İklim değişikliğine uyum kapsamında mekânsal planlama sürecini risk temelli yaklaşım ile yeniden düşünmek

Abstract

İklim değişikliği günümüzde önemli risk etmenlerinin başında gelmekte ve mevcut riskleri şiddetlendirmesinin yanı sıra yeni riskler yaratmaktadır. Aşırı iklim olaylarının sıklığı, süresi ve yoğunluğundaki artış, iklim değişikliğine bağlı risklerin yönetimini önemli bir gündem maddesi haline getirmiştir. Bu kapsamda iklimle ilgili risklerin azaltılması iklim değişikliğine uyum anlamında hayati önem kazanmıştır. Mekânsal planlama disiplini de iklim değişikliğine uyum stratejilerinin hayata geçirileceği ve risk azaltımına kendi gündeminde kaçınılmaz olarak yer vermesi gereken disiplinlerin başında gelmektedir. Mekânsal planlamanın analiz, sentez, planlama yaklaşımı ve plan aşamalarını içeren süreci göz önüne alındığında, Türkiye'deki planlama pratiğinde iklim değişikliğine uyum ve risk azaltımı yaklaşımının henüz önemli bir yere sahip olmadığı görülmektedir. Risk azaltımı, mekânsal plan kararları ile doğrudan ilişkili olup bu kararlar iklim değişikliğine bağlı riskleri tetikleyebilir ve arttırabilir. Buna karşılık artan risk, planlama kararlarını geçersiz kılabilir veya âtıl bırakabilir. Bu sebeple planlama disiplininin riski planlama süreçlerine entegre edememesi, başlı başına bir planlama sorununu işaret etmekte olup mekânsal planların analiz, sentez, planlama yaklaşımı ve plan süreçlerinde bu konunun benimsenmesi ihtiyacı doğmaktadır. Bu çalışmada, iklim değişikliğine bağlı risklerin mekânsal planlama sürecine nasıl entegre edilebileceği ele alınacak olup her aşamada bu yaklaşıma yönelik yapılabilecek adımlar önerilecektir.

Keywords

• iklim risk azaltımı
• tehlike
• maruziyet
• zarar görebilirlik
• mekânsal planlama

Rethinking the spatial planning process in the context of climate change adaptation through a risk-based approach

Abstract

Climate change is currently one of the most significant risk factors, not only exacerbating existing risks but also creating new ones. The increasing frequency, duration, and intensity of extreme climate events have made the management of climate-related risks a crucial agenda item. In this context, reducing climate-related risks has become vital for climate change adaptation. Spatial planning is among the key disciplines where adaptation strategies to climate change can be implemented, and it inevitably needs to incorporate risk reduction into its agenda. In the context of spatial planning practice in Turkey, it is evident that the approach to climate change adaptation and risk reduction has not yet gained significant importance within the planning process, which involves analysis, synthesis, planning rationale, and planning stages. Risk reduction is directly linked to spatial planning decisions, as these decisions may trigger and intensify climate-related risks. Conversely, increasing risks may invalidate or render planning decisions ineffective. Therefore, the inability of the planning discipline to integrate risk into planning processes indicates a fundamental planning issue, highlighting the necessity of adopting this perspective within the analysis, synthesis, planning rationale, and planning stages of spatial plans. This study aims to explore how climate-related risks can be integrated into the spatial planning process and proposes steps to incorporate this approach at each stage.

Keywords

• climate risk reduction
• hazard
• exposure
• vulnerability
• spatial planning

References

1. Arlikatti, S., Maghelal, P., Agnimitra, N., & Chatterjee, V. (2017). Should I stay or should I go? Mitigation strategies for flash flooding in India. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 27, 48–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2017.09.019
2. Chan, N.W., Ghani, A.A., Samat, N., Hasan, N.N.N., Tan, M.L. (2020). Integrating Structural and Non-structural Flood Management Measures for Greater Effectiveness in Flood Loss Reduction in the Kelantan River Basin, Malaysia. In: Mohamed Nazri, F. (eds) Proceedings of AICCE'19. AICCE 2019. Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering, vol 53. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32816-0_87
3. Connelly, A., Carter, J., Handley, J., & Hincks, S. (2018). Enhancing the Practical Utility of Risk Assessments in Climate Change Adaptation. Sustainability, 10(5), 1399. https://doi:10.3390/su10051399
4. Gao, Y., Pan, H., & Tian, L. (2023). Analysis of the spillover characteristics of cooling effect in an urban park: A case study in Zhengzhou city. Frontiers in Earth Science, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2023.1133901
5. Greiving, S., & Ubaura, M. (Eds.). (2016). Spatial planning and resilience following disasters: International and comparative perspectives. Policy Press.
6. IPCC. (2014a). Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report: Annexes. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Geneva.
7. IPCC. (2014b). Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi:10.1017/CBO9781107415379
8. IPCC. (2022a). Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [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.)]. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA, 3056 pp., https://doi:10.1017/9781009325844.

