Climate Change Preparedness: It’s a Social Issue

June 14, 2016 — From melting glaciers to the rise in extreme weather events, global warming is already affecting our planet in a variety of ways. But according to a new study, not all U.S. cities are prepared to deal with its adverse impacts. Sabrina McCormick, professor at MPH@GW, the online Master of Public Health program offered through the Milken Institute School of Public Health at the George Washington University, and her colleague Kathleen Carlson surveyed 65 local decision makers in six major U.S. municipalities to find out which ones are leading the way in climate change adaptation—and why.

What is climate change adaptation?

Climate change adaptation describes the ability of natural or human systems to adjust to the changing climate in order to lessen its harmful effects. This is not to be confused with mitigation, which refers to implementing strategies to remove or reduce the amount of greenhouse gases (GHGs) released into the atmosphere. Although distinctly different, adaptation and mitigation are complementary of one another. When done in synergy, these activities can lead to cost-effective implementation of climate policies.

What did the study find?

McCormick discovered that Portland, Boston, and Los Angeles were best prepared for the realities of climate change—while Raleigh, Tucson, and Tampa trailed behind. The following social factors appeared to impact a city’s level of preparedness:

• Swing factors, which include events within or characteristics of a city that can lead it toward or away from action. One example is political culture. McCormick found conservative regions to be less likely to support climate change adaptation measures. Extreme weather is another example. In a city like Tampa, events such as hurricanes are viewed as part of everyday life rather than a threat that must be addressed.
• Inhibitors, which refer to climate change mindsets that may slow (but not necessarily stop) change. Many decision makers cited a lack of clear, trustworthy scientific information on the consequences of climate change as their reason for inaction.
• Resource catalysts, which provide a strong rationale and therefore motivation for adaptation planning. They may include academic and public interest resources that offer a scientific or moral justification for change.

Not surprisingly, the study pointed to public engagement as a driving force for change. And nowhere is this more evident than in Los Angeles. Here are just a few examples of how L.A. nonprofits and residents are banding together to combat the climate crisis:

• Heal the Bay collaborates with researchers and agencies to assess the impact of climate change on Southern California coastal environments and help local communities adapt to the new normal.
• The Sierra Club Angeles Chapter engages its members and the public in a multitude of campaigns centered on air quality improvement, coastline preservation, and building sustainable communities.
• Climate Cents actively mobilizes public support for L.A.-based environmental initiatives such as kelp forest restoration, urban farming, and tree planting.
• Los Angeles Walks is a volunteer-run advocacy group focused on making L.A. more pedestrian-friendly and reducing GHG emissions through the development of safe walking environments.

As a heavily populated city that generated a total of 99.1 million metric tons of carbon dioxide in 2010 alone (about 21.7 percent of California’s GHG emissions), L.A. has a unique responsibility to confront the global warming issue head on. And its residents are doing just that. McCormick hopes the results of her study will inspire more American cities to take action. After all, adaptation measures are not something that can wait. “It’s not tomorrow,” she says. “It’s today.”

Julie Potyraj is the community manager for MHA@GW and MPH@GW, both offered by the Milken Institute School of Public Health at the George Washington University. For several years, she served as a community development specialist in Zambia coordinating youth empowerment programs and reproductive health education. She is currently an MPH@GW student focusing on global health and health communications.