Impact case study database

With the aim of filling the leadership gap left by CABE’s closure, Bartlett researchers led on the establishment in 2014 of an independent not-for-profit initiative: The Place Alliance. Having first informed a critique of the Farrell Review (2015), UCL researchers hosted debates (BIG MEET) through which the Place Alliance emerged and, in February 2015, more than 100 professionals from 77 organisations in the UK’s architecture, design and built environment industry endorsed this cross-sector collaborative network. UCL research informed the approach, tools and initiatives underpinning how the alliance seeks to influence the national place quality agenda through the use of formal and informal urban design governance tools [b, c].

The Place Alliance has had impact in three ways, through: the evidence base it provides for national and local decision-making; the design leadership it offers via its unique networked approach; and the influence it has on national and local policy.

4.1 Filling an evidence gap for design quality in development practice

The Place Alliance has become a key source in policy-making, and day-to-day decision-making, publishing evidence-based reports and knowledge tools on design governance. Place Value Wiki is a notable example.

Place Value Wiki

The Place Value Wiki is a collaborative online tool focused on place quality and its health, and social, economic and environmental value [1]. The wiki is a collective resource, accessed by around 250 unique users per month. It is open to all researchers to add and edit evidence for use by practitioners and others. Using technology, the wiki in effect continues CABE’s former workstream on measuring urban design value. It provided a knowledge baseline for Place Value and the Ladder of Place Quality [2], a guide for defining critical aspects of quality for public policy-making.

The Head of Urban Design and Landscape Architecture at Milton Keynes Council used the Place Value Wiki when developing the Milton Keynes Futures 2050 project. “In envisioning this future,” he stated, “we believe it is important to recognise the value of this growth as regards health, social, economic and environmental outcomes. To do this we reviewed the evidence gathered by the Place Alliance and its culmination in the Ladder of Place Quality” [3, p. 53].

In 2020, the United Nations Human Settlements Programme commissioned a talk on Place Value from Carmona for the Global Urban Lectures series [4], and a programme officer at UN-Habitat commented that “ The Ladder of Place Quality provides elements that can be used within the framework of our own raising awareness campaign” [3, p.64].

4.2 Advocating for design quality through a network approach

Using insights from the CABE analysis, The Place Alliance has brought a new collaborative, completely open and inclusive approach to the leadership of urban design governance, notably in the neutral space in its events and activities (e.g. 1,200 participants across ten themed ‘BIG MEETS’ **[3]**). A Senior Planning Manager in the Welsh Government remarked that “Place Alliance helps me understand the wide range of stakeholders available to drive awareness of placemaking and helps deliver change on the ground, both politically and in practice” [3 p.38].

One way the Place Alliance delivers this change is through facilitating community engagement for projects such as the Shad Thames Area Management Partnership (STAMP). The Chair of STAMP stated: “Through various Place Alliance events we connected with several professionals who are interested in engaging with us and supporting our work. […] Engaging with Place Alliance confirmed to me, even without us having design expertise, that local knowledge and understanding are valued” [3 p.55].

Housing Design Audit for England

This approach has helped to build coalitions of interest around initiatives and ideas, for example in ‘ A Housing Design Audit for England’ [5]. The Place Alliance organised Design Audits of 142 large scale developments across England, supported by the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE), Home Builders Federation as well as the Academy of Urbanism, Civic Voice, Design Council, Urban Design Group and the UK Green Building Council. The Urban Design Director at Barratt Developments noted that it: “shed[s] light on what housebuilders are developing, what are the constraints behind the developers delivering good design, and how could there be more constancy in housing delivery” [3 p.58]. The audit also underpinned the work of the Building Better Building Beautiful Commission, an independent body that advised government on how to promote and increase the use of high-quality design for new build homes and neighbourhoods [6].

4.3 Influencing design quality policy nationally and locally

The Place Alliance has fundamentally helped to shift the debate about, and national and local priority given to, design quality. Its 2017 report, ‘ Design Skills in English Local Planning Authorities’ [7], led the UK Government to redirect a share of the GBP11,000,000 Planning Delivery Fund of that year into a specific Design Quality Fund. The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) Head of Architecture states: “Place Alliance brings together industry and design sector businesses to provide research and insights on the design of the built environment. These can be beneficial for policymakers involved in the built environment. […] UCL […] provides a necessary academic foundation” [3 p.63].

Reviewing Design Review in London

Working with Urban Design London and the Greater London Authority, the Place Alliance examined the operation of design review through Reviewing Design Review in London. Published in 2018, the research significantly informed the Mayor of London’s London Quality Review Charter [8]. A Senior Urban Designer at London Borough of Enfield remarked, “The research has helped design officers make the case for the benefits of design review to the council, increasing its use and ability to raise the standard of design across the borough” [3 p.15]. The Executive Director at Civic Voice stated: “The connection with an independent academic organisation enables us to have evidence-based and responsive discussions nationally. […] The research into design review and the role of Councillors has been particularly valuable to us and we invited Place Alliance to present their research findings in parliamentary events that we ran” [3 p.59].

A Design Quality Unit for England

The Place Alliance instigated and led a campaign to set up a new national body to lead on design quality in England, supported by key stakeholders, such as the Academy of Urbanism, CPRE, and the Design Council. Central to this were Delivering Urban Quality, Time to Get Serious and Towards a Design Quality Unit for England [9] – based on Bartlett research. The Place Alliance led the initiative and brought together a consortium that included the Academy of Urbanism, CPRE, Civic Voice, Design Council, Design Network, Trees & Design Action Group, and the Urban Design Group. This secured commitment from the UK government to establish such a body in the 2020 Planning White Paper and in early 2021 the Office for Place was announced [10].

From its foundation out of a critique of the Farrell Review, informed by the underpinning research, Place Alliance has continued to use that research to structure an evolving work programme which has been hugely influential in providing national leadership and driving significant policy change in the planning and design of the built environment.

Sintropher has had major impacts in reconceptualising and investing in new tram-based projects across North West Europe, leading to significant travel behaviour changes, urban development and economic and social impacts.

4.1 Changing public transport investment strategy in North Western Europe

The economic impacts of regional public transport systems, connecting urban centres to their surrounding regions are often a very positive influence on GDP and growth [1]. Utilising best practice from Kassel and Saarbrücken, tram-train projects are being developed in the UK, Europe, and internationally, including Sintropher’s case studies. Organisations such as the Light Rail Transit Association have used the analysis and evidence from Sintropher to plan and lobby for tram-train projects in the UK. For example, the Sheffield-Rotherham tram-train pilot project is underway and a regional tram-train project is being planned in the Manchester city-region. The Technical Director, Light Rail Transit Association, cites Sintropher research – specifically evidence pointing to employment, educational, leisure and environmental benefits to areas of social and economic deprivation – as being of “great significance [in] changing the way that innovative tram-based projects are perceived in the UK, and will lead to many more project investments of this type” [2].

The research influenced proposals for new regional public transport investments in Blackpool. The Group Leader for Transport Projects in Blackpool Council cites Sintropher as providing the foundation for a “new [transport] system [that] is superior and future-proofed to enable further extensions,” and further states that the project “has made a real contribution to the north-west England economy. The new system has made a major positive difference to the Blackpool promenade environment, particularly as the now heritage trams continue to operate in between the core services” [3].

Sintropher has been fundamental to developing innovative proposals for urban and regional public transport investments in Northern England [4] [5]. This includes regional tram-train and also a high-speed rail connection linking Liverpool-Manchester-Leeds-Sheffield-Hull, initially proposed by Professor Sir Peter Hall. This latter project was subsequently developed by the UK Government as High Speed Rail 3 (HS3) within the Northern Way proposals [6].

