Funding and resources

Governments around the world are considering opportunities to tackle economic recession, climate change and energy security at the same time, including Barack Obama’s proposals for a green new deal.

As Lord Stern put it at the launch of the Centre for Climate Change Economics and Policy in January 2009: ‘We face a major economic crisis and we face a still bigger climate crisis and by thinking through clearly and carefully, and acting quickly, we can respond to both of them at the same time.’

The high cost of inaction

Significant climate change is inevitable as a result of the greenhouse gases already emitted. The 2006 Stern review on the economics of climate change confirmed that ‘mitigation - taking strong action to reduce emissions - must be viewed as an investment, a cost incurred now and in the coming few decades to avoid the risks of very severe consequences in the future.’

The UK’s vulnerability to extreme weather and flooding has been highlighted over recent years. Summer 2003 brought 3,000 additional heat-related deaths and the summer floods of 2007 caused loss of life, great hardship especially for poorer communities, and in excess of £3 billion of insured damage, with huge disruption to the economy. UK climate impacts programme (UKCIP) tools are designed to help local authorities and businesses assess climate impacts and adapt to them.

Many local authorities have begun to engage with adaptation at corporate level, driven by the risk agenda. However, mitigation and adaptation to climate change are about much more than managing risk and adverse events. Only fundamental changes to the way in which we plan and design our towns and cities will create resilient places - and provide for a high quality of life in the face of a changing climate.

The challenge – and priority - is to take action on climate change in a way that increases the overall sustainability of our towns and cities. Research shows that local authorities believe that progress on this agenda is possible - despite the recession. In a survey of local authorities by the LGA, IDeA and SOLACE, 25.8 per cent of respondents identified climate and sustainability as areas in which the recession will make it more difficult for them to achieve local area agreement targets. This compared to 80 per cent for housing and 84 per cent for employment and skills targets.

Funding with a long-term focus

At the site and neighbourhood scale, local authorities can mobilise funding streams such as warm front and the carbon emissions reduction target (CERT) to support the design and management of public buildings, regeneration projects and improvements to the existing building stock.

Improving the energy efficiency of our buildings will deliver cost savings through reduced energy bills and potential income from energy production. Rising energy costs and the carbon reduction commitment encourage local authorities to consider the value of mitigation, particularly in their own operations. Local authorities are well placed to investigate funding mechanisms to meet the upfront costs and maximise the environmental, economic and social benefits that can be achieved through working at a community level. This is already being demonstrated in the city of Copenhagen, for example, and in the UK by local authorities in Woking and Southampton.

Local authorities and their local strategic partners need to ensure their spending supports progress on climate change and sustainability. Placing the climate change mitigation and adaptation agenda at the heart of procurement, regeneration, housing, estate and asset management also provides essential support and stimulus to local economies.

Costs will be minimised if climate change and sustainability are factored in at programme inception rather than bolted on later. Actions on climate change must not undermine progress towards broader sustainable community targets.

Andy Nolan, head of environmental strategy at Sheffield city council, told a gathering of energy and built environment experts in January 2009 that the city intends to scrutinise every pound they spend to ensure they get maximum return in terms of efficiency and CO2 saved. The council sees this as a corporate priority and opportunity to address pressing health, inequality and regeneration issues alongside the climate change agenda.

The traditional cost-benefit analysis approach to assessing projects frequently underplays the social and environmental costs and benefits that can be accrued. Often solutions informed by the need to mitigate and adapt to climate change are considered too costly in comparison to the bulk standard approach.

Planning and design for sustainable development means taking account of the wider costs and benefits linked to a scheme over its lifetime. Whole life valuation techniques should increasingly inform client and partner decision-making to support long-term sustainable solutions. The RIBA are producing guidance on whole life assessment for low carbon design as part of their climate change toolkit