Adaptive Capacity - Climate Change Adaptation and Development: Transforming Paradigms and Practices - page 75

existing inequalities, but also create barriers to sustainable coping, given that
sustainable coping requires flexible and inclusive systems. Our study found
several examples of such barriers: programmes which impose risk reduction
and adaptation measures that cannot be locally maintained (e.g. projects where
easily maintained local retaining walls were replaced with ones built using
complicated modern techniques); programmes that deprive people of their
livelihoods without providing alternatives; the construction of physical risk
reduction measures that offer a false sense of security; or the provision of social
housing that homeowners cannot use as a financial guarantee when applying for
credits to improve further disaster resilience (see Wamsler 2007a, 2014). Another
example is resettling people from risk areas far away from their schools, income
sources and social networks, making them renters rather than homeowners, or
exposing them to new and unknown hazards - all factors that can increase social
vulnerability and risk (Wamsler 2014).
Our findings suggest that any adaptation approach needs to be based on
risk assessment methods that involve consultation with the people actually at
risk and are further based on the criteria of equity, flexibility and inclusiveness.
They draw attention to the need for measures that are fundamental, addressing
societal inequities and developmental shortcomings, rather than isolated,
hazard-specific actions. For example, one factor identified as fostering both
flexibility and inclusiveness on the part of coping systems is people's level of
formal education. Formal education, at all levels, increases people's flexibility as
regards finding appropriate and forward-looking solutions to climate-induced
problems as they arise, and preparing for anticipated risks (Lutz 2010; Tyler
and Moench 2012; Wamsler et al. 2012; Striessnig et al. 2013). This includes
improved access to the formal job market (and related workers' benefits) which
was identified as critical for urban dwellers' adaptive capacity. 13 Educational level
can also be an important determinant of adaptive capacity at the city level. In
cities, adaptive capacity is generally influenced by factors like infrastructure,
economic resources, technology, institutions and governance structures, equity,
information and skills (see Smit et al. 2001). Formal education is related to most
of these, as it can positively influence knowledge production and economic
growth, and is also a necessary condition for the development and persistence
of democratic institutions (Lutz 2010). This comes in addition to education and
capacity building focused directly on matters related to climate change adaptation
and the mainstreaming of such knowledge in formal education systems.
Conclusions: from coping to sustainable urban
transformation
The way that marginal at-risk settlements are viewed influences the types of
solutions proposed for them. City authorities and aid organizations may choose
to focus on how appalling conditions are, and therefore look for ways of clearing
or replacing such 'eyesores'. Alternatively, they can recognize and tap into the