Other cities, such as Oxford, are considering regional tram-based investments, using lessons from Sintropher [7], and Transport for London (TfL) is developing large public transport projects that regenerate urban corridors and neighbourhoods, such as Crossrail2. Sintropher’s emphasis on wider measures of investment value, such as the potential for trams to facilitate regeneration, are assisting in the planning and appraisal of such projects.

4.2 Impacts of Sintropher’s investment in tram-based projects for public infrastructure

By examining the social impacts of the demonstration projects, Sintropher’s research has shown that innovative tram-based projects benefit areas with high levels of social and economic deprivation – so-called ‘left behind’ areas. These areas are the focus of new public transport investments, assisting with environmental and social equity public policy goals. Sintropher invested EUR22,300,000 in tram-based projects, which leveraged further EUR1,000,000,000-EUR1,500,000,000 for infrastructure and promote related commercial and housing developments in the public transport corridors and station catchment areas [8].

Influencing travel behaviour in low-income areas in Valenciennes

The tram projects led to changed travel behaviours in the case study cities, with wider environmental, social and economic impacts. For example, in Valenciennes, around 19,000,000 passengers use the tram system annually. EUR13,000,000 from Sintropher co-funded an innovative single-track tramway system, as part of a EUR150,000,000 Ligne 2 project. This was a major EU demonstration project for single-track tram technology, and the investment supported a priority urban regeneration corridor in the Valenciennes urban plan.

A survey of passengers on the Valenciennes tram (Hickman et al., 2019), illustrates the impact of Sintropher-funded public transport investment on travel behaviours in a low-income urban area. The results show that use of the tram was by low-income groups: 66% of respondents had a household income of less than EUR2,000 per month and 39% less than EUR1,000 per month. 45% agree or strongly agree that the tram allows them to access employment opportunities; and 17% agree or strongly agree that the tram helps them to reach employment opportunities that were not reachable before. 95% agree or strongly agree that the tram network is well configured and goes to useful destinations. Finally, 67% agree or strongly agree that the tram helps to reduce inequalities of income and education in the region [9].

4.3 Challenging conventional project appraisal approaches and disseminating good practice

The research contributed to wider professional debate on transport project appraisal approaches, including the requirement for multi-actor MCA approaches as part of a more participatory approach to transport appraisal. TfL, for example, has developed project appraisal approaches that draw on multi-criteria strategic appraisal. The Head of Strategic Analysis at TFL indicates that Sintropher as a whole and the “approaches to transport project appraisal, including CBA, MCA and participatory MCA… [have] been of great significance, influencing the debate and practice relating to the way projects are assessed” [10].

Research and best practice guidance on appraisals have been disseminated internationally. The POLIS network – a network of EU cities and regions concerning transport innovation – has hosted briefing papers on its website, covering innovative approaches to the financing of transport infrastructure and technologies for light- rail or tram-based systems. A good practice interchange guide for NWE was published, and similar resources have been developed for the Asian Development Bank for use in the planning of high-speed railway stations and surrounding neighbourhoods in China [11].

An online course on sustainable urban mobility, developed by the Bartlett School of Planning, and Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ), is available via Futurelearn. Aimed at transport planning practitioners, participants on the first runs of the Part 1 and 2 course totalled over 5,000, including professionals and public stakeholders from the Global South [12]. This course discusses the implementation of sustainable urban mobility projects worldwide, giving attendees the tools to sustain and extend the impact of these projects.

4.1 Inscription of Asmara as a UNESCO World Heritage Site

Following submission of the Nomination Dossier, Asmara: A Modernist African City, on 8 July 2017, Asmara was successfully inscribed onto UNESCO’s World Heritage List. Together with the AHP, Denison’s research provided the required detail of Asmara’s places, spaces and history, for it to become both Eritrea’s first World Heritage Site and Africa’s first Modernist World Heritage Site. Culturally, positive global recognition of Asmara has challenged and changed international perceptions of Eritrea, often misrepresented in the global media as secretive and perpetually in conflict. For Asmara’s 500,000 residents, the planning documents and heritage laws created material improvement to the city’s built environment, enhancing living conditions and the wellbeing of the population through the rehabilitation of buildings, spaces and infrastructure. The Turkish UNESCO Chair’s response encapsulated the research’s significance and intended impact: “What we would like to highlight by this inscription is the great contribution that Asmara’s acceptance will make to the ongoing theoretical discussions about modernity and Modernism in the African continent and about the impacts of urbanisation since such discussions have always been limited to known examples mainly in the West and to some extent in the East. Following the inscription, the site will come to be known much more than before and therefore will serve as a school in itself in the field of urban planning” [1].

Producing the heritage laws and plans to rehabilitate Asmara, and procure international investment

Following Asmara’s inscription, in late 2017 the EU pledged EUR300,000 for Capacity Building for safeguarding Asmara Historic Urban Environment, a programme of funding for staff training, the production of a Conservation Master Plan, and a programme of public engagement and awareness-raising, which included the publication of an Architectural Guide and Heritage Map. In providing the underpinning historical detail, Denison and Ren’s research formed the basis for five key policies that will govern the long-term management of the city’s built environment:

1. 1938 Building Regulations: Asmara’s building regulations – unchanged since 1938 – have been updated to make them relevant in the 21^st century. The updated ‘Planning Norms and Technical Regulations’ include data on the perimeters of the protected area, typological characteristics and the state of the conservation of buildings, roads and open spaces, and the condition of technological networks and public services. The new regulations also include guidance on the upgrading of public services, the protection of the environment, and the reorganisation of infrastructures. These regulations are currently awaiting ratification.

2. Conservation Master Plan: UNESCO mandates that all nominated properties have in place a Conservation Master Plan developed by Asmara Heritage Project and two external experts from Italy. This plan includes analysis of key features such as physical analysis (studies on the characteristics of building typology, current state of conservation of buildings and urban fabric), functional and socio-economic analysis (technical infrastructure, services and compatibility of use, current mobility). It also includes a plan for architectural assets and the townscape comprising five hundred blocks in the historic perimeter. The plan lays out policies on housing, services, mobility and traffic. This work is expected to be completed before UNESCO’s deadline of the end of 2021 (deadline extended due to COVID-19).

3. Integrated Management Plan: The Integrated Management Plan (IMP, 2016-2021) specifies the vision, strategies and tools to be used for heritage protection, while responding to the needs of contemporary life. It contains the legal framework for the coordination the Conservation Master Plan, the Planning Norms and Technical Regulations, and the Disaster Risk Management Framework. The IMP also contains action plans spanning five years that establish a management institution, fund-raising initiatives, human capacity development schemes, and implementation of legal frameworks.

4. Disaster Risk Management Plan: The Disaster Risk Management Plan assesses the risk to the nominated property of all potential natural and man-made disasters. It was produced by an independent Eritrean consultant and approved in 2016.

5. Eritrea’s first ever heritage laws: Heritage laws are a mandatory requirement of UNESCO when nominating a property. For Eritrea, this provided the impetus to create the nation’s first ever heritage laws, which govern recovery, use, protection, and possession of elements of the physical or conceptual world produced culturally, which therefore cover both natural and cultural heritage. Combining both types of heritage was seen as positive and progressive, showing a firm commitment by the State Party to uphold the principles of the UNESCO Convention, to which Eritrea is a signatory, whether or not it has World Heritage Sites [2].

The long-term implementation of plans and policies emanating from the underlying research required investment in skills and training, which was supported by EUR96,000 from the EU. The first phase (late 2017) aimed to produce future conservators and managers of heritage sites. The second phase (2018) focused on producing technicians to participate in future restoration and conservation of cultural heritage sites. Participants (60 overall) were selected from various institutions (Department of Public Works Development, Ministry of Tourism, National Museum of Eritrea, Northern Red Sea Museum, Departments of Tourism of Northern Red Sea, Southern Red Sea and Maekel Region, Department of Social Services, Eritrea Mapping and Information Centre, Eritrea Institute of Technology, and Ministry of Public Works) and from relevant professions (architects, engineers, urban planners, surveyors, tourism managers, anthropologists, archaeologists and hydrologists). The Regional Advisor for Culture, Nairobi Office, UNESCO Regional Office for Eastern Africa highlights the importance of these developments and partnerships as a means of increasing support. They stated that “These different management and planning instruments are crucial to complementing existing legal protections of Asmara to ensure the preservation of the property’s “Outstanding Universal Value” [3].

