Show simple item record

dc.contributor.convenorAssociate Professor Paul Maginen_US
dc.contributor.authorByrne, Jasonen_US
dc.contributor.authorChapin, Timen_US
dc.contributor.authorDedekorkut, Aysinen_US
dc.contributor.authorHowes, Michaelen_US
dc.contributor.authorPengfei, Zhuen_US
dc.contributor.editorAssociate Professor Paul Maginen_US
dc.date.accessioned2017-04-04T21:46:10Z
dc.date.available2017-04-04T21:46:10Z
dc.date.issued2011en_US
dc.date.modified2012-08-19T23:10:48Z
dc.identifier.refurihttp://www.wpsc2011.com.au/index.htmlen_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/45266
dc.description.abstractThe state plays a central role in society by providing public goods to the community, regulating the economy, and mediating the interactions between society and the environment. This role is supported by some unique powers including the ability to make and enforce laws, plan the development of settlements, and provide essential infrastructure. These features make the state a key player in any attempt to adapt to the impacts of climate change but its structure and powers vary considerably from country to country. This raises the important question of what institutional arrangements might enable or constrain an adaptation response. We seek to address this question via a comparative analysis of three cities: the Gold Coast in Australia, Fort Lauderdale in the USA, and Beihai in China. All three are comparable rapidly urbanising, low lying, subtropical coastal cities with similar development patterns, built environments, climates, landforms, socio-demographic compositions and growth drivers (e.g. tourism and property development). They are also all highly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. Notwithstanding these similarities, the architecture of their state institutions and the distribution of powers across different levels of government vary significantly. By comparing these case studies our research will generate some key insights into the institutional features that influence the ability of the state to respond to the effects of climate change.en_US
dc.description.peerreviewedYesen_US
dc.description.publicationstatusYesen_US
dc.format.extent386275 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.languageEnglishen_US
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherWorld Planning Schools Congressen_US
dc.publisher.placePerth, Western Australiaen_US
dc.publisher.urihttp://anzaps.net/en_US
dc.relation.ispartofstudentpublicationNen_US
dc.relation.ispartofconferencename2011 WPSCen_US
dc.relation.ispartofconferencetitleWorld Planning Schools Congress 2011: Planning in an era of uncertainty and transformationen_US
dc.relation.ispartofdatefrom2011-07-04en_US
dc.relation.ispartofdateto2011-07-08en_US
dc.relation.ispartoflocationPerth, Western Australiaen_US
dc.rights.retentionYen_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchLand Use and Environmental Planningen_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode120504en_US
dc.titleAlternative States: Comparing Climate Adaptation Governance for the Gold Coast (Australia), Fort Lauderdale (USA) and Beihai (China)en_US
dc.typeConference outputen_US
dc.type.descriptionE1 - Conference Publications (HERDC)en_US
dc.type.codeE - Conference Publicationsen_US
gro.facultyGriffith Sciences, Griffith School of Environmenten_US
gro.rights.copyrightCopyright 2011 ANZAPS. The attached file is reproduced here in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher. Please refer to the conference's website for access to the definitive, published version.en_US
gro.date.issued2011
gro.hasfulltextFull Text


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Conference outputs
    Contains papers delivered by Griffith authors at national and international conferences.

Show simple item record