Getting started can be the most challenging step of any new planning process. Although climate action planning includes many of the traditional steps in a comprehensive planning process, it presents a set of distinct challenges. Climate action planning requires greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions accounting, including inventories, forecasts, and quantification of reduction strategies. It also requires a climate change vulnerability assessment. Climate action strategy development requires technical expertise and detailed data from a variety of sources not usually drawn upon for many types of local plans, which places an added informational and organizational burden on climate planning efforts.
It is important that a community completes several preliminary steps in the climate action planning process before working on the core components. These preliminary steps warrant special consideration, as they will serve as the foundation for the overall climate action planning process. Communities can usually initiate and complete these steps without external assistance from technical experts or consultants. The steps presented in this book are based on traditional steps for comprehensive planning and include observations from a review of climate action planning processes and evolving best practices. They are primarily written for an audience of local government professionals leading a climate action planning effort but are readily transferable to other organizations that may be leading the effort.
This book proposes a three-phase climate action planning process: phase 1, “Preliminary Activities”; phase 2, “Climate Action Strategy Development”; and phase 3, “Implementation and Monitoring” (see box 2.1). Although the steps are presented in numerical order, many of them overlap or are iterative; thus they should be applied as general organizing principles rather than a stepwise “cookbook” for planning. This chapter provides an overview of the phases and describes phase 1 (except public education and outreach, which are covered in chapter 3). Phase 2 is described in chapters 4, 5, 6, and 7, and phase 3 is described in chapter 8.
In phase 1 (“Preliminary Activities”), the community makes a clear commitment to climate action; builds community coalitions and partnerships; establishes the goals of the planning process; assembles a climate action team; makes logistical choices such as identifying a funding source, a timeline, and a manager (e.g., city, consultant, stakeholder, task force); develops a public outreach and education program; and conducts an audit of existing community policies and programs. The order of these preliminary tasks is not critical and will vary based on community needs. For example, in some communities, political commitment may be secured after partnerships have been formed. In others, time and funding considerations may affect the goals.
In phase 2 (“Climate Action Strategy Development”), the community conducts a baseline GHG emissions inventory, develops an interim forecast of future GHG emissions, conducts a climate change vulnerability assessment, establishes a vision and goals (including GHG emissions reduction and adaptation targets), and develops, evaluates, and specifies climate action strategies. This phase is usually iterative; often the GHG emissions forecast is adjusted based on the policy audit, and the goals may be adjusted as the community evaluates potential strategies.
In phase 3 (“Implementation and Monitoring”) the community develops and administers an implementation program, implements the adopted policies and strategies, monitors and evaluates implementation, reports progress to the community and any reporting platforms, and then modifies and updates the strategies based on the evaluation and the changing policy environment. The last two steps are critical but often overlooked.
These three phases of the climate action planning process reinforce each other. When moving through these steps, it is important to adhere to principles for a good planning process, such as transparency and documentation, participation, justification, and consistency (see box 2.2). Given this is a new area of planning, communities need to be willing to experiment, innovate, change course, admit failures, and promote successes. The freedom to develop and implement aggressive, innovative emissions reduction and climate adaptation strategies in phase 2 relies on the strength of the organizational steps taken in phase 1 and the feedback loop provided by phase 3. Experimentation and innovation are only possible with careful monitoring and a firm commitment to revise and adapt strategies based on observed effectiveness.
Chapter 1 outlined several reasons a community may want to pursue local climate action planning. These include the critical nature of the global climate change problem and the need for immediate action. Some communities act out of self-preservation, some from external mandates, and some due to a sense of responsibility to the global community. Regardless of the reason, the commitment to climate action planning should be established through a formal mechanism. Many communities have accomplished this by the mayor signing the Global Covenant of Mayors for Climate & Energy Commitment (or previously, the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement) and joining a national or international organization such as ICLEI or C40 Cities, by elected officials passing resolutions, or by community leaders issuing proclamations supporting the commitment to addressing climate change. These are all positive steps for a community, but it is important that they move beyond symbolic gestures and rhetoric to specific action.
In addition to formally committing to address climate change, two steps are necessary to move forward with planning. First, the local government must establish work program priorities and then commit staffing, funding, and resources to climate action planning. Whether the local government is leading the planning effort or not, its commitment is necessary. The second is to secure formal commitments of funding, technical expertise, or political support from relevant private and nonprofit organizations. The cooperation and coordination of local government and community partners constitute a successful formula that has been used by most communities engaged in climate action planning.