Changing public perceptions of Asmara

Through the inscription of Asmara, the research has contributed to challenging perceptions of the cultural and economic value of modern heritage among both domestic and international audiences. This was emphasised by the Head of the EU Delegation in Eritrea: “Cultural heritage is not only a means to understand the past, but also an initiative to ensure that Asmara's heritage is treasured and protected for future generations, while also benefiting local communities through increased visits and tourism” [4].

The impact on audiences within Eritrea is seen in an extensive programme of public engagement through exhibitions, workshops and conferences, such as the International Conference on Eritrean Studies in July 2016, and the annual Festival held in Asmara every August. From 2015 to 2018 Asmara’s modern heritage featured prominently in the Festival, attracting approximately one million visitors annually (Eritrea’s total population is less than five million). Former Deputy Director of the Asmara Heritage Project (AHP) said: “Prof Denison’s underlying research was instrumental in providing the content for these exhibits […] [making] it accessible to a very wide public audience (often non-literate) […] [shifting] perception among Asmara residents from seeing the heritage negatively as old, neglected and rundown to more positively, as precious, antique, and a valued asset to be safeguarded: a source of pride. People have started to take responsibility to look after and care for their city” [5]. The Director of the AHP said: “The links [Denison] has established between UCL and AHP through student field trips and the public engagement activities, conceptual projects, and 3D scanning have also made a significant positive impact on the AHP’s work and skills development” [6].

4.2 Asmara as a beacon of change for modern heritage cities

The international significance of Asmara’s inscription can be seen in the growing demand for recognition of the value of modern heritage sites and other types of urban sites outside the West. The research has resulted in invitations to consult on future UNESCO inscriptions for: Ife Campus, Nigeria (March, 2019); Casablanca, Morocco, (Oct 2018); Beijing, China (Oct, 2018, 2019 and 2020); Gdynia, Poland, (May, 2018); and Kaunas, Lithuania (September, 2018). In 2018, Denison co-founded the Modern Cities Network, a professional collaborative group concerned with researching and safeguarding modern heritage. A preliminary meeting was held in June 2018 in the UNESCO World Heritage Site of the White City of Tel Aviv, followed by the first official meeting in the interwar Lithuanian capital and modernist city of Kaunas, in September 2019, funded by Kaunas Municipality. Kaunas is preparing its nomination for inscription in the UNESCO World Heritage List, with Denison as advisor. The Head of Architecture and Urbanism at Kaunas University of Technology described the impact of the research: “The Bartlett School of Architecture is among our most important partners who share their knowledge about heritage as a potential resource for the future sustainable way of urban life. City of Asmara in this context has a particular interest for Kaunas” [7]. In February 2020 Denison was instrumental in forming MoHoA: Modern Heritage of Africa – Modern Heritage in the Anthropocene. This global collaboration with key partners including the African World Heritage Fund, University of Cape Town, Getty Conservation Institute and Modern Cities Network, aims to support the sustainable agenda in Africa by developing new professional and academic networks. Five cross-disciplinary regional workshops are planned for 2021, leading up to a conference hosted by Cape Town University in September 2021 and at UCL in 2022.

The Director of the Conservation Department, Tel Aviv-Yafo Municipality, who is another co-founder of the Modern Cities Network and was a member of the ICOMOS delegation to Asmara to review the city’s candidacy for world heritage status, described the ongoing collaboration and research as “an outstanding source of knowledge as well as a source of geo-cultural interpretation of local attributes” and that these new ideas “are having a wide-ranging impact, from influencing UNESCO’s policy to creating new global networking frameworks addressing the needs and challenges of Modern cities in the twenty-first century” [8].

In 2018, WHO Director General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said that “The Lancet Countdown on Health and Climate Change is an essential partner in driving global progress towards achieving the goals of the Paris Agreement, the most important health treaty of the century” [1]. Bartlett-led research has been central to The Lancet Commission and the Lancet Countdown in establishing a greater understanding of the health consequences of climate change. This has led to global organisational and policy change, demonstrated in a shift in the response of mainstream health institutions (i.e. medical colleges, health professional associations, health systems) to climate change. Such institutions have been historically hard to reach when discussing climate change, yet can play a leading role in utilising research to make positive climate-related decision making. This is because they: i) are required to contribute to the health adaptation response; ii) are a large contributor to emissions in high-income settings; and iii) have powerful influence on the public, the media, and policymakers.

4.1 Fossil fuel divestment of international associations

One of the indicators under the Countdown’s ‘Section 4 – Economics and Finance’, tracks funds from health institutions divested from fossil fuels, finding that at least 23 national and international health associations, colleges and insurers have voted to cease fossil fuel investments since 2014.

The Royal College of General Practitioners (the UK’s largest Medical Royal College, with over 53,000 members) provides an example of how Bartlett research through the Countdown contributed to these decisions to divest. In 2018, their Trustee board announced divestment in fossil fuel companies, representing 5-6% of its GBP7,150,000 investment portfolio. As their Chair confirms [f, g, h] was integral to divestment decisions: “This research made it clear that the continued use of fossil fuels is harming the health of our patients. Based on this evidence from the Lancet Countdown, in addition to a wider recognition of the issues by our members and staff, the College made the decision that it would no longer invest in fossil fuel companies” [2].

The total asset value of these 23 health institutions is estimated at USD42,000,000,000 and includes: the World Medical Association, a confederation of 115 National Medical Associations (representing 9,000,000 doctors around the world, some of whom have also made their own divestment commitments); the Royal Australasian College of Physicians (>25,000 members); the British Psychological Society (representing 21,500 UK psychologists); the New Zealand Nurses Organisation (representing 58,000 nurses in New Zealand); the HESTA Super Fund (>880,000 members); Berlin Doctors’ pension Fund (>30,000 members); and Medibank and HCF, Australian private health insurers to 3,700,000 and 1,700,000 members, respectively.

The 2015 Countdown report provided the scientific rationale to engage the World Bank in funding health and climate change research. Over three years, the World Bank established a new methodology for screening its health investments for climate change impact, which increased the share of World Bank climate-sensitive health investments by 31%, corresponding to more than USD1,000,000,000 in developing country grants and loans. The Founding Lead of the World Bank Climate Change and Health Program cites the impact The Lancet had on these decisions: “Overall, the World Bank Climate Change and Health Program has increased the share of World Bank health investments that consider climate change from a baseline of virtually 0 to 31% for the 2018 financial year, corresponding to more than $1billion for climate-sensitive health investments. The publications of the Lancet Countdown have provided a robust peer-reviewed basis upon which this work was launched and has continued to contribute to its growth” [3].

4.2 NHS net zero emissions strategy and implementation plan

This research is at the core of the ‘Greener NHS’ campaign. Following the launch of the 2019 Lancet Countdown that concluded “the health-care sector is responsible for about 4·6% of global emissions, a value which is steadily rising across most major economies” and air pollution predominately driven by fossil fuel burning was leading to 2,900,000 global deaths attributable to fine particle matter, the NHS Chief Executive approached the Countdown Executive Director to provide independent advice on when and how the NHS could achieve net zero. This led to an NHS net zero contract to UCL (GBP441,600). Bartlett researchers led on the independent advice on two of the four working groups, ‘Estates & Facilities’ and ‘Travel & Transport’ and joined the NHS Net Zero Expert Panel [4].

