Floods, wildfires and other extreme weather events spurred by climate change can disrupt entire communities, turning residents' lives upside down and costing millions in property damage.
Now, a University of Alberta study gives more insight into how personal beliefs of the public and politicians hamper decision-making around climate adaptation to better protect communities.
Urban planners, engineers, executive managers and emergency management specialists responsible for developing and implementing adaptation strategies have been hindered by ideological barriers from both the governments and the public they serve, the research shows.
"The subjective perceptions people had about climate change and the need for adaptation were stumbling blocks for these professionals to do their job," says Sarah Kehler, a co-author on the study and a PhD candidate in urban and regional planning in the Faculty of Science.
They all expressed "a high degree of frustration," she adds.
"As professionals, they have the technical knowledge — and often the responsibility — to look after the public well-being, but when they can't get a certain amount of support from political leadership or the general public, they are stuck in the middle."
That's a concern, leaving many communities stagnant on taking proactive measures against increasingly prominent impacts of climate change such as floods, fires, high winds and erosion, adds Jeff Birchall, lead author on the study, director of the Climate Adaptation and Resilience Lab and associate director of the School of Urban and Regional Planning in the Faculty of Science.
"To develop adaptation strategies that will build resilience, it's necessary to have public and community support, which can lead to political buy-in. Once both are in place, local government decision-makers can affect more purposeful, direct change," Birchall says.
Even when climate change adaptation is a priority, local governments need to have the capacity to take action, and sometimes governance processes like jurisdiction, authority and responsibility can make this difficult in practice, he adds.
