet the climate challenge.
A predominant theme in the papers is a need for more effective, multiway, climate governance. Vertically, there is a need for more coordinated efforts between levels of government, with higher levels of government enabling cities. Horizontally, there is a need for more coordinated/less siloed multi-departmental, multi-sectoral, multi-jurisdictional approaches.
In examining climate governance, this
collection of papers shows how social practice and transitions theories afford
complementary analytical approaches. Ultimately, they suggest both differing
and overlapping intervention points from social practice-informed
recommendations for normalizing climate action to multilevel perspective-informed suggestions for improved
niche-regime-landscape configurations and communication that accelerate
multisectoral climate action.
Meaningful public engagement, particularly by way of co-production processes, is also valuable for fostering social learning. Several papers highlight this can occur through multiple avenues such as experiments, pilots, demonstration projects, or living labs that involve residents and other community stakeholders helping to innovate climate interventions. It is vital that local governments ensure their regulations are flexible enough to accommodate and take up learning born of local experiments and living labs. The facilitation of collaborative visioning can help move local governments along the adaptation spiral, while prompting social learning among planners and policymakers.
Transformational climate actions by cities (Editorial)
K.R. Slater & J.B. Robinson
Institutionalisation of urban climate adaptation: three municipal experiences in Spain
M. Olazabal & V. Castán Broto
Stretching or conforming? Financing urban climate change adaptation in Copenhagen
S. Whittaker & K. Jespersen
Integrating climate change and urban regeneration: success stories from Seoul
J. Song & B. Müller
Transformational climate action at the city scale: comparative South-North perspectives
D. Simon, R. Bellinson & W. Smit
Assessing climate action progress of the City of Toronto
K.R. Slater, J. Ventura, J.B. Robinson, C. Fernandez, S. Dutfield & L. King
Climate action in urban mobility: personal and political transformations
G. Hochachka, K. G. Logan,
J. Raymond & W. Mérida
Canadian cities: climate change action and plans
Y. Herbert, A. Dale & C.
Stashok
Meeting GHG reduction goals with waste diversion: multi-residential buildings
V. MacLaren, E. Ikiz &
E. Alfred
Retrofitting Norwegian residential buildings: an archetype-based dynamic stock model
L S A Rousseau, S Amini, S Akin & E G Hertwich
Decolonising time: vernacular villages and the politics of heritage temporality
R Al-Rabady
Commutes to alternative workplaces: GHG emissions and physical activity
J Taylor, L Thoen, A Espinosa Mireles De Villafranca, P Anashin, J Vanhatalo, D Milián
Bernal & I Okkonen
Nine ‘myths’ about the building stock of Great Britain
S Evans, P Steadman, A Neto-Bradley, D Humphrey, R Liddiard,H Shamsi, J Palmer & G Simons
Critical Reconstruction Theory and the invention of post-disaster response
G Lizarralde, D Wachsmuth, F Özdoğan & M Cossu
Post-war reconstruction-as-knowledge practice: Fukui’s dual disaster recovery
A Y F Urushima & K Yamaguchi
Critical reflections on the process of interdisciplinary building science research
G T Morgan, M F Touchie, J Robinson, A Jakubiec & J Tran
Comparing technical disassembly potential methods for concrete and timber buildings
N Westerholm, A Tuure, S Pajunen & M Kuittinen
One-stop shops as leverage points for renovation sufficiency
G Pardalis & M Sula
Creating resilient cities: advocacy and planning for equity-based recovery
A Paidakaki
Impact of glazed balcony design on daylight in Finnish apartments
L Jegard, R Castaño-Rosa & S Pelsmakers
Climate-related risks: implications for municipal governments in Brazil
C Nastari Fernandes, P Ciminelli Ramalho & F Lima-Silva
Changing land-use metrics in mass housing: Türkiye case study
M S Çepni, A K Kutluca, T Salihoğlu, A Atmaca & S Mintemur
Personal comfort systems for adults with intellectual disabilities
K Exss, M Trebilcock, P Wegertseder-Martínez, S Schiavon & H Zhang
How buildings shape occupant movement: a systematic review and framework
G Chinazzo & N Wang
Rethinking the second life of post-disaster and post-conflict temporary housing
N Akdede, B Ö Ay & İ Gürsel Dino
Embodied carbon impacts of residential development siteworks: new assessment framework
P Comerford, O Kinnane, R O’Hegarty & P Crowe
Horizontal building extensions: potential in Finnish blocks of flats
J Tarpio & P Lehtovuori
Post-disaster reconstruction and ethics: the power of social capital
B Ubesingha, G Ofori, G Agyekum-Mensah & D Frings
Towards net zero: sectoral ambitions and global trends in building decarbonisation
C E Caballero-Güereca, J Vogel, N Alaux, C M Ouellet-Plamondon, J Silva Santana, G Foliente, T Lützkendorf & A Passer
Climate literacy and labour agency in vocational education and training
J Calvert, V Price, C Winch, L Clarke, M Sahin-Dikmen, P-L Bilodeau & E Dionne
Towards a new neighbourhood-scale climate risk-adaptation approach
C Rigoni, S Oliveira, O Romice, A Moreno-Rangel & A Chatzimichali
Sharing energy renovations know-how through citizen–professional knowledge networks
C Foulds, S Royston, A Aggeli, A Crowther & R Robison
Environmental impacts of reclaimed bricks: comparing different deconstruction methods
E Salmio & S Huuhka
eCOMBINE: framework for energy, comfort, behaviour and a multi-domain environment
V M Barthelmes, C Karmann, V Gonzalez Serrano, K Lyu, J Wienold, M Andersen, D Licina & D Khovalyg
Living labs as ‘agents for change’ [editorial]
N Antaki, D Petrescu & V Marin

The most important part of any journal is our people – readers, authors, reviewers, editorial board members and editors. You are cordially invited to join our community by joining our mailing list. We send out occasional emails about the journal – calls for papers, special issues, events and more.
We will not share your email with third parties. Read more
Latest Commentaries
Disaster Reconstruction: Practitioner Insights Improve Outcomes
Regan Potangaroa (Auckland University of Technology - AUT), Kelvin Zuo (Massey University), Suzanne Wilkinson (AUT) explain why experience-led knowledge from the field, when triangulated with contemporaneous documentation, can constitute evidence for understanding post-disaster reconstruction systems. People working within reconstruction environments (engineers, builders, logisticians and community actors) provide crucial observations about how reconstruction systems function in practice, particularly supply chains, material flows, procurement and governance in post-disaster rebuilding. Integrating this knowledge can lead to better outcomes.
Preparedness for Recovery
Kristen MacAskill (University of Cambridge) and Lianne Dalziel (University of Canterbury) explain capabilities (and the associated capacity) are essential for preparedness. Capacity for both physical infrastructure and organisational / institutional response are necessary. This commentary focuses primarily on institutional capacity for disaster risk management, and the positive (if slow) developments in the value that is being placed on preparedness.