Equity in Urban Climate Change Adaptation Planning: A Review of Research
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A growing number of cities are preparing for climate change by developing adaptation plans, but little is known about how these plans and their implementation affect the vulnerability of groups experiencing various forms of underlying social inequity. This review synthesizes research exploring the justice and equity issues inherent in climate change adaptation planning to lay the foundation for critical assessment of climate action plans from an equity perspective. The findings presented illuminate the ways in which inequity in adaptation planning favours certain privileged groups while simultaneously denying representation and resources to marginalized communities. The review reveals the specific ways inequity is experienced by disadvantaged groups in the context of climate change and begins to unpack the relationship between social inequity, vulnerability, and adaptation planning. This information provides the necessary background for future research that examines whether, and to what extent, urban adaptation plans prioritize social vulnerability relative to economic and environmental imperatives.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it