Communities engaging in climate action planning should develop partnerships with entities such as government agencies, community associations and nonprofits, colleges and universities, and neighboring communities (see below). Partners can help with data collection, community education and outreach, stakeholder mobilization, implementation, and monitoring (see box 2.3). They may also help reduce the costs of planning by donating volunteer hours, providing needed expertise on specific issues, and enhancing the effectiveness of implementation. A successful planning process built on partnerships can also increase the visibility and credibility of climate action. This helps with implementation in the community.
When identifying potential partnerships, communities should look to existing planning or implementation partnerships as a starting point. For example, many cities already have formal partnerships among public, private, and nonprofit transit, housing, and social service providers. Also, some communities participate in county and regional cooperative efforts on transportation planning and funding, emergency management and hazard mitigation, air quality, public health, and stormwater management. These partnerships can be leveraged to assist in climate strategy preparation and implementation. They also ensure alignment with other local and regional efforts. This consistency increases the likelihood of successful implementation.
Once potential partners are identified, it is reasonable to consider the pros and cons of the partnership and ask the following questions:
Partnerships in climate action planning must define responsibilities. There are a variety of questions regarding responsibility, including the following: (1) Who will be responsible for managing the climate action planning process? and (2) Who will be responsible for implementation? These roles can be filled by a local government agency or a nongovernment community-based organization and may be shared or divided between process management and implementation. The advantages of a government-led approach are that local governments have regulatory and taxing authority and usually the legitimacy to successfully implement strategies. The disadvantage is that the process may become enmeshed in local government politics, may be superseded by other local priorities, or may succumb to fiscal pressures. The advantages of a nongovernment-led approach are the potential to build strong grassroots support and relief from the potential legal or political complications. The disadvantages are the lack of a clear implementing authority and the potential for conflicts between disparate community organizations. Regardless of this choice, local governments and community-based organizations should seek each other out, settle the responsibility issue, and commit to a partnership.
In many communities, umbrella groups form around the issue of climate action planning. These may be government-appointed task forces or committees (mayor-appointed groups are common) or selforganized. They may be focused on technical expertise in areas such as climate science, city planning, alternative transportation, energy efficiency and renewable energy, public health, emergency management, and finance. Or they may be focused on bringing together diverse stakeholders within the community, such as environmentalists, business and industry representatives, energy and utility providers, developers and builders, alternative transportation advocates, and homeowners’ associations.
The role of each partner should be established early in the process to avoid confusion, duplication, and turf battles. There are numerous roles to play that can be clarified by asking the following questions:
Community and nonprofit organizations often partner with government agencies to prepare and implement climate strategies. Community organizations may include nonprofits, advocacy groups, foundations, and business associations. These organizations often fill a critical role in strategy development because many of the GHG emissions reduction and adaptation strategies rely, at least in part, on behavior change, such as increased bicycle ridership, which reflects overall community awareness and acceptance of alternatives. Close alliances with or support from key local organizations can be critical to building community support for such changes in daily patterns. During strategy formulation, carefully selected local organizations are in an ideal position to provide feedback on measures most likely to be effective. They can assist with outreach and communication to people who might not normally participate in community planning or who may not be aware of climate change issues. In addition, many partners are well positioned to aid in the outreach programs that ensure long-term implementation.
Since many colleges and universities have prepared plans to address climate change on campus, communities should check in with them to see if the measures being pursued can be coordinated. Colleges and universities can serve as sources of information and provide technical assistance in preparing GHG emissions inventories, vulnerability assessments, and climate action strategies. For example, students from the University of Michigan completed a GHG emissions inventory for the City of Detroit.1
Partnering with neighboring communities presents unique challenges and opportunities. Communities can differ in politics, priorities, demographics, wealth, size, government structure and capacity, and a variety of other factors. But collaborating offers an opportunity to share resources, save money, and coordinate on difficult regional issues. In South Florida, the counties of Miami-Dade, Monroe, Palm Beach, and Broward partnered to form the Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact and prepared a regional climate action plan (RCAP), completed in 2012. RCAP 2.0 was released in 2017, drawing on lessons learned over the prior five years and providing a tool for local communities in the region with a broad set of best practices that can be incorporated into local action.2
Communities must determine what they want to achieve through a climate action planning process. Clear definitions of goals in combination with local knowledge such as values, capabilities, politics, and available resources help a community determine the best course of action to achieve those goals. A community may pursue a stand-alone climate action plan or may choose not to develop a separate plan but to integrate climate action strategies into its comprehensive land use plan, sustainability plan, or other planning and policy documents. This can vary from integrating climate action strategies throughout existing chapters, to developing a climate change chapter, to creating an appendix or addendum. All these choices carry different benefits and challenges, meaning the status of the climate action strategies and their positions relative to other local plans and policies must be made based on local context, including existing policy, political climate, and the time and funding available for planning.
