5.1. Building Practices and User Choices

Where we have also the knowledge mismatches in the norms when we talk about the climate change, it was when it was discussed in the 80s which was the first era from 80s to 2002 it was mostly focused on the greenhouse gas emissions. Where the most of the scientific community are involved, it is an environmental problem.

This chunk discusses the evolution of climate change discourse over the decades. In the first era, from the 1980s to 2002, the focus was primarily on greenhouse gas emissions. The scientific community largely viewed climate change as an environmental issue, seeking to understand and address the impacts of these emissions on the planet. This historical perspective is essential for understanding how the conversation around climate change has changed over time and how it has influenced public policy and awareness.

Think of climate change discussions like the development of a video game. At first, the focus is just on the main character and their challenges (greenhouse gases), but as the game progresses, it reveals a wider world with more complex issues, like social dimensions and community impacts.

Whereas in the second era from 2000s this has been seen by the International agenda, and also the social dimension come into the picture where the social scientists and the development workers have increased their cooperation in the second era.

In the second era, beginning in the 2000s, the understanding of climate change expanded to include international agendas and social dimensions. This marked a shift where not only environmental scientists but also social scientists and development workers began to collaborate on climate issues. This cooperation highlights the recognition that climate change is not just an environmental problem but also a social one that affects human lives and communities around the globe.

Imagine a community planning session where not only engineers discuss the infrastructure needed after a flood, but social workers are also present to discuss how to support families affected by the disaster. This encompasses both technical and human aspects.

In the third era it also looks from the you know this has been felt by other countries and other regions. So this is become a question of global justice in the near future that is where the legal dimension came in third era which is, and this is where we need to talk about develop of certain legislative cultural and behavioral norms which determine the functioning of human society and how the interactions between nature and society were created.

The third era of climate change discussion focuses on global justice and legal aspects, acknowledging how climate change affects various countries and regions differently. This highlights the need for specific laws and cultural norms that govern how society interacts with nature. It underscores the importance of legislative frameworks in ensuring equitable responses to climate challenges, as different societies have unique needs and vulnerabilities.

Consider a sports tournament where teams from different countries have different rules and play styles. A fair tournament requires clear rules that all teams understand and can agree upon, just as equitable climate laws need to account for the different impacts on diverse populations.

So many of these legislative norms were often violated in the context of informal and coastal settlements. For example, the coastal regulation zone which was formed in 1991 and revised 19 times until the tsunami have struck. But then they were barely implemented.

This chunk highlights a critical issue where many legislative norms are not enforced, especially in informal and coastal settlements. Despite the existence of regulations like the Coastal Regulation Zone, which has undergone numerous revisions, these laws are often ignored in practice. This lack of implementation creates vulnerabilities for communities living in high-risk areas, demonstrating the gap between policy and real-world applications.

Think of rules set by a school to keep students safe, like no running in hallways. If these rules are not enforced, students may continue to run and put themselves at risk, illustrating how important it is for laws to be upheld in order for them to be effective.

Also the knowledge mismatches when we talk about different scales, different data sets, different climate and risk scientist’s practitioners which they do not bring the transparent communication and collaboration and joint programming between various levels of actor’s, institutions, and agencies.

This section addresses knowledge mismatches, noting how different scales of data and a lack of communication among scientists and practitioners hinder effective climate action. Without transparent collaboration, the integration of varied knowledge sources becomes challenging, leading to ineffective responses to climate risks. This highlights the importance of establishing clear communication channels among diverse stakeholders to address climate issues effectively.

Imagine a group project where different team members work on their parts without sharing information. The final product may be disjointed and less effective than if everyone communicated regularly, just as coordinated efforts are crucial in addressing climate challenges.

And who should take this into consideration, in what way a clear roadmap is needed for a better integration of CCA and DRR.

The discussion turns towards the importance of having a structured roadmap for integrating climate change adaptation (CCA) and disaster risk reduction (DRR). This roadmap should clarify who needs to be involved in these processes and how they should cooperate to achieve effective adaptation strategies. It's crucial for ensuring that efforts to combat climate risks are systematic and comprehensive.

Think of a family planning a big vacation; without a clear itinerary, they may end up missing flights or forgetting important items. Similarly, a roadmap for adaptation helps ensure that all necessary steps are taken to effectively address climate challenges.

So to summarise whole aspect we see that differences and challenges we have disaster risk reduction and the climate change adaptation. This because it is aimed at the adaptation strategy which tells of scale mismatches because it is aimed at disaster event, it is a long term implications.

This chunk summarizes key differences and challenges between disaster risk reduction (DRR) and climate change adaptation (CCA). DRR is often focused on immediate disaster events, whereas CCA is about long-term strategies for adapting to climate change. Understanding these differences is vital as both approaches address different aspects of climate-related challenges and require different strategies and timelines for implementation.

Consider a farmer who prepares for a storm (DRR) by securing crops versus a farmer who plants drought-resistant crops for future seasons (CCA). Both strategies are important but cater to different needs and timelines.

So for this Lei and Wang they actually come up with more explicit frameworks they call about '6w framework'. So they talk about why adaptation is needed for natural disaster risk, what is adaptation to disaster risk, and adapt to what, who has to adapt?.

The '6W framework' proposed by Lei and Wang provides a comprehensive approach to understanding adaptation to disaster risks. It outlines critical questions: why adaptation is necessary, what adaptation entails, who needs to adapt, and how adaptation should be conducted. This framework encourages a thorough examination of adaptation strategies and helps to identify specific needs and responsibilities.

Think of a teacher preparing a lesson plan; they must understand why a topic is important, what content to cover, who their students are, and how best to teach it. Similarly, effective adaptation requires a deep understanding of multiple facets of the issue.

So there is a brief summary of this whole 6w framework has been listed out and now one of the important understanding from a built environment perspective what we can see is there is a scale mismatches.

This chunk emphasizes the importance of considering different scales in the built environment. Planners and architects often focus on individual buildings or plots without acknowledging broader ecological systems and public infrastructure. Recognizing these scale mismatches ensures that planning integrates with natural systems and takes into account how environments are interconnected.

Imagine a puzzle where each piece represents a part of the city, like schools, parks, and roads. If we only focus on fitting one piece without seeing how it connects to the others, the overall image remains incomplete. Similarly, urban planning needs to see the bigger picture.

And when we talk about an integrated multi-dimensional framework, so it investigates on three aspects; one is how different building practices have offered choices to variety of users and users, how the natural environment with its ecosystems and services has been integrated in the place making process in different disaster recovery process.

This chunk outlines an integrated multi-dimensional framework that explores how building practices provide various options for users and how these practices incorporate natural ecosystems into place-making, particularly during disaster recovery efforts. By examining these aspects, we can better understand the relationships between human-made and natural environments and how they should work together.

Consider a neighborhood that combines residential homes, parks, and community gardens. This integration allows diverse community members to choose spaces that fit their needs while also promoting ecological benefits, illustrating how thoughtful planning connects people with nature.

--