성과
 
Extra Form Output
시립대 
종류 학술대회 
설명 본 사업단의 백시우 연구원이 AGU Annual Meeting 2024에서 "Exploring Barriers to Evidence Utilization in Climate Adaptation: Differences Between Planning and Implementation in Municipalities of South Korea"에 대해 발표함. 
 
 

1) 발표자: 백시우

2) 학술대회명: AGU Annual Meeting 2024

3) 발표 주제: Exploring Barriers to Evidence Utilization in Climate Adaptation: Differences Between Planning and Implementation in Municipalities of South Korea

4) 발표 내용

 

Exposure of urban settlements and infrastructure to climate change-related hazards is a major global challenge. This has led to political mandates requiring urban governments to adapt to climate change. In response, many city governments have adopted climate change adaptation plans. However, they face barriers in planning for climate change adaptation due to a lack of background in climate science, which has inherent uncertainties and complexities. As a result, many scientific evidences have been offered to support planning of local climate change adaptation, representatively vulnerability and risk assessment tools. Nevertheless, urban governments continue to encounter barriers in utilizing scientific evidence, making evidence-based climate adaptation planning and implementation difficult. Therefore, this study focuses on understanding what make barriers to utilize evidence at planning and implementation stage of climate adaptation planning policy process. This study adopt a case study approach to seek to identify barriers. To collect quantitative data, in-depth interviews are carried out with stakeholders within the climate change adaption plans of municipality governments in South Korea. The interview was comprised semi-structured questions regarding various aspects ? policy targets, goals, processes, and strategies for climate adaption. Result of this study show that these evidence, typically vulnerability and risk assessment tools, are not enough to plan and implement climate adaption policies. Especially, the tendency of barriers faced by local government officials in using evidence differed depending on the policy processes.

TOP