The subsequent report ‘Delivering a ‘Net Zero’ National Health Service’ provides a detailed account of the NHS’ modelling and analytics underpinning the latest NHS carbon footprint, trajectories to net zero, and the interventions required to achieve that ambition. The Head of Operations and Delivery, Greener NHS confirmed the important role Bartlett researchers played via the Countdown and further consultation in helping the NHS set its carbon targets and in planning the transition, stating that “Their evidence […] and advice about the energy systems impact of NHS decarbonising and issues of health co-benefits […] provided the NHS with key evidence that supported the publication of the NHS “Deliver[ing] a ‘Net Zero’ National Health Service” report” [5]. The report commits the NHS to the following targets:

• for the emissions the NHS control directly (the NHS Carbon Footprint), net zero by 2040, with an ambition to reach an 80% reduction by 2028 to 2032

• for the emissions the NHS can influence (the NHS Carbon Footprint Plus), net zero by 2045, with an ambition to reach an 80% reduction by 2036 to 2039 [4]

Estimated positive impacts from this commitment include:

• Reduction in the NHS’s contribution of 4-5% of the UK’s carbon footprint

• Reduction in the estimated 6,700,000,000 road miles each year created by patients and their visitors travelling to the NHS

• Promotion of public transport or walking and cycling to work, monitoring of waste generation and recycling rates, and installing more energy efficient heat and power sources [6]

The Lancet Countdown team summarises the significance of this shift, stating that: “the NHS sit on the frontline of public health, with 1,300,000 staff it is the country’s largest employer as well as one of the world’s top 10 employers, and accounts for 4% of England’s carbon footprint […] The NHS has also shown a willingness to challenge itself by not only setting a 2040 net zero target for direct emissions, but an even more ambitious target of 2045 for emissions it can influence such as those in its supply chain” [7].

4.3 Global policy and discourse on climate change and health

The global reach and influence of this research through the Countdown is shown by its inclusion in national policy and press and public events to coincide with the launch of its annual report. In December 2020, despite the enormous effect of the COVID-19 pandemic, 2,200 people signed up to the live event platform for the 2020 global and US launches of Lancet Countdown Report (with a further 1,200 views on The Lancet’s Youtube channel), over 2,000 attendees at the Chinese launch, and a further 30 events across every world region. There were over 1,200 unique media stories, reaching over 1,000,000,000 members of the public in 44 countries [8]. The 2020 Lancet Countdown Report was ranked in the top 10 climate change articles most featured in the media (2020) [9].

In the UK, the Countdown has held briefings for the Department for Health; Department of Business, Energy, and Industrial Strategy (and DECC, prior); Department of the Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs; and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. In 2017, the Countdown co-hosted a policy event for MPs on its latest analysis, with the All-Party Parliamentary Group for Climate Change and the All-Party Parliamentary Group for Health. This led to a debate in the House of Lords on the ‘Effects of climate change on health’, which was punctuated with references to the Countdown’s work [10].

Bartlett research through the Lancet has influenced the policies of global health institutions and the NHS, and in turn, this is contributing to a global rethink of the relationship between health and climate change.

The research has been instrumental in raising the profile within UK government of the risks to public health associated with overheating in buildings, and providing evidence to support approaches to mitigate those risks. This impact is reflected in current UK national policy: the UK Climate Change Risk Assessment (2017) and the National Adaptation Programme (NAP2, Risk PB1, 2018) identify overheating as one of four key climate change risks for people and the built environment that needs urgent action.

4.1 Raising the profile of overheating in buildings at UK government level

Under the 2008 Climate Change Act, the UK government is required to publish a UK-wide Climate Change Risk Assessment (CCRA) every five years. The Act stipulates that the government must assess “the risks for the United Kingdom from the current and predicted impacts of climate change”. For the second CCRA, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) commissioned an independent evidence report. CBES researchers were contributing authors of the 2016 evidence report published by the Adaptation Sub-Committee (ASC) of the Committee on Climate Change [1]. It drew substantially on their research, naming 20 of the group’s papers (six on overheating in buildings **[a-f]**), and citing it as the basis for identifying high temperatures as the second most important climate change risk facing the UK. Namely, the report: 1) noted that there are no regulatory or other incentives to ensure existing buildings are retrofitted and for new build developments to be designed and built to limit overheating; and 2) recommended that the urgency of the response be increased to avoid ‘lock-in’ due to the lack of policy and long lifetime of the residential building stock. The ASC review recognised CBES findings that policy and technological approaches are needed to ensure homes and other buildings are well-insulated for winter, yet sufficiently ventilated in summer to keep internal temperatures down. It acknowledged that future research might show how green infrastructure could reduce the urban heat island effect which can exacerbate climate warming and overheating problems.

Informing UK national assessment of climate-change risks

The ASC report was explicitly addressed in the 2017 UK CCRA. The impact on the UK government was unequivocal: it endorsed the new six priority risk areas identified in the ASC review (of which high temperatures was placed second) and drew on the report’s findings. The CCRA acknowledged the significance of a new focus on overheating for policy makers, stating that: “The Government recognises the importance of reducing the risks and impacts of overheating” [2].

Directing UK national policy on climate-change adaptation

The UK National Adaptation Programme (NAP) set out the current and future actions that the government is taking to address the risks and opportunities posed by a changing climate over a five-year period). Where the first NAP contained over 370 actions addressing 100 risks, the government followed research recommendations from the ASC evidence report in the publication of the second UK National Adaptation Programme (NAP2) in 2018, “to set more focused priorities and specific and measurable objectives that clearly contribute to adaptation outcomes, and to be clear on how these will be monitored and evaluated” [3 p.iii]. A section of the NAP2 (section 4.5) was devoted to ‘Overheating in buildings’, drawing on CBES research embedded in the ASC evidence report. This section echoed the findings of CBES research, stating: “We want to ensure that homes and other buildings are well-insulated for winter, while not overheating in the summer. Achieving this aim is likely to require a number of actions, including changes in construction practices, in occupier behaviour and in greater use of green spaces, including historic parks and gardens, whose role in reducing overheating in urban environments is well documented” [3, p.51].

4.2 Shaping the next generation of UK building regulations for a climate-changed UK

This research has influenced recommendations for UK regulations that will help prevent overheating—particularly in relation to housing stock.

UK Committee on Climate Change’s progress report to Parliament

The research informed the UK Committee on Climate Change’s progress report to Parliament in June 2017, which recommended that a standard or regulation should be introduced to reduce the risk of overheating in new homes [4]. This was reiterated in the committee’s 2019 report UK Housing: Fit for the future? [5] for which Davies was an Adaptation Sub-Committee (ASC) champion. In its 2019 inquiry into heatwaves, the Environmental Audit Committee made the recommendation again, inviting Davies to provide oral evidence [6].

Regulating housing stock to prevent overheating

Mavrogianni provided expert review and guidance on building stock modelling to the 2018 AECOM-led research project on overheating risk in new homes, commissioned by the UK’s Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government. This is informing its review of relevant Building Regulations. The report states that “[t]o run detailed models on all dwellings in the region however requires significant amount of data and resources. Based on discussions with Symonds and Mavrogianni from UCL it was determined that simulation work by UCL and the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) using the English Housing Survey (EHS) dataset provides a reasonable estimate of the average indoor temperature for the existing dwelling stock relative to external temperature” [7, p.31].

The Head of Research at the Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers (CIBSE) summarises the influence that CBES research has had as “fundamental in providing evidence to support national policy such as the National Adaptation Plan and the Climate Change Risk Assessment as well as the follow up UK Housing: Fit for the future? report by the Committee on Climate Change” [8].

Through consultation, lobbying and policy discussions, the Bartlett is providing research to aid the UK Government in addressing climate-change risks associated with high temperatures.

