Community Resilience to Climate Change: Theory, Research and Practice

243 The Heatwave Plan Temperatures in the south of England are projected to increase significantly over coming decades, with extreme heat wave events in particular likely to cause significant harm and economic damage (Stott et al. 2004, Metroeconomica 2006). Demographic trends in parts of England, particularly the southwest, are likely to increase the population’s vulnerability to high temperatures, largely as a result of increases in the number of older people, the proportion of whom is projected to rise from 22.5%, already above average, to 29% by 2031, and increased numbers of tourists. The only current strategy for explicitly managing risks relating to high temperatures in the UK is the Heatwave Plan for England and Wales, led by the Department of Health. The existence of the strategy is in part a reaction to the unforeseen impacts of the 2003 heat wave in Europe, which led to the premature deaths of around 2000 people in the UK (Metroeconomica 2006) in addition to 30,000 deaths and billions of Euros’ worth of damage across mainland Europe (De Bono et al. 2004). The Heatwave Plan relies on various tiers of governance to “cascade” down responsibilities during heat wave events. Different levels of alert are defined within the plan and are triggered once weather forecasts exceed certain thresholds (see DoH 2010, 2011 for details). Benzie et al. (2011) interviewed various “responsible authorities” under the Heatwave Plan and other relevant stakeholders to examine their understanding of “vulnerability to high temperatures” and to see how the concept of vulnerability was operationalized in practice. Unsurprisingly, given the complexity and lack of an evidence base identifying vulnerable people, there is some confusion and an oversimplification of vulnerability in practice, which tends to revert to health-based definitions of vulnerability. This tends to ignore the social processes that determine vulnerability and therefore misses opportunities to build resilience to high temperatures, rather than merely to respond during emergency situations. In many cases it is unlikely that the most vulnerable people will receive support during heat wave events, largely because health services are not able to identify who is most vulnerable. The case study found that resources for implementing the Heat wave Plan were severely limited, and responsibility to implement the plan fell mostly on emergency planning departments within local government and health care professionals. This precludes the potentially crucial role of local stakeholders who benefit from a more detailed understanding of vulnerability and climate change, including social services, climate change partnerships, researchers, and, in particular, community groups. The role of stakeholders with the ability to help build resilience to high temperatures, for example spatial planners and educators, is not yet a feature of Heatwave Plan implementation, according to Benzie et al. (2011). However, a key recommendation in the report is to go beyond the Heatwave Plan, which is understandably focused mostly on health and emergency response, given its remit, and to take a much more proactive and integrated approach to build resilience to high temperatures in the UK in ways that explicitly promote social justice and equity. Quadruple injustice These cases highlight the social nature of vulnerability and the uneven distribution of vulnerability to climate change. They also highlight the potential for maladaptation to increase certain groups’ vulnerability, especially autonomous maladaptation, and the uneven and uncertain benefits that adaptation might bring to certain social groups in the UK. In conclusion, it is possible to identify a “quadruple injustice” to climate change within the UK. Certain disadvantaged groups, including those on low incomes, the socially marginalized, and older people: emit the least; may be negatively impacted by mitigation policies; are most vulnerable to climate impacts; and, may be negatively impacted by adaptation policies. However, these groups are diverse and there is not always a uniform correlation between social disadvantage and emissions or vulnerability. Sometimes the reverse is true and there will be various exceptions. Identifying the quadruple injustice is not intended to imply a determinist view of vulnerability to climate change. Instead it aims to highlight the social nature of climate change causes and consequences, with a view to influencing policy responses. This presents a particular set of challenges to adaptation decision makers. First, it raises questions of procedural justice. How can the voices of the most vulnerable be heard in the design and implementation of adaptation policies? It has been shown that the implementation of theHeatwave Plan in England andWales has so far failed to involve vulnerable groups, or organizations that represent vulnerable groups, in the process of identifying who is vulnerable or in delivering emergency response services during heat wave events. However, the involvement of the Consumer Council for Water in the Rising Block Tariff trial in the southwest of England is evidence of a more participatory decision-making process, which also happens to result in a more just outcome (Benzie et al. 2011). Given the complexities involved in adaptation policy design, including the treatment of complex and uncertain science and the normative choices relating to risks that characterize adaptation, it is both difficult and yet essential that vulnerable groups be brought into adaptation decision making. Second, questions of substantive justice have been raised, particularly with respect to autonomous adaptation and, most of all, where unmediated market forces are employed to deliver efficient adaptation outcomes, whether these are in the pricing of risk (via free