As climate action planning becomes more common, communities are considering whether to integrate strategies into their comprehensive land use plan (also called “general plans” and “city master plans”). Updating a comprehensive plan can be a lengthy process. If a jurisdiction would like to ultimately integrate climate policy into its comprehensive plan but does not have the time or funding to do so, in the short term, climate action strategies can be developed that specifically identify areas of the comprehensive plan that should be revised in the future. This does not imply that a community must wait to implement emissions reduction or climate adaptation strategies until the appropriate sections of a comprehensive plan are due for revision. Many of the strategies common to a comprehensive plan already serve to reduce GHG emissions and foster community resilience so that the existing plan may serve as a basis for action.
In addition to the issue of whether to create a stand-alone climate action plan is the decision of whether to prepare strategies that address only local government (i.e., municipal) operations or to prepare a plan that is community-wide. Local government operations strategies only address those things that local governments have direct control over, such as public buildings, government vehicle fleets, public transit, and water and sewer infrastructure. Although local government operations strategies can be a great way to get started and can serve as an example to the community, they only address a very small percentage of a community’s total emissions (typically 3% to 8%). This book assumes and advocates for the preparation of community-wide strategies that address both local government operations and community-wide emissions sources, such as residential and commercial energy use, private vehicle use, and industrial and agricultural operations.
Based on the various considerations for the role of climate action planning, a few typical approaches have emerged:
Climate action planning is a data-intensive planning process that relies on a number of government agencies or departments and organizations, many of which are unaccustomed to being directly involved in the planning process. Regardless of who is identified to prepare the GHG emissions inventory, vulnerability assessment, and climate action strategies—local government staff members, consultants, or community organizations—one of the first steps in the climate action planning process is the establishment of a forum for interactions between the primary planners and other local government staff members. The ease and accuracy of the GHG emissions inventory, vulnerability assessment, and strategy implementation will rely, in part, on the quality and continuity of the collaboration between primary planners and staff members.
This collaboration can be developed through the establishment of a CAT. The CAT plays two critical roles in the climate action planning process. The first is provision of data needed to complete the GHG emissions inventory and vulnerability assessment. With the completion of these, the role of the CAT changes to advising GHG emissions reduction and adaptation strategy development, assessing feasibility, and in the long-term, implementing the chosen strategies. Thus the CAT serves in both a technical capacity and a policy capacity.
Through a CAT, tasks such as staff education, data collection, operational documentation, and long-term plan implementation and monitoring are completed. Because the establishment of a CAT is an integral part of plan development and implementation, it is critical to assemble the team strategically. This section details CAT formation and the initial steps necessary to lay the groundwork for conducting a GHG emissions inventory, a vulnerability assessment, and subsequent strategy development and implementation.
A CAT consists primarily of government staff from a variety of departments that oversee day-to-day operations and activities, including fleet management, accounts payable and contracts, parks and recreation maintenance, facility management, building permit approval, emergency management (including policy and fire), utilities, and long-range planning. Individual members must be well integrated into their respective departments to facilitate and monitor data collection and review materials. Members of a CAT should have some combination of the following characteristics or knowledge areas: (1) familiarity with department operations that will allow for easy identification and collection of the data needed for the GHG emissions inventory and vulnerability assessment, (2) knowledge of department operations and budget procedures to evaluate climate action strategies, and (3) the authority to implement strategies identified in the strategy development process. In a given department, this may require several people.
Identifying departments for inclusion on the CAT begins with identification of needed information and responsibilities. Table 2.1 is a partial list of information to aid government agencies in identifying departments and personnel for the CAT. Based on local context, additional staff and information may be required, such as jurisdictions that include an airport. Staff may not be able to provide all information needed for the emissions inventory and vulnerability assessment. In some cases, a local agency may choose to include members from a partner organization identified as integral to plan development.
