Urban designers can't ignore climate change

Editor's note: The increasing risk of extreme climate events poses new challenges to urban governance. The National Business Daily spoke to Li Xiaojiang, former director of the China Academy of Urban Planning and Design, on how to integrate climate adaptation into the urban renewal process. Below are excerpts of the interview. The views don't necessarily represent those of China Daily.

In urban governance, addressing climate change encompasses two main dimensions. The first is climate mitigation, which involves promoting green and low-carbon initiatives to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and slow down global warming.

However, even achieving net-zero carbon emissions may not reverse the already deteriorated climate conditions, and global warming may continue. This takes us to the other dimension: climate adaptation. Climate adaptation focuses not on halting global warming but on protecting humanity.

There is a fundamental difference between climate mitigation and climate adaptation. Climate mitigation has universal benefits, because any reduction in emissions in one region contributes positively globally, making it easier to garner worldwide consensus.

On the other hand, climate adaptation is localized and varies significantly. The same disaster can have vastly different impacts on countries and cities based on their unique circumstances. This makes it difficult to establish a universal standard for climate adaptation indicators.

Hence, it is recommended that urban and rural areas implement localized climate adaptation assessment frameworks based on five key capabilities: prevention, resilience, recovery, transformation and long-term adaptation.

Transformation should be central to this framework. To combat worsening climate challenges, it is imperative to move beyond the passive cycle of "disaster-relief-repeat" and target the root causes of risks. This makes it possible to cultivate long-term adaptation capabilities.

Urban renewal projects typically aim to improve living conditions, enhance public services and prioritize safety. Focus should also be on upgrading disaster-related infrastructure. Currently, China's national urban renewal pilot program encourages cities to invest in essential infrastructure, a trend that should be reinforced.

There is potential for social capital and private sector participation. For instance, wind and solar power projects can generate revenue and attract commercial investment due to their complete industry chains. However, climate adaptation, particularly disaster prevention infrastructure, rarely generates direct income.

Both domestic and international practices indicate that public financing remains the primary source of funding for climate adaptation. It is crucial to promote coordinated innovation in policies related to fiscal measures, finance, credit and taxation, establishing an institutional framework to encourage the participation of social capital.

Traditional villages and historic districts have historically avoided high-risk areas, developing mature, localized disaster prevention systems over centuries. In contrast, newly developed urban areas and districts, often rapidly developed, lack historical resilience and are more vulnerable to disasters.

It is also important to focus on watershed collaborative coordination. In some cities, high drainage engineering standards may be undermined by mismatched standards between upstream and downstream areas. Rapid drainage upstream shifts the pressure entirely downstream, leading to disasters at the watershed level.

Therefore, unified coordination at the watershed level is essential. When necessary, regulating upstream drainage rates can ensure shared risk management across the entire watershed.