Policy in the Built Envoronment

Question: Discuss about the Policy in the Built Envoronment. Answer: Introduction The aim of the policy of UK government is to achieve the practicable level of sustainable development. Some of the recent reports have revealed that the National Planning Policy Framework sets out the planning policies for England along with the setting up of the practices that are predictable to apply to understanding the expected result (Adaikalam and Hessle, 2010). The National Planning Policy Framework is required to take into account for the overall preparation of local as well as neighborhood plans. Anderson (2012) has identified this as a material consideration in the planning decisions. It has been found that the Government has simplified the planning system, so that the local councils can enjoy the freedom to make some of the decisions in the in the best interests of their area. Recent reports on sustainable development have identified that in 2009, buildings accounted for more than 43% of all the UKs carbon emission and the government felt the necessity to reduce the carbon emission as it largely affects as well as damage the environment (Baker, 2012). In this regard, adaptation vs. mitigation is one of the important parts of the policy and this has been identified as one of the strong debates. In this particular work, the current policy of UK in building sustainable development has been mentioned along with the critical review. Outline of the Current Policy Framework As per the policy framework of UK, development means the overall growth and the policies are required to incorporate for the betterment of the living in a competitive world and the sustainable change in the environment means the overall change, not only in the built environment. It has been observed that the core of the National Planning Policy Framework is a assumption in great favor of the sustainable development and Smith (2014) has opined that it should be viewed as a golden thread running through both the plan making as well as decision-making. Mitigation and Adaptation are the two significant parts of the National Planning Policy Framework and Smith and Green (2010) have identified mitigation of the climate change to be more economic than adaptation. Therefore, it can be said that there exists a debate between the two factors, i.e. Mitigation and Adaptation. Chem (2012) has said that Adaptation in comparison to Mitigation is more practical as it has the potentiality to attack the raised problem tactfully. As per the viewpoint of Colligan (2012), mitigation is such an easy process in case of achieving the environment sustainability, that everyone can take part, as this is as simple as planting a tree. Colligan (2012) has found that climate change adaptation appears to occupy the centre of the climate conciliation. One of the prominent climate policy debates is related to adaptation vs. mitigation, as the climate change in UK is one of the prominent issues that come to the forefront. In the National Planning Policy Framework, there are some basic development models as Food brings satisfaction, Housing brings stability, health brings stability, and education brings opportunity (Drake, 2014). It is no doubt that global warming is one of the great concerns of the whole world and the policies adopted by UK Government are well aligned with the National Planning Plans. The National Policy has introduced some of the important aspects and those have been mentioned here. Figure 1: The Aspects of Sustainable Development of the Environment (Source: Hopkins, 2012) For the achievement of sustainable environment, government is required to focus at each of the steps as the collaboration of these help to gain the achievable result for saving the environment for further depletion. United Nation Climate Conference of 2015 is targeting to make some global change process that tends to protect the nation towards global devastation (Kuramochi et al. 2012). Reports published by UK Government say that the United Nation Climate Conference in December 2015 must adopt a legally binding treaty in regards to reduce the carbon emission by 80% by the end of 2050 and after achieving the goal; it would try to eliminate the green house gas emission in the century. Seroli (2009) has said that there is a debate that whether mitigation is feasible or not and in favor of the answer, it has been found that many people have argued that mitigating the global environment and the global warming will be easier than fighting with it later. On the contrary, it has been observe d that many experts have opined that world would not be able to reach the set target of keeping the warming or the temperature below 2 degrees. Therefore, it can be easily said that in the current policy framework, adaptation vs. mitigation is one of the prominent debate issues that tends to shed light on some of the serious aspects of building sustainable environment (Paudel and Hatch, 2012). Critical Review of the Current Policy Framework After discussing the present policy framework adopted by the government of UK, it is required to analyze the policy with special focus on mitigation vs. adaptation. It has been observed that there are certain claims in the literature on the diplomacy of climate about the adaptation turn in the last year of the negotiation. Rabczak (2012) has argued that, the conception of adaptation is often opposed to that of mitigation as the contrast is not without the reason. These two mentioned notions refer to largely different ways of in order to deal with the global warming. It has been found that Mitigation refers to the efforts that target to shorten the impacts of climate change by acting on the causes and thus tends to reduce the emission of the Green house gases (Scherer, 2012). On the other hand, Adaptation refers to the efforts in regards to prepare the living society to gradually cope up with the effects of climate changes. Therefore, it is clear enough to say that these two approache s are not mutually exclusive and thus often been opposed by the actors in the debate of climate change (Weston, 2009). Resolution 42/187 of the United Nations General Assembly has outlined sustainable development as meeting the requirements of the present situation without compromising the capability of the prospect generations for meeting their own needs. Zhang and Agarwal (2012) have identified three major dimensions of sustainable development that give rise to the requirements of the planning system to perform some of the major roles. Scherer (2012) has said that Economic Role, Social Role and Environmental Role are focused largely with special reference to the concept of Mitigation vs. Adaptation. Over the past few times, the climate scientists have severely argued on the effectiveness of the mitigation and adaptation as this is one of the significant parts of the climate discussion (Scherer, 2012). Paudel and Hatch (2012have defined that with only four decades to go and the UK is already losing the Climate Change Mitigation Battle, as the target of emission of the greenhouse gases set by the UK government demands