Table 2.1. Needed expertise of a climate action team
| Category | Access to data for greenhouse gas emissions inventory | Knowledge of local government policies and operations |
|---|---|---|
|
Facilities |
Energy use (electricity, natural gas) Year built Square footage Number of employees Hours of operation Traffic signal energy use Quantity, location, bulb type, and energy use of streetlights, parking lot lighting, security lighting |
Operational procedures Planned and completed energy or water efficiency upgrade Facilities proposed for closure or construction Critical node identification Emergency procedures |
|
Government fleet (including police, fire, transit, general vehicle pool) |
Miles traveled Gallons of fuel used Vehicles by make/model/year Refrigerant use/maintenance |
Maintenance schedule Fleet replacement/conversion schedule |
|
Employee travel behavior |
Daily commute distance Commonly used routes Business travel type and mileage |
Daily commute distance Commonly used routes Employee commute reduction programs |
|
Transportation |
Vehicle miles traveled on local streets Traffic signal and streetlamp energy use |
Transportation infrastructure design guidelines and maintenance Long-term planning (all modes including bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure) Critical node identification |
|
Facilities proposed for closure or construction |
Treatment and conveyance energy use Volume treated and conveyed |
Pump, blower, and lift station efficiency Critical node identification Emergency procedures |
|
Solid waste |
Volume and/or weight delivered to solid waste facility Disposal associated emissions (e.g., landfill methane production) Transport distance |
Local diversion rate Existing waste diversion program effectiveness |
|
Parks and recreation |
Fuel type and amount for maintenance equipment (mowers, blowers, etc.) Size of area maintained (i.e., park and open space acreage) Water use Fire management activities |
Open space and park area and use Maintenance schedule Irrigation infrastructure type Urban forest management Recreational program administration Wildfire procedures and preparation |
|
Administration/finance |
Invoices for vendors related to refrigerant replacement, waste haulers, and others as needed Lists of equipment and vehicles Mileage and destinations for employee travel |
Cost feasibility evaluation Budget Capital improvement plan/program |
|
Build-out year or horizon year for the comprehensive plan Baseline year of the comprehensive plan Planning area and/or expansion area included in the comprehensive plan |
Planned future development Comprehensive plan build-out assumptions Existing policy consistency |
|
|
Development review |
Building and project permit approval process |
|
|
Economic development |
Identification of economic constraints and opportunities |
Source: Adapted from ICLEI, Cities for Climate Protection: Milestone Guide (Oakland, CA: Author, n.d.); California Air Resources Board, Local Government Operations Protocol for the Quantification and Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventories Version 1.0 (Sacramento, CA: Author, 2008).
The size of the CAT should be limited (e.g., fewer than 20 members) to ensure that the team can foster open dialogue and timely review and response to requests. All staff members who will participate in the strategy development and implementation need not be on the CAT. The CAT should include staff members who are best able to transmit information to colleagues and identify departmental information sources and have an overall understanding of department operations.
In most departments, the best initial point of contact is the director or manager. The director is able to oversee long-term implementation of strategies and, in the short-term, is best positioned to identify the staff who are able to provide the data needed for an emissions inventory or vulnerability assessment. Involvement of department directors or managers also helps ensure the cooperation of all staff within a given department. As the process evolves, staff below the director may play a more direct role in generating data and disclosing operational procedures.
While local government organization structures vary, the following sections include some of the key departments that should be participants in a CAT. These departments are critical not only to the development of a GHG emissions inventory and vulnerability assessment but to long-term implementation of emissions reduction and climate adaptation strategies. The following can be tailored based on government agency size and function, operational control, and organizational structure.
Most jurisdictions provide all or a portion of basic services such as water, power, and solid waste services through a utilities department, making this department a critical member of the CAT. A utilities department is often the data source for energy use (electricity and natural gas), critical points of vulnerability, and operational procedures. This includes the building operations, the treatment and conveyance of drinking water and wastewater, traffic signals and streetlights, and solid waste generation. CAT members from a utilities department should be aware of operational changes such as the use of motion detectors or thermostat regulation that were implemented as cost-saving measures. If there is a community-owned utility for power, then the department should have access to data on community-wide use of electricity and existing safety procedures. Other information useful to the CAT is the success of existing programs such as recycling and educational programs.
In the United States, transportation-related emissions are one of the largest contributors to GHG emissions.3 The transportation department is critical to assembling accurate data for the emissions inventory, particularly estimates of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) on local streets and specifying the ways in which climate impacts may disrupt transportation. In addition, transportation CAT members should be able to provide VMT, fuel use, and cost information for local government fleet vehicles. In the long-term, CAT members should have the authority to change vehicle purchasing procedures to more fuel-efficient models. They will also be key in developing and implementing strategies for the community’s transportation infrastructure and management.
The community development or planning and building departments must be included on the CAT. Depending on who is developing the inventory and plan, community development staff may be tasked with CAT coordination, ensuring that there are no gaps in data or implementation, and overseeing information-gathering efforts that span multiple departments such as employee commute data. Community development staff are also best positioned to aid in the development of the policy audit described later in this chapter. In addition to a coordination role, this department oversees updates to and implementation of a community’s comprehensive land use plan and zoning codes. Also, the community development department often houses development review and permitting functions. It is through this process that strategies such as impact fees, energy efficiency programs, or green building programs (for greenhouse gas reduction and adaptation needs) may be implemented; therefore, community development is a critical adviser in the development of these and similar strategies.