IIPP has used its research to build strong relationships with policymakers, which have led to collaborations to develop and implement new mission-oriented policies at a European, UK and Scottish governmental level.

4.1 Inspiring the European Union to create a new mission-oriented research and innovation programme

In January 2018, the then European Commissioner for Research, Science and Innovation, appointed Mazzucato as Special Advisor for Mission-Driven Science and Innovation, with a remit to shape the EU’s new Research and Innovation programme. During her time as a special advisor, Mazzucato drew on her research [a, b, c] on mission-oriented innovation to author two EU-funded reports.

Mazzucato’s February 2018 report Mission-Oriented Research & Innovation in the European Union argued missions should be a critical component of EU research and innovation policy. It also set out a detailed policy framework to harness innovation policy to solve societal challenges, such as the decarbonisation of cities, and guide the union’s selection of mission-oriented projects [1]. In June 2018, the Commissioner for Research, Science and Innovation formally announced the ambitious EUR100,000,000,000 Horizon Europe research innovation project for the next EU budget between 2021 and 2027. He described this investment as “the biggest increase [in budget] in absolute terms, ever’ from €80bn to €100bn” [2]. The proposals incorporated and referenced, in detail, Mazzucato’s recommendations on mission-oriented innovation policy. Discussing her influence on its design, the Commissioner stated, “The idea of the missions, which comes from the work of the economist Mariana Mazzucato, is exactly to create ways of communicating better to the people what we do (in European science and research). Instead of saying that we will map the brain, we can say that our mission is to cure some diseases like Alzheimer’s or dementia, or that we’ll do something for people not to die of cancer, and people will understand better what we do” [2]. The European Parliament endorsed the proposals on 17th April 2019 [3].

The subsequent report, Governing Missions, was launched on 4th July 2019 in Helsinki, Finland at a ministerial meeting of 28 innovation ministers from EU member states. It details three areas that have a large effect on mission implementation: financing, public sector capabilities and civic engagement [4]. In a November 2019 letter, the Commissioner for Research, Science and Innovation explained how the “combination of economic theory with policy practice demonstrated both the ability of public servants in directing innovation and the potential for market shaping policies”, noting that IIPP’s input had inspired the EU to “fundamentally redesign” the Horizon Europe framework to “incorporate a funding stream based upon the missions” [5].

4.2 Influencing UK Government to adopt a mission-oriented approach to industrial policy

In November 2017, following formal and informal consultations with Mazzucato, the UK Government’s Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy (BEIS) published a new industrial strategy entitled Building a Britain Fit for the Future. The publication included a specific reference to her work and stated, “Where appropriate, teams will develop ‘missions’ to tackle the Grand Challenges. They involve tackling specific problems, such as reducing carbon emissions by a given percentage over a specific year period, using well defined and concrete goals” [6]. The influence of the work was also evident in the industrial strategy’s mission-orientation around four ‘Grand Challenges’; Future of Mobility, Clean Growth, Ageing Society, and AI and Data Economy [6].

In March 2018, IIPP established the UCL Commission on Mission-Oriented Innovation and Industrial Strategy (MOIIS) to develop policy solutions to address each of these challenges. Co-chaired by Mazzucato and Lord Willetts, former government minister for science and innovation, the commission included academics and industry experts . BEIS civil servants closely involved in Industrial Strategy policy development also attended monthly meetings and participated in working groups. In a May 2018 speech at Jodrell Bank Observatory, then Prime Minister Theresa May cited the MOIIS Commission’s work when launching the first set of missions in each Grand Challenge, supported by a GBP6,000,000,000 Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund. She stated, “There is huge potential in a missions-based approach to drive faster solutions – and it is an approach being pioneered here in the UK, by University College London’s Commission on Mission-Oriented Industrial Strategy” [7i]. The move represented a significant shift in focus from traditional, sector-based strategies, to societal challenges with local and national resonance [7ii].

The MOIIS Commission launched its first major report, A Mission-Oriented UK Industrial Strategy, on 22^nd May 2019 at an event attended by the then BEIS Secretary of State, Greg Clark [7iii]. The report identified several key implementation challenges and policy recommendations for the UK Government to drive the Grand Challenges agenda forward, such as policy evaluation, leadership and regulations. Media outlets such as the Financial Times, City AM and the Times Red Box reported on its recommendations [7v]. On September 13^th 2019, the government officially announced the Grand Challenge Missions pertaining to four areas: Artificial Intelligence and Data, Ageing Society, Clean Growth, and the Future of Mobility, all drawing heavily on the MOIIS report [7ii].

MOIIS Commission co-chair, Lord Willets wrote that without Mazzucato and IIPP colleagues’ work, he doubted “that the Industrial Strategy white paper would have included the four ‘Grand Challenges”. Moreover, he acknowledged Mazzucato’s “important role in reshaping a key plank of the UK economic policy” [7iii]. Greg Clark MP confirmed that the research “was a significant contributor to the increase in public R&D spending of over £4 billion that was achieved in 2018” and that the challenge-based thinking she advanced “has been, and still is, highly influential on both public policy and practice in the UK” [7iv].

4.3 Shaping the Scottish Government’s new Scottish National Investment Bank

In her role as an economic advisor to the Scottish Government, Mazzucato has advocated for state investment as a critical component of mission-oriented innovation. In March 2019, she drew on specific research insights on the success of patient, long-term finance in driving innovation in areas such as renewable energy [d, e, f], to publish a Scottish-Government-commissioned framework for its new Scottish National Investment Bank (SNIB) [8]. The publication laid the blueprint for the state-backed lender, which will invest GBP2,000,000,000 during its first ten years, to provide mission-oriented businesses with an alternative source of sustainable, long-term finance, with repayment terms between 10 and 15 years. It will fund projects that help Scotland meet its 2045 net zero target, tackle place-based inequality and foster innovation in the country’s businesses [9].

The Chief Economist at the Scottish Government described how “the design, structure and approach being taken forward in creating the SNIB has been influenced directly” by Mazzucato [10]. The Scottish Government’s plans for the bank includes several references to Mazzucato’s work [11]. The SNIB was launched in late 2020 when First Minister Nicola Sturgeon described the project as “one of the most significant developments in the lifetime of this parliament” [12].

IIPP’s impact continues to grow and in late 2020 it was awarded a grant of GBP470,000 from the Bittner Foundation for a project called ‘Mission Oriented City Innovation: Tackling the Climate Crisis’. This will support IIPP to engage with cities on the decarbonisation ‘mission’ at an international scale, engaging with influential cities networks including C40, UN HABITAT and Bloomberg Cities.

Bartlett researchers have developed and used models that combine engineering and economics to enable policy-makers and industry to understand potential pathways to decarbonisation, as well as implications for affordability and energy security.

4.1 Shaping UK climate policy on net-zero emissions

The Climate Change Act 2008 requires the UK government to reduce UK greenhouse gas emissions by 80% by 2050 compared to 1990 levels. In July 2019, the UK adopted a more ambitious net-zero emission target to meet its Paris Agreement commitment. Building on its underpinning research, UK TIMES is the principal model within the UK government for generating long-term energy scenarios, and it directly contributed to the decision to adopt a net-zero target.

Co-creating UK TIMES with BEIS to enable their climate policy analyses

In 2013, The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS; then the Department for Energy and Climate Change) appraised then adopted an early version of UK TIMES for energy scenario development. BEIS signed a Memorandum of Understanding with UCL to co-develop the model. Cross-government reviews examined each part of UK TIMES to build consensus around its use. BEIS then used UK TIMES to create a range of internally consistent scenarios that met emission targets, and each part of those scenarios was then reviewed by the appropriate expert team in BEIS or elsewhere in government. This helped BEIS to coordinate its various teams around a more coherent decarbonisation strategy. The importance of using the model to improve communication across government is evident in the testimonial from BEIS’s Deputy Director of Central Modelling: “UK TIMES [is] the focal point for developing long term decarbonisation strategy. We work with teams within BEIS, DEFRA [Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs] and DfT [Department for Transport]…to produce analysis that has been validated and verified by our stakeholders. The role of UK TIMES in improving communication within and across government departments is evident in the Clean Growth Strategy and our recent Energy White Paper which also sets out our long-term commitments on using UK TIMES” [1].