9. IPCC. (2022b). Annex II: Glossary [Möller, V., R. van Diemen, J.B.R. Matthews, C. Méndez, S. Semenov, J.S. Fuglestvedt, A. Reisinger (eds.)]. In: Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [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.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA, pp. 2897–2930, https://doi:10.1017/9781009325844.029.
10. Jurgilevich, A., Räsänen, A., Groundstroem, F., & Juhola, S. (2017). A systematic review of dynamics in climate risk and vulnerability assessments. Environmental Research Letters, 12(1), 013002. https://doi:10.1088/1748-9326/aa5508
11. Kelly, C. N., McGuire, K. J., Miniat, C. F., & Vose, J. M. (2016). Streamflow response to increasing precipitation extremes altered by forest management. Geophysical Research Letters, 43(8), 3727–3736. https://doi.org/10.1002/2016gl068058
12. Lalonde, M., Drenkhan, F., Rau, P., Baiker, J. R., & Buytaert, W. (2024). Scientific evidence of the hydrological impacts of nature‐based solutions at the catchment scale. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Water, 11(5). https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1744
13. Lichfield, D. (2006). From Impact Evaluation to Dynamic Planning: an integrated concept and practice. In E. R. Alexander (Ed.), Evaluation in Planning: Evolution and Prospects (s. 237–266).
14. Lin, B. B., Ossola, A., Alberti, M., Andersson, E., Bai, X., Dobbs, C., Elmqvist, T., Evans, K. L., Frantzeskaki, N., Fuller, R. A., Gaston, K. J., Haase, D., Jim, C. Y., Konijnendijk, C., Nagendra, H., Niemelä, J., McPhearson, T., Moomaw, W. R., Parnell, S., . . . Tan, P. Y. (2021). Integrating solutions to adapt cities for climate change. The Lancet Planetary Health, 5(7), e479–e486. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2542-5196(21)00135-2
15. Liquete, C., Udias, A., Conte, G., Grizzetti, B., & Masi, F. (2016). Integrated valuation of a nature-based solution for water pollution control. Highlighting hidden benefits. Ecosystem Services, 22, 392–401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.09.011
16. McKay, D. I. A., Staal, A., Abrams, J. F., Winkelmann, R., Sakschewski, B., Loriani, S., Fetzer, I., Cornell, S. E., Rockström, J., & Lenton, T. M. (2022). Exceeding 1.5°C global warming could trigger multiple climate tipping points. Science, 377(6611). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abn7950
17. Rahman, A. U. & Rajib, S. (2015). Introduction and Approaches of Disaster Risk Reduction in Pakistan. In Disaster Risk Reduction Approaches in Pakistan, edited by Atta-Ur-Rahman, Amir Nawaz Khan and Rajib Shaw, 3–32. Tokyo: Springer.
18. Rana, I. A., Asim, M., Aslam, A. B., & Jamshed, A. (2021). Disaster management cycle and its application for flood risk reduction in urban areas of Pakistan. Urban Climate, 38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2021.100893
19. Seddon, N., Chausson, A., Berry, P., Girardin, C. a. J., Smith, A., & Turner, B. (2020). Understanding the value and limits of nature-based solutions to climate change and other global challenges. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences, 375(1794), 20190120. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2019.0120
20. Sharma, J., & Ravindranath, N. H. (2019). Applying IPCC 2014 framework for hazard-specific vulnerability assessment under climate change. Environmental Research Communications. https://doi:10.1088/2515-7620/ab24ed
21. Singkran, N. (2017). Flood risk management in Thailand: Shifting from a passive to a progressive paradigm. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 25, 92–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2017.08.003
22. Sharpe, S., & Lenton, T. M. (2021). Upward-scaling tipping cascades to meet climate goals: plausible grounds for hope. Climate Policy, 21(4), 421–433. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2020.1870097
23. Toham, A., Rustiadi, E., Juanda, B., & Kinseng, R. A. (2021). Relationship of participative planning, planning alignment and regional development performance: evidence from special region of Yogyakarta. Procedia of Social Sciences and Humanities, 1, 49-56. https://doi.org/10.21070/pssh.v1i.18
24. Torrieri, F., & Nijkamp, P. (2009). Scenario analysis in spatial impact assessment: A methodological approach. (Research Memorandum; No. 2009-26). Faculteit der Economische Wetenschappen en Bedrijfskunde.
25. Wang, Y., Fu, Z., Cheng, Z., Xiang, Y., Chen, J., Zhang, P., & Yang, X. (2024). Uncertainty analysis of dam-break flood risk consequences under the influence of non-structural measures. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 102, 104265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2024.104265
26. World Bank. (2021). A Catalogue of Nature-based Solutions for Urban Resilience. Washington, D.C. World Bank Group
27. Yildirim, E., & Demir, I. (2021). An Integrated Flood Risk Assessment and Mitigation Framework: A case study for Middle Cedar River Basin, Iowa, US. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 56, 102113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102113