Parks and recreation departments often maintain a vehicle fleet, operations and maintenance equipment, parks and recreation facilities, and the structure of parks for natural system health and reduction of hazards such as fire. The parks and recreation staff are often charged with the maintenance of community green spaces such as parks, open spaces, and vegetated areas in the streetscape. Parks and recreation staff help assess fuel, water, and energy efficiency and conservation practices. They also identify opportunities for GHG emissions reductions from parks and open spaces, provide sequestration through tree planting, enable local food access through community gardens, identify potential sites for local alternative energy generation, and manage landscapes for water retention, flood attenuation, and fire reduction.
Depending on jurisdiction size, services (e.g., water, waste, transit) may be provided by outside suppliers. In this case, data and long-term implementation require the involvement of staff from regional providers or agencies. In addition, partner organizations may have particular expertise that will strengthen plan elements. Where deemed appropriate, a representative from these organizations can be invited to the CAT.
The CAT’s primary role is to contribute to the GHG emissions inventory, vulnerability assessment, policy audit, and strategy development and implementation. Each of these tasks is detailed in a subsequent chapter. However, prior to beginning the climate planning tasks, there is a series of educational steps intended to prepare staff for the climate action planning process. This educational process is ongoing and iterative. It begins as soon as CAT members are identified and recruited. Potential members may be skeptical of new policy relating to climate change or may feel uncomfortable with increased demands on staff time. The formality required for this initial outreach varies. Greater effort is required to clarify expectations and needs for a department that is hesitant to participate.
The CAT provides a forum for collaborative learning and a support network for staff as they face data acquisition and policy development challenges. While departments will be providing data, they are also expected to disclose operational information that allows the planners to accurately project emissions, quantify GHG-reducing actions already being implemented, identify vulnerabilities, and understand the adaptive actions already being implemented. The process of disclosing current GHG-reducing and adaptive actions allows departments to learn from each other and bolsters participants’ confidence in the process. In many cases, these actions are adopted to improve efficiency or to lower costs rather than lowering GHG emissions or adapting to climate change. Identifying these actions clearly demonstrates to participants that climate action planning is compatible with local operations. For example, the City of Benicia, California, established an interdepartmental team dubbed the Green Team. This team included representatives from all City departments. One of the activities organized by the team was a speaker series open to all City staff covering topics related to climate change. These presentations served to raise staff awareness of the intention and utility of climate action strategies.
While the education process is ongoing, there are a few early steps critical to ensuring all participants have a shared understanding of the process and the role of the CAT. These key phases in the CAT educational process are briefly described here.
Awareness of climate science, emissions-reducing strategies, and climate adaptation strategies will vary among members of a CAT. A critical first step is ensuring a common knowledge base, shared vocabulary, and collective understanding of context. This broad overview can be conducted solely for the CAT or as a series of workshops open to all government staff. These workshops or meetings should cover basic climate science (see appendix A); federal, state, and local policy; and the context in which the jurisdiction sees climate strategies in relation to other local policy. This staff preparation also lays a foundation for future engagement of the community, particularly the potential presence of climate change skeptics or deniers.
It is critical that all participants understand the overall climate action planning process. Throughout the presentation of the process, the role of the CAT should be clearly articulated so that participants are aware of the areas to which they will be contributing. The intention is to provide an overview of the process from project inception to implementation and monitoring. It should provide a clear understanding of the relationship between a GHG emissions inventory, vulnerability assessment, policy audit, and strategy development. It should also cover the time horizon expected for implementation and periodic monitoring and reporting. It is here that the link between basic climate science, policy, emissions estimates, and projected impacts can be made tangible for CAT participants. A presentation of the preliminary strategy development timeline should also be included at this point to clearly communicate the commitment duration expected of CAT members.
The details of GHG inventory development are covered in chapter 4. During this introductory process, it is critical to communicate the intent and role of the GHG emissions inventory. An overview of the expected data needs can also be covered. Gathering the data for the emissions inventory can be labor-intensive, with data kept in disparate locations. Obtaining information is easiest if the participating departments understand the needed level of detail and the data’s intended use. This can be accomplished through a presentation detailing the GHG emissions inventory process, with specific examples demonstrating the use of requested data. Increased knowledge of the process also allows departments to evaluate if more appropriate or additional staff are necessary for CAT membership.
Chapter 6 covers the steps and details of a vulnerability assessment. When establishing the CAT, it is critical that the content, role, and intent of a vulnerability assessment be communicated. The vulnerability assessment requires all CAT members to consider their individual department responsibilities to allow identification of the community functions, structures, and individuals that may be affected by climate impacts. This understanding prepares CAT members for the information they will have to collect, some of which may require tracking down colleagues to gather data or gain understanding.