The UK TIMES user group now meets annually and includes BEIS and the Scottish Government, government agencies (Climate Change Committee, National Infrastructure Commission, Energy Systems Catapult), universities, and companies (e.g. National Grid).

Providing the evidence for the UK’s Fifth Carbon Budget and Clean Growth Strategy

In June 2015, the UK government used UK TIMES to provide evidence in its decision to accept the advice of the Climate Change Committee (CCC) on the level of the UK’s Fifth Carbon Budget for 2028-2032 [2]. The advice used UK TIMES scenarios to explore potential decarbonisation pathways [3], and was supported by UK TIMES analysis by Dodds that explored the potential roles of hydrogen for decarbonising road transport, industry, and heating houses and offices in a future low-carbon energy system [4].

In 2015, the Scottish Government created a Scottish TIMES model from UK TIMES by replacing UK data with Scottish data. As noted in the testimonial from the Scottish TIMES lead at the Scottish Government: “Much of the other information, for example the assumptions about future energy technologies, remained largely unchanged [from UK TIMES]. The Scottish TIMES model was first used to provide evidence for the 2018 Climate Change Plan as well as supporting parliamentary debate around earlier draft plans. Scottish TIMES has since been used for a draft update to the Climate Change Plan which is consistent with [Scottish] revised ‘net-zero’ targets. This is currently progressing through the Scottish Parliament” [5]. The value of the model to the policy process is explained in the 2018 Climate Change Plan as “[helping] us to define policy outcomes in each sector in terms of real life, tangible changes in technologies, fuels and other measures, allowing us to visualise the low carbon economy of the future” [6, p.10].

Informing the Paris Agreement through the Deep Decarbonisation Pathways Project

In advance of COP21, the Deep Decarbonization Pathways Project (DDPP), a collaboration of researchers from 16 countries, identified practical national pathways to deeply reduce greenhouse gas emissions. UK TIMES was used to produce the first national Deep Decarbonization Pathways Project appraisal [7]. Built on a rigorous accounting of national circumstances, the project defined pathways to support decarbonisation of energy systems, while respecting national political economy and domestic development priorities [8]. The DDPP contributed to the evidence base needed to support Article 4.19 of the Paris Agreement, which urged countries to establish long-term, low-emission development strategies [9].

Identifying pathways to curb emissions

In October 2017, BEIS published the Clean Growth Strategy, which set out how the government plans to meet the Fourth and Fifth Carbon Budget commitments [10]. BEIS used UK TIMES to explore scenarios for the energy system, and identify key energy technologies that could contribute to decarbonisation and provide growth opportunities.

In March 2018, UCL was approached by the CCC to carry out analyses of industrial emissions projections. This analysis contributed to the CCC’s ‘Reducing UK emissions’ report to Parliament, which showed that although progress had been made in reducing emissions from electricity generation, reductions in other sectors had stalled [11].

4.2 Supporting competitiveness in the UK industrial sector

The cost of transitioning to a low-carbon energy system has been estimated as 1%-2% of GDP, and would be higher if the combination of low-carbon technologies was chosen poorly. Bartlett research is underpinning UK energy transition cost and demand analysis.

Underpinning National Grid Future Energy Scenarios

National Grid adopted UK TIMES in 2017 and used it to inform its 2018 Future Energy Scenarios, which are used by the UK electricity and gas system operators, the wider energy industry, and academia. Bartlett researchers trained and supported National Grid staff during scenario development, leading to the 2018 publication that used UK TIMES to calculate detailed greenhouse gas emission profiles and compare the costs of Future Energy Scenarios for the first time [12].

This was further developed in Future Energy Scenarios 2020, which shows how UK TIMES underpins National Grid’s net zero scenarios, and that it “is used to provide guidance for the scenarios that meet the 2050 decarbonisation target” and “to determine the emission level within the scenario” [13].

Improving the accuracy of the industry energy demand model

The UK government publishes annual Energy and Emission Projections based on its Energy Demand Model (EDM). These are required for international reporting to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, as well as to inform the Climate Change Programme, fiscal policy and clean growth strategy, the Climate Change Committee, and to set carbon budgets as required by the Climate Change Act 2008.

In 2015, UK government grew concerned that the EDM industry model overestimated industrial demand for energy. Agnolucci carried out an econometric analysis that confirmed this concern [b], and used this analysis to create a new industry model for the EDM. Researchers worked closely with BEIS, with an estimated contact time of 160 hours, including facilitating two workshops attended by around 40 policy-makers. This approach increased BEIS’s understanding of the industry sector and raised confidence in the EDM projections. Based on BEIS’s internal analysis, use of the new UK TIMES model resulted in a reduction of 20 megatonnes of CO₂ emissions for carbon budget periods 3 and 4, which represents 5.5% of the whole CO₂ emissions reduction envisaged for that period [14]. BEIS officials testified to the usefulness of these workshops, indicating that since the workshops, “the revised industry model was incorporated into the EDM in 2017 and has, with some modifications, been used ever since to produce the BEIS Energy and Emissions Projections” [1].

This research had a significant impact on strategic plans and actions for Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) - a systematic approach to identifying, assessing and reducing the risks of disaster - building capacity to better deal with ‘risk traps’, and challenging fragmented and exclusionary city governance practices. The research has: generated georeferenced risk data used to design and implement community-led projects benefitting over 200,000 people in the three cities; produced actionable knowledge to reframe public debates and policy-making; and established robust community capacities and networks, such as District Disaster Risk Management Committees (DRMC) and new governance tools. The importance of the environmental and social benefits of this work is indicated in local communities’ improved access to basic services, adequate shelter and protective infrastructures, and the enhanced risk-preventing capacities of communities and policy-makers through innovative governance instruments.

4.1 Community-led mapping adopted and translated into innovative actions

ReMapLima [b, d, e, f] was adopted in 15 neighbourhoods in high-risk areas in the centre (BA) and periphery (JCM) of Metropolitan Lima [1]. During the COVID19 pandemic, local authorities and communities used ReMapLima to identify the most vulnerable groups and to target health and food emergency support to those most at risk, through a body of community-appointed ‘local guardians’ [2]. In Karonga, the ReMapRisk platform covers the entire town, informing the work of four DRMCs formally recognized by the Government of Malawi [5D]. In Freetown, 15 out of the 60 informal settlements in high-risk areas were surveyed and established community-based DRMC [4A, 4C, 4E]. In both Freetown and Karonga, the DRMCs established through Urban ARK represent the most decentralised governance structures dealing with risk reduction and prevention with systematic inputs from local communities. The enhanced capacities of these pioneering structures extend to other settlements. As a Senior Researcher at Mzuzu University explains: “a very important aspect that we are experiencing [is that] community members are being asked by the local government to assist in building capacity in other settlements within the city” [5D].

