Agenda item

(1)          The slides from Mr Henderson’s presentation are contained in the electronic papers for this meeting on the KCC website.

(2)       Mr Henderson began his presentation by saying that over the previous 4 years KCC had designed and led an EU Interreg project named STAR2Cs. Its purpose was to promote climate adaptation by overcoming an implementation gap between national strategies, to adapt to climate change and to undertake local adaptations in Kent’s communities. 

(3)       Mr Henderson set out the background to climate adaptation and mitigation.   He said that climate change was occurring as evidenced by intense heat waves and flooding.  Global temperatures had risen significantly over the previous 100 years, with the last 15 years being the hottest on record.   The usual approach to climate change was to seek to mitigate it by reducing its speed and magnitude. This was clearly the most vital activity and was also the thrust of the Paris Accord where global leaders had committee to reducing temperatures to 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels. 

(3)       Mr Henderson went on to say that the need for adaptation was often ignored. Even if the aims of the Paris Accord were achieved, this would not prevent the cumulative impact of greenhouse gasses on the environment.   Mitigation and Adaptation needed to be carried out simultaneously. 

(4)       Mr Henderson then showed a slide giving data produced by UKCP18.   Over the coming years, summers were expected to be hotter and drier. Temperatures were projected to rise by between 2 and 3 degrees by 2040 and 5 to 6 degrees by 2080.  Average summer precipitation would reduce by between 20 and 30% by 2040n and 30 to 50% by 2080.  Winters were expected to become warmer and wetter with temperatures increasing by 1 to 2 degrees by 2040 and 3 to 4 degrees by 2080 whilst winter precipitation would rise by between 10 and 20% by 2040 and by 20 to 30% by 2080.  These figures were not, however, expected to represent a steady increase as it was predicted that temperature rises would be far more volatile with the projected simply representing the overall rise.   Meanwhile sea levels were expected to rise in London by 2m over the next 100 to 200 years even if the low emissions targets were met, which looked unlikely at present.

(5)       Mr Henderson then said that given that the effects of climate change were already being felt, and were going to increase, there was a clear need to be proactive in reducing their impacts on the natural environment, communities, and economies. The Interreg 2 Cs Member States (UK, Belgium, France and Netherlands) had developed national adaptation strategies that identified a range of actions with solid evidence bases. It was difficult to translate national priorities into local actions. The local authorities and regional agencies responsible for implementing them, however, faced challenges in engaging planners and decision-makers. There was insufficient understanding of the long-term costs and benefits of adaptation measures, and a lack of relevant tools to support decision-making and funding for perceived “future” investments. This perception meant that people considered climate change to be something that was going to happen rather than that it was happening already. These barriers led to a situation in which there was little appetite for, or ability to deliver local adaptation. The result was an implementation gap between strategy and real, tangible change on the ground.  This was an issue that STAR2Cs was seeking to overcome as it aimed to establish how adaptation could be delivered as part of the business planning and decision-making process.

(6)       Mr Henderson turned to the project itself.  The Partnership had identified different financial, social, technical and eco-system based mechanisms to deliver cost effective climate change adaptation.  An adaptation catalyst tool had been developed as an e-tool designed enable planners to weigh up the cost and benefits (including long term benefits of adaptation measures.  This helped to overcome the perception that benefits had to be measured in the short term only.

(7)       Mr Henderson then showed a slide of bufferblocks which had been developed in Belgium using recycled lightweight concrete materials which absorbed water and were very effective, especially in low-lying areas where they also reduced subsidence.  The carbon footprint was far lower than for traditional concrete.

(8)       The Dutch partners had developed innovative flood modelling techniques to help better plan for and mitigate the impacts of flooding.  Mr Henderson said that climate change technology tended to be seen as predominantly scientific and technical. This ignored the importance of social participation which was fundamental from the outset. Any measures taken needed to take full account of the concerns and interests of the residents.

(9)       A guidebook had been developed to help residents to set up climate forums, maximise participation and come to shared understandings of risk.   In Flanders, where the rivers were increasingly prone to flooding, a river contract had been set up to enable communities to collectively manage local fluvial flood risk in partnership with local authorities.

(10)    Mr Henderson said that STAR2Cs’ approach was based on seven principles: Co-Design, Customised, Flexibility, Multi-Functionality, Incrementalism, Integration and Cost Effectiveness.   This represented a partnership rather than a top-down method of working where the aim was to provide benefits in addition to those arising from climate change. Each project was tailored to its specific location, ensuring that further adaptations could be added to the project events turned out differently from what had been predicted.  

(10)     Mr Henderson continued that there had been two preparatory pieces of work which had needed to be carried out in order to understand the risks and opportunities from climate change.  Consequently, KCC, supported by JBA Consultants had carried out significant research and wide stakeholder engagement with 120 key stakeholders, publishing the results of the climate risk assessment in late 2020.