Communities deciding whether to develop a climate action plan or set of climate action strategies will want to consider factors of cost, time commitment, and needed expertise. GHG emissions inventories require data collection and analysis, specialized software, and personnel with knowledge of government operations and community energy, transportation, and infrastructure data. Vulnerability assessments require climate data acquisition and interpretation and personnel with enough knowledge of government operations and community function to be able to determine how climate impacts may affect them. Development of emissions reduction and climate adaptation strategies may require community education and participation. It will also require specialized knowledge of transportation, energy, building and development, utilities, hazard mitigation, and finance.
Communities will vary in their choice of planning process and approach to climate action, so costs will vary. Most of the costs associated with climate action planning come from key activities such as preparing a GHG emissions inventory. Doing this work in-house can save money, but the specific, technical nature of the work may be challenging and lengthy for staff members. Conversely, hiring a specialized consultant can deliver sophisticated and timely results but can be difficult for communities with a limited budget. Table 2.2 provides rough time estimates if done in-house, assuming an initial learning curve, and rough cost estimates if an experienced consultant is hired. The following sections describe key factors that will affect time and cost.
Table 2.2. Estimates of staff hours or consultant fees needed to complete major climate action planning tasks
| Task | Staff hours | Consultant fee |
|---|---|---|
|
Standard, protocol-compliant GHG emissions inventory and forecast (community-wide) |
150 to 200 hours |
$5,000 to $15,000 |
|
Comprehensive climate change vulnerability assessment |
300 to 600 hours |
$20,000 to $75,000 |
|
Limited public outreach and participation |
60 to 100 hours |
$10,000 to $20,000 |
|
Extensive public outreach and participation |
600 to 1,000 hours |
$40,000 to $80,000 |
|
Development of climate action strategies |
80 to 100 hours |
$10,000 to $15,000 |
|
Quantification of GHG emissions reduction strategies |
6 to 15 hours per strategy |
$700 to $1,800 per strategy |
|
Implementation and monitoring program |
40 to 80 hours |
$5,000 to $15,000 |
|
Preparation of a full climate action plan (generally includes all of the above plus process management) |
1,000 to 2,500 hours |
$50,000 to $300,000 |
Note: These are rough estimates and can vary significantly based on size of the community, availability of data (especially on climate impacts and transportation), existing knowledge of the staff, region of the U.S., and level of detail desired.
Since climate change and climate action planning may be relatively new concepts in some communities, a more extensive public education and outreach effort can be required. In addition, the issue of climate change is a politically charged one that may raise the level and intensity of participation. Many communities have chosen to spend significant up-front time in educating the community and elected officials on the science of climate change and the climate action planning process. This can be one of the largest time commitments for a community pursuing climate action strategies and can thus drive costs toward the high end of the range. Chapter 3 provides additional detail on development of a public education and outreach process.
Many communities have chosen to establish formal advisory groups for their climate planning process. Similar to public education and outreach, the role, membership, number, and schedule of the advisory groups will determine the level of staffing necessary. Some advisory bodies may consist of technical experts who are simply reviewing and commenting on drafts and thus require relatively little staff time. Others may be more policy oriented, may require detailed staff reports, and may hold open debates, thereby demanding significant staff time. In some cases, advisory bodies develop a life of their own and exceed initial estimates of staff time commitments.
Best practice requires that climate action strategies be based on a GHG emissions inventory and vulnerability assessment. The level of data collection, management, and analysis required is significant. The choices about content and level of detail of the inventory and vulnerability assessment affect costs. Communities will vary in the quality and accessibility of their emissions data and availability of the data needed for the vulnerability assessment. Chapter 4 provides additional detail on development of a GHG emissions inventory, and chapter 6 describes the vulnerability assessment process.
Climate action strategies vary in their degree of specificity. This is partly based on whether the community is pursuing a more visionary approach or one more focused on implementation. Development of emissions reduction strategies may include quantification, comparison of costs and benefits, and assessment of feasibility. Similarly, adaptation strategies can compare cost, duration of implementation, period of time until a climate impact is experienced, and feasibility. Each of these would require additional time in preparation. Chapter 5 provides additional detail on development of GHG emissions reduction strategies, and chapter 7 discusses adaptation strategy development.
A CAT provides two benefits that will affect the time and cost of the process. First, CAT members facilitate a positive and cooperative relationship with their departments. This is necessary because climate action planning requires data that may be difficult or time-consuming to provide and that departments may not be used to providing. Second, they have the technical depth of knowledge to contribute to the development of the GHG emissions inventory, vulnerability assessment, and new policies and programs.
As already discussed, climate action strategies may be consolidated in a stand-alone climate action plan or can be integrated with other plans and policy documents such as a comprehensive or general plan, a sustainability plan, an energy plan, a zoning code, or a budget. Integration will require additional time to ensure consistency, including amendment of existing plans and documents that may require additional informal and formal review.