In all three cities, the adopted mapping and risk monitoring systems translated into community projects as a direct outcome of cLIMA sin Riesgo and Urban ARK. In Lima, this included 13 community-led innovative projects and six fully implemented actions [1, 6C]. Among other goals achieved, these projects: reduced young adults’ vulnerability by developing safe public areas in the historic centre [1C, 1D, 1E]; established a bio-huerta through a local school, implementing organic allotments and piloting vermiculture technologies to tackle food insecurity; and devised a social housing scheme to densify consolidated areas and reduce the occupation of high risk-prone areas in JCM [1B]. A community leader in BA indicates that mapping techniques allowed residents to “discover the number of buildings that were constructed without licences, without plans, in an arbitrary way and the impacts they have in increased evictions affecting many plots and neighbours” [1D]. Co-funded by local communities and local governmental programmes these actions benefited 700 households (c. 3,500 people) and c. 2,200 primary school students involved in the bio-huerta, ameliorating local living conditions, while catching the attention of local authorities and policy-makers as flagship examples of how transformative change can be achieved collaboratively, and at scale [1B, 6C]. Local residents testify to the importance of the support from cLIMA sin Riesgo, indicating that it “saved our Quinta, where we suffered from terrible humidity and where we were afraid that dwellings we inhabit would collapse. [The action project] saved us from the humidity, changes to the sewerage system were made thanks to the architects and the support we had through them, and some neighbours” [1E].

Under Urban ARK, community-based action planning underpinned by both the new evidence gathered and newly-built led to five strategic risk-reduction and prevention projects - four implemented in Karonga and a fifth in Mzuzu (Malawi) - and 14 strategic action projects in Freetown (Sierra Leone) [7]. These projects benefited c. 72,000 people in Karonga/Mzuzu [7C], significantly reducing the risks of waterborne diseases, such as cholera, and making potable water accessible to local communities [5A, 5B, 5C]. This includes the creation of a new water kiosk, which is cited by a local resident and kiosk manager as life-changing: “Now we drink clean water and there is no more sickness. We are now able to concentrate on housework, we can now do our businesses and when coming back we don’t stress anymore because water is now close” [5A]. Another local manager of the kiosk further highlights this benefit: “Cholera was rampant here because we lacked clean water sources and now because people access clean water, cholera is history and there has not been a single case this year” [5C].

In Freetown, c. 140,000 dwellers in informal settlements benefited from risk-preventing measures to confront flooding, landslides and housing collapse, upgraded drainage and sewage infrastructure [4B]. Initiatives also tackled the encroachment of coastal areas; consequently preserving environmentally protected mangrove wetlands recognised by the Ramsar Convention [4C, 4D]. The involved communities have since continued their efforts to reinvest in risk-prevention upgrade projects by extending the construction of retaining walls [4B].

4.2 New governance mechanisms and attitudinal change in policy-making

The actionable knowledge produced by DPU helped to reframe public debates, public funding and policy-making, and created new alliances [d, e]. Institutionally recognised DRR observatories and community-led DRMC were established in the three cities. These led to strategic, vigorous and concerted actions to disrupt urban risk traps in all three cities. DRR Observatories are virtual platforms set up by cLIMA sin Riesgo and Urban ARK to share evidence on risk trends and enable abridged collective action among the urban poor, customary authorities, local governments and external agencies [d, e].

In Lima, cLIMA sin Riesgo set up three DRR Observatories. The Metropolitan DRR Observatory enabled a wide range of institutional actors to drive policy change, prompting the creation of an Urban Risk Observatory in the Peruvian National Congress in 2017 (Congress Act No. 2483). This promotes new directives and funding to articulate DRR and urban development in Peruvian cities, and as the Director Foro Ciudades para la Vida and Senior Advisor to the Peruvian National Congress indicates, has contributed to the decision “to finally update the urban development plan of the city” [1A]. The DRR Observatory in Lima’s historic centre signed an official agreement with municipal and ministerial entities and UNESCO to reduce and prevent risks through ongoing efforts on heritage preservation and regeneration [1C, 3]. The DRR Observatory in the periphery of the city has expanded its work to monitor the activities of land trafficking mafias driving the occupation of high-risk prone areas [1B].

Through Urban ARK, DPU researchers also built a long-lasting legacy to promote and sustain risk-prevention policies and strategic planning across various institutional domains. In Karonga, the DRMCs established by the project have been adopted as a model to decentralise DRR across Malawi [5A]. In Sierra Leone, the Freetown City Council has recognised the DRR Action-Learning Hub (hosted by the Sierra Leone Urban Research Centre, SLURC), and Urban ARK findings and strategic interventions are guiding the environmental and urban planning component of Transform Freetown (led by SLURC), a city-wide strategy promoted by the Mayor to tackle structural vulnerabilities and risk accumulation across the city. Citing the research on risk, the Mayor of Freetown testifies that “a fundamental challenge that the city faces is unplanned urbanisation. So there's a direct alignment with the focus of this research work and our agenda” [4A]. This includes creating Community Area Action Plans for informal settlements to incorporate local voices in Freetown Local Area Plans and National Urban Policy [4E]. Also as a direct result of the research, a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) has been established between coastal communities and the National Protected Area Agency (NPAA) to preserve mangrove areas and prevent the encroachment of land towards the sea along the coast of western Freetown [4C]. The Chairman of FEDURP and Community Leader of Dwozark settlement testifies to how Urban ARK work has taught communities that solving flooding “is not only about the amount of money [provided], it is about the amount of collaboration, the impact participation, and our people are involved in solving the problem within the community” [4B].

The underpinning research has also provided key evidence to drive policy and attitudinal change, opening debate on issues of heritage conservation, relocation and climate-change adaptation between residents and decision-makers [a, b, d, e]. Public dissemination of findings and insights has been extensive (numerous television, radio and print media features) [8], together with engagements in high-level international fora (Habitat III Conference, Quito 2016; IPCC Cities and Climate Change Conference, Edmonton 2018 and Adaptation Futures, 2018).

The information technology, infrastructure, resources and expertise developed in the localities through the participatory mapping process in the cLima sin Riesgo and Urban ARK projects remains as a legacy to stimulate and support future action and research. Circa 240 direct beneficiaries were trained by the Urban ARK team on similar capacities in Karonga and Freetown [7A, 7B]. Further, building on Urban ARK, a free Massive Online Open Course ( MOOC ) on Urban Risk in African Cities has been developed as part of a set of capacity-building resources on Development and Planning in African Cities; reaching almost 6,000 learners from 114 countries across Africa and internationally, and building critical professional skills.

Overall, the research has created a solid legacy to instigate locally relevant and socially sensitive risk-reduction and climate-adaptation investments at various scales to support strategic community-led action across the urban Global South now and into the future.

The impact of this research can be seen in the vigorous debate on gender politics and electoral processes in Somaliland and in the adoption of recommendations by the National Electoral Commission while, in Sierra Leone, increased and more effective involvement of people living in informal settlements has supported key improvements in planning processes and decision-making.

4.1 Impact on gender politics in Somaliland

DPU’s gender-focused research supported debate and civil action on increasing women’s involvement in Somaliland politics. The research, notably [b], has influenced public debate on women’s political leadership, by providing a new resource on the dynamics of politics, gender and clan relations in Somali society. It was cited in a statement by a founder of NAGAAD, Somaliland’s leading umbrella organisation on women’s rights, and now the executive director of Somaliland Women’s Research and Action Group. They attested to the impact for women’s rights organisations in Somaliland and more broadly, indicated that the approach was “like shedding more light on the situation of gender politics…it creates a new knowledge so that always gives you more information, more reliable data to base your work on” [1].

The founder and director of Hargeisa Cultural Centre stated that UCL’s research on political settlement and women’s political leadership had strengthened the relationship between institutions in Somaliland, forming what he called “an important bridge” by raising awareness, and through cooperation and participation, including informing international partners on development programmes. They stated “the research has also helped to develop and create debate in different sectors. For sure, the gender issue was really important”, along with the intergenerational gap [2].

