On 9 October 2024, the second workshop in this year’s CIPU series built on the outcomes of the first workshop to further explore “The Climate-Resilient City”. Held in the city Dudelange, the workshop brought together 30 participants from Luxembourg’s municipalities and other stakeholders to explore strategies for enhancing urban resilience to climate change.

The workshop aimed to develop tools for municipalities for the development and adoption of climate resilience strategies. It continued discussions initiated in the previous CIPU workshop in June 2024 (see blog post here) and was closely tied to Luxembourg’s overarching efforts to integrate resilience into urban planning. Participants addressed the central question: “What can municipalities do to become more climate-resilient?”

As part of the CIPU’s mission, the event contributed to fostering exchange between municipalities and aligning local efforts with national and international frameworks. The workshop opened with a recap of insights from the first event and a presentation by Patricia Vilar from the Ministry of Internal Affairs Luxembourg. She provided an overview of national efforts to support municipal resilience, including the national platform for disaster risk reduction and the working group on resilient municipalities. Highlighting the importance of fostering collaboration and building networks, she connected local efforts with international frameworks such as the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction.

With this inspiring input, the participants were then divided into four groups, each tasked with addressing three of four specific aspects of establishing a climate resilience strategy. Each group developed their own results, which were later aggregated into overarching trends and outcomes.

1) How can a climate resilience strategy be developed? Participants worked on outlining a framework for creating a municipal climate resilience strategy. Each group explored the essential steps, including initiating the process, collecting and analysing data, setting priorities, and planning implementation. A key outcome was a seven-phase process to guide municipalities: from defining responsibilities and gathering data to monitoring progress and involving stakeholders through communication and participation. The discussions highlighted that municipalities with prior experience in managing climate events could rely on existing data, while those less experienced needed to focus on risk assessment. Political commitment and sufficient funding were identified as critical to success, alongside a flexible and cyclical approach that allows for adjustments as circumstances evolve.

2) How should municipalities act during a crisis? Participants addressed municipal responses to two extreme weather scenarios (severe drought and heavy rain fall), focusing on three phases: preparation, response, and recovery. Key measures in the preparation phase included assessing local needs through surveys, developing emergency plans, and creating communication strategies. Specific actions involved identifying cooling zones for heatwaves and upgrading wastewater systems for heavy rainfall. During the response phase, the focus was on effective crisis management, such as issuing warnings, ensuring access to cooling centres or evacuation zones, and maintaining critical infrastructure. Temporary measures like water fountains or sandbags were also proposed. In the recovery phase, learning from events was prioritised, with measures such as enhancing cooling zones and adapting infrastructure to prevent future risks. The results highlighted that a structured, three-phase approach helps municipalities proactively address extreme weather impacts while strengthening long-term resilience.

3) How can urban areas adapt to specific climate risks? Participants addressed how to make an existing neighbourhood more resilient to the two fictive scenarios of a heatwave (2025) and heavy rainfall (2026). The discussions centred on three goals: creating resilient public spaces and infrastructure, ensuring resilient buildings, and protecting residents’ health and safety. Proposed measures for public spaces included identifying and enhancing “cool spots” through greening and reducing impermeable surfaces, while converting vulnerable “hot spots” into green or water-retention areas. Pathways between green spaces and neighbourhoods were prioritised to improve airflow and reduce heat. For buildings, the focus was on green roofs and facades, rainwater retention systems, and enhanced thermal insulation to mitigate heat and flood risks. Financial incentives and regulations were suggested to encourage private adoption of these measures. To protect health and safety, ideas included “heat plans” and “flood plans,” clear communication systems, and providing public cooling and evacuation centres. Participants also highlighted the need to balance resilience with urban density, noting that compact urban forms often increase vulnerability. Integrating resilience into early planning stages was deemed essential for long-term success.

4) What internal structures are needed to implement resilience strategies? Participants explored the organisational structures needed to integrate climate resilience strategies into municipal administrations. Groups developed models reflecting their size, resources, and specific climate risks. Two primary approaches emerged which can be adopted simultaneously:

• Hierarchy-based structure: This approach included a central resilience coordinator and task force involving key departments, such as technical services, environment, urban planning, and communication. These departments collaborate to develop, implement, and monitor strategies, supported by specialised commissions or external advisors.
• Risk-based structure: This flexible approach tailored responsibilities to the scale and type of climate risks. Smaller measures, like flood barriers, could be handled by individual departments, while larger initiatives, such as city-wide greening projects, required broader collaboration across multiple teams and governance levels.

Both models emphasised the importance of cross-departmental communication, adaptable structures, and, for smaller municipalities, inter-municipal cooperation to pool resources. Regular review and adaptation of the strategy were highlighted as essential to ensure continuous improvement and preparedness for future climate challenges.

The workshop concluded with a plenary session where participants shared their findings. Emphasis was placed on the cyclical nature of climate resilience planning, the need for robust data and stakeholder engagement, and the importance of integrating resilience into all stages of urban development. The participants developed a seven-phase approach as a structured framework to guide municipalities, covering steps from initiation and risk assessment to implementation, monitoring, and continuous communication. However, it was also noted that resilience planning must be flexible and adaptable to the size, structure, and resources of each municipality. Smaller municipalities may benefit from inter-municipal cooperation, while larger ones need clearly defined roles and cross-departmental collaboration.

Following the workshop sequence, the participants had the chance to visit Dudelange’s newly built multipurpose hall (Hall Polyvalent). Constructed with sustainable materials and designed for easy disassembly and relocation, the building exemplifies the principles of circular economy. It highlights how climate-resilient infrastructure can simultaneously support sustainability and urban adaptability.

If you are interested in a more detailed description of the workshop and the results of the group discussions, you can access the documentation here: https://cipu.lu/. The insights from this workshop informed the annual CIPU conference that took place on 18 November 2024 and will additionally be incorporated in a strategic statement on climate resilient cities synthesising the events and discussions from the CIPU year 2024. It is foreseen to be published beginning of 2025.

Contact

CIPU: cipu@zeyenbaumann.lu

References

Workshop documentation – available online (German): https://cipu.lu/