We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.
The cookies that are categorized as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ...
Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.
Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customized advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyze the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.
City planners are facing an ‘unenviable’ balancing act of tackling climate change and improving quality of life, according to new research.
The study, which was led by experts at Newcastle University and published in the journal Cities, analysed the trade-offs between different sustainability objectives.
These include minimising climate risks such as heat waves and flooding, reducing emissions from transport, constraining urban sprawl, making best use of our brownfield sites, ensuring adequate living space, and protecting green space which is important for our health and wellbeing.
Focusing on London, an example of a large rapidly growing city that is also at the forefront of tackling climate change, the team show the ‘best case’ scenario would be to increase development in a small number of central locations, such as East Barnet, Wood Green and Ealing.
Avoiding development along the Thames, researchers say this plan would reduce flood risk, minimise transport emissions and reduce urban sprawl.
However, author Dr Dan Caparros-Midwood says the trade-off will be more people exposed to extreme temperatures.
‘Many of the lowest heat hazard areas coincide with the flood zone on the banks of the River Thames due to the cooling effect of blue infrastructure,’ explains Dr Caparros-Midwood, who carried out the work as part of his PhD at Newcastle University.
‘But moving development away from the river while also protecting our green spaces and reducing sprawl really only leaves two options; either shrinking our homes or developing in higher heat risk areas.
‘And while our study looked at London, this could apply to most cities in the world.’
By 2050 it is estimated that two-thirds of the world’s population will live in cities and project lead Professor Richard Dawson of the School of Engineering at Newcastle University, said the findings reinforced the scale of the challenge.
‘We are already starting to see the impact of hotter summers and flooding on our cities,’ he said.
‘Balancing trade-offs between these objectives is complex as it spans sectors such as energy, buildings, transport, and water.
‘What our study shows in stark detail is this cannot be done using our current approach to planning and engineering our cities – difficult choices will have to be made.’