In some states, the climate action strategies may require review in addition to the standard local government resolution. For example, climate action plans prepared in California are subject to environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. In Florida, strategies that are integrated into a comprehensive plan will require a plan amendment that is subject to state- and regional-level review. These additional levels of review extend the time frame for adoption and will result in additional costs.
It is increasingly common for communities to hire consultants to assist in or manage the process. Some communities hire consultants to prepare an entire plan, while others will only hire them for specific tasks. When doing the task mostly in-house, common tasks to hire out include the GHG emissions inventory (due to its technical complexity), the vulnerability assessment (due to its reliance on climate change science), and the public education and outreach program (due to the need for specialized expertise).
Based on the foregoing process steps and factors, the full process will usually take one to one and a half years. Table 2.3 shows time estimates for each of the process steps. Since some tasks can be completed concurrently, the overall timeline is shorter than the sum of the individual tasks.
Table 2.3. Climate action planning time frame
| Phase/task | Time to complete |
|---|---|
|
Phase 1: Preliminary Activities |
3–6 months |
|
1. Make a community commitment. |
1–2 months |
|
2. Build community partnerships. |
Ongoing |
|
3. Establish planning process goals. |
1–2 months |
|
4. Assemble a climate action team (CAT). |
2–3 months |
|
5. Consider the logistics of the planning process. |
1–2 months |
|
6. Establish a public education and outreach program. |
Ongoing |
|
7. Audit existing community policies and programs. |
2–3 months |
|
Phase 2: Climate Action Strategy Development |
9–18 months |
|
8. Conduct a baseline GHG emissions inventory and interim forecast. |
4–6 months |
|
9. Conduct a climate change vulnerability assessment. |
4–6 months |
|
10. Formulate vision, goals, and targets. |
2–3 months |
|
11. Develop, evaluate, and specify climate action strategies. |
6–8 months |
|
Phase 3: Implementation and Monitoring |
Ongoing |
|
13. Develop and administer an implementation program. |
Ongoing |
|
14. Monitor, evaluate, and report implementation. |
Every 1–2 years |
|
15. Modify and update the strategies. |
Every 2–5 years |
A critical issue for climate action planning is how it will be funded. Although some communities have enlisted significant volunteer support for the effort, particularly from colleges and universities, there will likely be some costs incurred. But for most communities, the costs discussed at the top of this section will have a significant impact on the scope and quality of the climate action planning effort. There are several possibilities for funding, including local government general funds, private foundation donations and grants, and state and federal grant programs, but these change often. Communities are best advised to explore all opportunities and talk to other communities about how they funded their planning processes.
The policy audit assesses preexisting policies, programs, and procedures for consistency with community goals for GHG emissions reduction and adaptation to climate impacts. For example, many communities already have policies and programs aimed at promoting transit use, bicycling, and walking—the same types of goals that may be found in a climate strategy. By going through the audit process, a community can establish the local policy context in which measures must be devised, adopted, and implemented. The policy audit is also a chance for a community to describe the great things it is already doing to address GHG emissions reduction and climate adaptation.
The audit provides useful information for several climate action planning activities. First, many communities will have implemented activities between the baseline emissions year identified in the inventory and the current year. The policy audit provides the information necessary to estimate emissions reductions achieved in that time and forecast the long-term reductions likely to result from those activities. Second, this information can help a community set more realistic emissions reduction targets that account for existing and proposed policies that reduce GHG emissions. Third, the policy audit shows where the community has the adaptive capacity to address climate impacts and where policies are maladaptive. Fourth, the policy audit lets the community clearly identify the gaps in its current policy and program framework. Thus the strategy development process can focus on filling these gaps.
The policy audit typically assesses the local government’s policy and operational procedures that may or may not be formally documented. A thorough policy audit requires close collaboration with the CAT, whose members aid in the identification of relevant policy documents and disclose operational procedures. In addition, though not yet common, a community may wish to account for nongovernmental programs that reduce GHG emissions or reduce community vulnerability, such as LED lightbulb giveaway programs from electricity providers or emergency kits and evacuation educational programs offered by nonprofits. The audit seeks to identify policies or programs that already serve to reduce GHG emissions, increase local resilience, and identify policy or programs incompatible with the goals of addressing emissions reduction and climate adaptation. It is best to organize the audit into sections that generally reflect those in the emissions inventory (i.e., transportation, water, energy, etc.) and vulnerability assessment. This division helps in confining assessment to policy that directly impacts emissions sources and climate vulnerability. The following sections explain the local government policies and operations audit.