a significant rate of reduction that has never been achieved by any of the nations before in this world. For the replacement of Kyoto Protocol, World nations meet took place in the year 2009 in Copenhagen, Denmark and it was determined over there that initially the government will try to reduce the emission by 34% at the end of 2020 and 80% by 2050 (Paudel and Hatch, 2012). In order to reduce this high emission rate, the introduction of mitigation and adaptation were obvious and the scientists kept on emphasizing on the relevance of these two different approaches. Therefore, debate was unavoidable regarding the effectiveness of the adoption of the approaches. In this special field, MAG is one of the prominent integration of Mitigation, Adaptation and Geo-engineering into one amalgamated as well as articulate policy that has successfully addressed both the national and the international concerns. Paudel and Hatch (2012) have described Mitigation as the continuing reduction of the Green House Gas emissions from various sectors of the society like production of energy, transportation, the built surroundings and some more. Hopkins (2012) has identified its significance largely as it will remain the centerpiece of any of the climate change policies. On the contrary, Colligan (2012) has described Adaptation as to ensure that the government adapts and tries the best to protect the critical assets of the society like power stations, transportation links, overheating or the sudden rise of the sea level and some more. In some of the specified tremendous cases, this would mean the premeditated rejection of the settlements along with the obtainable condition (Baker, 2012). Therefore, it is clear enough to say that the debate regarding the two advances are obvious enough and thus it required detailed study. The new high-level vision of Policy Framework After discussing the entire concept critically, it is clear enough to say that some of the points are compulsory to be focused as this is in the centre point of the debate. MAG is one of the effective approaches to the climate change policy as it has the potentiality to reach the set target. So, further research and modification of this approach is required to mitigate the flaws of the present day adopted policies (Rabczak, 2012). The entire adoption of this approach of the MAG policy can significantly increase the green sector of UK in order to reduce the carbon emission and to protect the nation largely. Therefore, the local communities and the governments need to address this part for the further improvement of the existing policies, so that the desired level can be achieved within the set target time. The development of the comprehensive MAG battle plan is required to focus to secure the future as well as to help the industry plan for the further skill requirements (Drake, 2014). It can be recommended that the government should work with proper collaboration with the engineering professionals as well as the business community for the further development of the comprehensive plan for the proper implementation of the geo-engineering and adaptation. The focus is required to give on the low carbon economy as well as for achieving the set target level of the sustainable development of the environment (Seroli, 2009). It can be said that this plan is required to be scaled over at least 100 years or waiting for the geo-engineering ingredient is eradicated. In this approach, the renewable energy sources are required to be focus largely in order to save the earth or the environment and further researches as well as modification of the existing approaches are encouraged (Drake, 2014). Mostly wind, solar and wave technology are required to use largely as the renewable source of energy. Further improvement of the river and sea defenses is needed to be largely improved in order to protect against the problem of gradual rise of the present sea level. These areas are required to be focused immediately to achieve the target goal. Conclusion After discussing several aspects of the current policy framework of UK, in this research work, further critical evaluation of the existing policy has been prepared. Considering various aspects, it has been observed that one of the main purposes of the company is to reduce the carbon level by 80% at the end of 2050 and thus the government has adopted various useful policies (Bhattacharya, 2012). Moreover, it has been observed that the government is largely concerned about the reduction of the carbon emission level and further improvements have been focusing with the help of scientists and the environmental analysts. It is no doubt to say that every small community, local government is required to give the freedom to take initiatives that can best feet the requirement of the particular area. Councils and the communities are needed to central all the systems to achieve that socially, environmentally as well as economically for achieving the sustainable development of the society, nation and in broader sense the entire world. Various departments of the society is required to take the equal part in the overall development, otherwise the policies adopted cannot contribute the expected results. References Adaikalam, F. and Hessle, S. (2010). Environmental change and sustainable social development. Anderson, M. (2012). Global Warming. New York: Britannica Educational Publishing in association with Rosen Educational Services. Baker, R. (2012). REMOVED: Membrane Solutions to Global Warming. Procedia Engineering, 44, p.5. Chem. V, (2012). Greenhouse Gas Emissions. ChemViews. Colligan, L. (2012). Global warming. New York: Marshall Cavendish Benchmark. Drake, F. (2010). Global Warming. Hoboken: Taylor and Francis. Drake, F. (2014). Global Warming. Hoboken: Taylor and Francis. Hopkins, C. (2012). Twenty Years of Education for Sustainable Development. Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, 6(1), pp.1-4. Kuramochi, T., Ramrez, A., Turkenburg, W. and Faaij, A. (2012). Effect of CO2 capture on the emissions of air pollutants from industrial processes. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 10, pp.310-328. Paudel, K. and Hatch, L. (2012). GLOBAL WARMING, IMPACT ON AGRICULTURE AND ADAPTATION STRATEGY. Natural Resource Modeling, 25(3), pp.456-481. Rabczak, S. (2012). Heat pump installation and greenhouse effect. Zeszyty naukowe Politechniki Rzeszowskiej Nr 283, z. 59. Scherer, L. (2012). Global warming. Detroit: Greenhaven Press. Seroli, G. (2009) Learning for the Future: Competences in Education for Sustainable Development. (2012). Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, 6(1), pp.165-165. Smith, H. (2014). Deep-sea warming slows down global warming. Science, 345(6199), pp.886-887. Smith. K and Green. J. (2010) Plants can play a role in avoiding dangerous global warming: Climate Institute. (2014). ECOS. Weston, D. (2009). The political economy of global warming. Weston, D. (2010). The political economy of global warming. Zhang, Z. and Agarwal, R. (2012). A simple integrated model of global warming and policymaking. International Journal of Global Warming, 4(2), p.134.