The assessment highlighted the environmental changes that Kent could experience over the next 20-80 years, the potential risks and opportunities these changes posed to Kent’s society, economy and environment, and made recommendations for adaptation action.

(11)     In Kent, climate change was likely to result in warmer, more wet winters and hotter, drier summers. Extreme weather was expected to become more frequent and intense in a county that was already vulnerable to heavy rainfall, floods, droughts and heatwaves. The priority risks for Kent were therefore Flooding, Storms, Water Stress and High Temperatures. Some of the most significant likely impacts of climate change were loss or reduction of agricultural land, changes to crops, increased overheating in homes and public buildings, habitat loss, flooding of homes and businesses, disruption on the transport networks, and a greater number and variety of plant and animal diseases.

(12)     Mr Henderson then said that although climate change presented Kent with many challenges, it was also likely to bring about some important benefits including decreased winter mortality among the elderly, a reduction in energy use during winter, longer growing seasons, opportunities for crop for the agricultural sector, and the potential to boost tourism. Some of Kent’s industries are already seeing benefits, such as increasing viticulture across the county and improved conditions for soft fruit production. diversification for the agricultural sector, and the potential to boost tourism. Some of Kent’s industries were already seeing benefits, such as increasing viticulture across the county and improved conditions for soft fruit production.

(13)     Mr Henderson turned to then described some of the work undertaken following the risk assessment. He said that KCC was also involved in the H20 Partnership which was carrying out three significant pieces of work.  The first of these was the Spatial Risk Assessment for water which used GIS techniques to assess and map potential nature-based flood and drought mitigation measures. It would assess the risks to water systems (flooding, contamination, drought) arising from climate change, population growth and land use change across Kent’s hydrological catchments. 

(14)     The Rainwater Harvesting Tool had been developed. Kent had some of the highest concentrations of protected soft fruit production under polytunnels in the UK. The irrigation water needs of these crops were significant and increasing, at the same time as climate change was affecting rainfall patterns and the availability of water resources. During the growing season intense rainfall could see the concentration of rainfall on the polytunnels, leading to flooding and soil erosion as well as the loss of valuable water. The tool aimed to encourage farmers to see the benefits of rainwater harvesting for their own farms, including the savings that could be achieved from not using mains water.

(15)     A Water Trading Tool pilot was being run at the Hacklinge Marshes in East Kent and it was hoped to expand this work across other areas in the future. It supported farms across Kent to effectively manage and make best use of available water resources, enabling users with water abstraction licenses to collaborate and examine the potential for improved sharing of water resources to protect the environment.  The modelling for this Tool was currently seeking to establish whether a marketing or social sharing mechanism was the best way to promote water sharing.

(16)      Mr Henderson then said that the H20 Cool Towns Project in Margate combined two elements of adaptation. Thirty trees were being planted in a residential to reduce ambient temperatures by creating shading and also to help absorb heavy rainwater through the pits dug out below them, thereby reducing the flow on hard surfaces.  At the same time, buildings which had been erected to cope with the climate of 30 years earlier were being adapted in response to the impacts of climate change.  These buildings would be in accordance with the building resilience standards for Kent, incorporating thermal dynamics, heat stress and the maximisation of shading and ventilation to reduce internal temperatures.    

(17)     Mr Henderson concluded his presentation by saying that the adaptation programme built on work that was already being undertaken in order to build resilience across Kent in response to the changing climate.

(18)      Mr Lewis said that many people were against the approach that had been described.  He said that the way forward for agriculture was to reduce meat eating, which the agriculture sector would oppose for financial reasons. There were questions too about the willingness of the industrial sector to carry out the necessary measures.  Solar panel installation was not taking place at the rate people wanted because many people had neither the means nor the inclination to do so.  Tree planting in Thanet was taking place in the context of their destruction as part of the Thanet Parkway scheme.  Electrical cars were far more expensive that those that ran on petrol. He asked how Mr Henderson intended to persuade KCC to undertake the adaptation measures at the pace that he clearly would like it to. 

(19)     Mr Henderson replied that many of the pilot schemes that he had described were small in scale.  Certainly, the planting of thirty trees in Margate would not negate the full impact of trees which had been felled.  One of the purposes of the Cool Towns Project, for example was to raise public awareness of what could be accomplished on a larger scale.  It sought to change perceptions and the way in which people reacted.  The pilots were a necessary stage in bringing about the significant action that was needed. 

(20)     The Chairman said that whilst various people had different views about the pace of adaptation, it was important to recognise that everything Kent County Council did was in the context of the effects of climate change and the need to adapt to its effects.

(21)    RESOLVED that Mr Tom Henderson be thanked for his presentation and that its content be noted.