Adopted policy refers to plans, ordinances, and other local government laws that directly influence GHG emissions or adaptive capacity. The content of these policy documents falls into three broad categories: supporting policies that act to reduce GHG emissions, supporting policies that act to reduce local vulnerability to climate impacts, and potentially conflicting policies that either directly conflict with these goals or prevent actions focused on achieving them (see box 2.4). Supporting policy identifies positive actions the community is already taking that could be enhanced. Potentially conflicting policies identify those areas where plans or other city policies will require amendment to become compatible with climate action goals. It is critical that the evaluation be limited to actions that directly impact GHG emissions and climate vulnerability. It is quite easy, through a series of hypothetical scenarios, to tie any local government policy to GHG emissions or climate vulnerability. The inclusion of farfetched causal links makes the audit convoluted and more difficult to use. It is critical that each policy be tied to items in the GHG emissions inventory and the vulnerability assessment. Table 2.4 lists several of the documents most likely to be important components of an audit of adopted policy.
Table 2.4. Summary of some of the documents most commonly included in a policy audit
| Plans | |
|---|---|
|
Comprehensive Land Use Plan (general plan) Parks, Trails, and Open Space Master Plan Urban Water Management Plan Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan Transit Plan Area Plan Downtown Mixed-Use Plan Local Hazard Mitigation Plan |
Plans are necessarily broad; therefore, focus should be placed on the lower levels of policy hierarchy (policies and programs as opposed to goals or objectives). The goal is to identify plan elements that directly influence emissions reduction or increase community resiliency from climate change. |
| Standards, ordinances, programs, and policy | |
|
Zoning Code Green Building Ordinance Water-Efficient Landscape Standards Tree Ordinance Environmentally Friendly Purchasing Policy Traffic Calming Program Floodplain Ordinance |
These are the regulations that implement the plans. In these documents one may find the specifics lacking in the plans. The specificity of these regulations allows the assessment to be more nuanced. |
| Memoranda, feasibility assessments, and other nonbinding statements | |
|
Community Garden Memorandum Energy Efficiency Status Memorandum Feasibility Assessments |
While these documents are not enforceable policy, they do provide a good indicator of city perspective and awareness. For example, a city that has conducted a feasibility study on local renewable energy generation may not have installed any renewable energy projects, but the study may signal a political willingness to do so. |
Identifying current policy is the first step in conducting the audit. Existing policy that supports GHG mitigation and climate adaptation must be further divided based on the level of implementation. Policy that has been or is currently being implemented should be separated from adopted policy that has not been funded or implemented. Implementation can be assessed through examination of funding allocation in the local government budget, periodic reports on implementation of plans, and feedback from the CAT. The CAT is a critical check in ensuring that this division is done accurately.
Many of the actions taken by local agencies to address climate change are enacted not only for environmental reasons but also in the interest of efficiency and cost savings. This information can only be obtained through close interaction with the CAT. Many of the procedures may be standard protocol for individual departments. This will include the maintenance schedule for municipal structures, which may entail actions such as replacement of heating, ventilating, insulating, and air conditioning systems or the addition of motion sensors for lighting. It will also include the vehicle fleet turnover schedule and purchasing policy. In many cases, saving money on energy to operate buildings and fuel to power vehicles is motivating these choices, and staff may not initially recognize the benefit in terms of GHG emissions or climate adaptation. Another area to evaluate is employee programs such as transit incentives, office education programs, and environmentally friendly purchasing programs.
Many of the operational procedures will be revealed during the development of the emissions inventory and vulnerability assessment, but some of these programs may have been created in the time since the baseline year. In other cases, they may not be actions that directly affect these reports. For example, an emissions inventory will include energy consumed by municipal buildings. But whether the energy use data are higher or lower than normal due to an education campaign or installation of motion detectors for lighting is irrelevant to the accuracy of the inventory. When strategies are being developed, these data are critical for choosing strategies that reduce energy use.
The policy audit containing a review of adopted policy, guidance documents, and department operations should be submitted to the CAT as well as the departmental staff. This serves as a final check on accuracy by those tasked with implementing the reviewed plans, guidance, and protocols. This also serves to ensure that members of the CAT share a common basis for strategy development, review, and implementation. The policy audit should set the stage for strategy development by identifying areas in which short-term strategies can be most effectively pursued and also where there are gaps in or conflicts with current policies. The policy audit data inform the prioritizing of strategies.
Each community will need to tailor these preliminary activities to its own needs and interests. It is good practice to talk to similar communities that have gone through the climate action planning process about how they got started and what they would do differently in hindsight. Communities that work through the issues raised in this chapter will find that the rest of the planning process will go more smoothly and that the final strategies developed to address climate change will better serve the community.