In 2017, owing to his expertise in Somaliland politics and gender Professor Walls was invited at the request of the UK’s Department for International Development to collaborate with Social Development Direct (SDD) on new policy-oriented research on the nature and potential for Somali women’s leadership across Somali and Somaliland. The work of SDD focuses on building inclusive societies in which people of all genders and identities are valued and empowered to make choices about their own development. The organisation is a leading provider of high-quality, innovative and expert social development assistance and research services. This collaboration led to internal changes for the organisation. As a former Senior Technical Specialist at SDD stated, “Internally it helped to pave the way for SDD to deepen and develop its portfolio on WPE (women’s political empowerment), including in fragile and conflict-affected settings” [3]. In turn, Walls’ expertise and the findings from [b] shaped SDD’s influence over DFID’s strategic vision. As the former Senior Technical Specialist at SDD commented, “Professor Walls’ research filled an important evidence gap on issues of gender, inclusion and women’s political participation and leadership in the Somalia and Somaliland context, and was leveraged to open up dialogue with a number of relevant stakeholders across civil society and government […] It opened up specific discussion with [DFID] on their approach to WPE (women’s political empowerment), and contributed to strategic discussions led by the Gender and Development Network’s Women’s Leadership and Participation Working Group who worked successfully to get WPE added to DFID’s strategic vision on gender equality” [3, 4]. As she continues, “This would not have been possible without Professor Walls’ research contribution” [3].

4.2 Impact on elections and electoral processes in Somaliland

The research on Somaliland has strengthened political institutions and political inclusion by supporting analysis, understanding and transparency of representative electoral systems. It has developed strong connections with local partners and teams from international election observation missions, including from DFID, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the EU’s External Action Service. The then Governance Adviser at DFID, who now heads the UK Prosperity Fund in Somaliland, attests to how the work helped DFID understand the political economy of Somaliland. They describe [a] as their “go-to piece to understand the history [of Somaliland]” and that Walls’s advisory position has been important in understanding clan dynamics and that they would not have invested so much in voter registration infrastructure without this guidance. They also highlight that the “peaceful transfer of power in Somaliland, again, was testament to some of [Walls’] historical knowledge” [5].

Walls briefed 20 EU ambassadors and officials before and after the Somaliland elections in 2017, and briefed several successive UK representatives to Somaliland, as well as two successive UK Ambassadors to Somalia. The EU Ambassador to Somalia made clear the impact of this, stating that the: “activities, including… analyses, findings, press releases and reports, represented a valuable source of information for the EU Delegation and served for the preparation of political assessments, messaging and updates on the 2017 Somaliland pre- and post- electoral environment” [6].

4.3 Impact of the Sierra Leone Urban Research Centre (SLURC) on informal settlements

Much in the same way that DPU researchers recognised the need for local, culturally-specific research and data in Somaliland, they saw that action-oriented research in Sierra Leone would be key to tackling complex policy issues such as informal settlements. SLURC provides training and capacity-building for key urban stakeholders (such as local researchers and academics, civil servants, NGO staff and residents of informal settlements). The centre produced a MOOC to extend this training to 1,100 people internationally. The research centre has integrated informal settlements into how Freetown thinks about urban planning. It helped them become recognised in the National Land Policy of the country’s New National Development Plan, as well as the Mayor’s Freetown Transformation Plan (2018–2022) [7].

SLURC’s partnership with the Centre of Dialogue of Human Settlement and Poverty Alleviation (CODOHSAPA), enhanced CODOHSAPA’s capacity to engage in community-led research and improved the design of development interventions. As the Executive Director of the organisation stated, “the beauty or uniqueness of SLURC’s research approach is that it is quite community-led …the research is owned by the community and so the findings are owned by community…The findings of this research has actually informed [the] community to make informed decisions about what actions they can do in terms of determining the political future of their respective communities. So I think in that dimension, SLURC has been very much influential” [8]. As the Executive Director of CODOHSAPA continued “SLURC is not just gathering figures, but is…translating them into useful... information that is user-friendly even for community people to use it to articulate their issues” [8]. This empowerment has encouraged the acknowledgement of CODOHSAPA and partner organisations including the Federation of Urban and Rural Poor (FEDURP) by governmental institutions, such as the Ministry of Planning, as reliable sources of sound research data on informal settlements.

The Mayor of Freetown underlined the influence of SLURC’s community action plans on urban planning, improving informal settlements, and mitigating flooding, saying in a public speech that: “the community area action plans, which are a core part of SLURC’s work … will be elevated into local area plans [within the Transform Freetown programme]. [Through them, SLURC provide] the empirical evidence we need as we work together to Transform Freetown” [9].

Impact on policy-making in Freetown has been evaluated independently. In a report from January 2019, External Evaluation of the Sierra Leone Urban Research Centre, the external and independent evaluator describes SLURC as having strategically positioned itself as a key mediator between communities, civil society groups and policymakers. The report states, ‘In just three years SLURC has emerged and developed into a leading urban stakeholder in Sierra Leone that is recognised for producing high quality, community driven research and analysis’ [10, p.iii]. It states, “SLURC is providing leadership on the implementation of key areas of the Transform Freetown agenda, has provided input into the drafting of the National Land Policy and is well positioned to be consulted on a number of other policy developments, including the formulation of the National Development Plan” [10, p.iii]. This has been done through encouraging community-led policy, “More than just bringing them together to discuss key urban issues,” the report stated, “they [SLURC] are ensuring interactions are done in a way that they learn together, both through the formal training but also in one-to-one interactions” [10 p.8].

Finally, SLURC has had direct impact on those living in informal settlements, including an interviewed community member of the slum area, Cockle Bay. They benefited from the training and support – it had helped them campaign in community elections, ultimately winning the position of Community Youth Leader for Cockle Bay. As they stated, “Because of my involvement with SLURC…and all the empowerment…I’ve really broadened my knowledge”. This knowledge could then be used to empower the community to advocate for better design practices in national policy. As they continued, “I started disseminating this information, meeting youth groups, local clubs, organisations within the community…so many things I learned from them about the risks in within our community, the way we are exposed to risks, I think this is one of the things that really making government to see they want to impact on the community”. They recognise how the research had sensitised people to the benefits of political organisation, helping to provide the information needed for them to organise elections. As they stated, “Everybody is ready to receive SLURC… SLURC is [working with] the governments and other practitioners getting this information. And we believe one day, our dreams, what really we are yearning for, for Cockle Bay, it will come to pass. And that's our belief, and that's why we give 100% trust to SLURC.” [11].

Through co-production, collaboration and partnership, Bartlett researchers have contributed to equitable approaches to policymaking and governance, and built capacity for research-driven planning interventions that address poverty and unemployment in these regions.

Ekins and McGlade’s paper [b] was published in Nature in January 2015, and immediately received significant public attention. Carbon Brief data reported it as the climate science paper most featured in the media and on social media in 2015, and the third highest of all time [1]. The research was foregrounded in the Guardian’s ‘Keep it in the Ground’ campaign, and influenced the financial sector where it informed a major shift in the understanding of the financial risks of climate change. Impacts can also be seen in law-making, policy and litigation.

4.1 The ‘Keep it in the Ground’ campaign

In 2015, the editor-in-chief of The Guardian launched the ‘Keep it in the Ground’ divestment campaign, encouraging the Wellcome Trust and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to divest from fossil fuel companies in which the foundation has a minimum of USD1,400,000,000 invested. The Head of Environment at The Guardian directly cited [b] in his launching article for the campaign, indicating that this “new analysis calls into question the gigantic sums of private and government investment being ploughed into exploration for new fossil fuel reserves” [2].

Since the launch of the campaign, the Guardian has tracked that institutions worth USD2,600,000,000,000 have now pulled investments out of fossil fuels, while the Guardian Media Group has divested its GBP800,000,000 fund from fossil fuels [3]. The campaign’s petition for the Wellcome Trust and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to divest gained over 140,000 signatures and support from a range of public figures [4]. While the Wellcome Trust did not divest, in 2016 the Gates Foundation divested from Exxon Mobil (worth USD824,000,000) and BP (worth USD187,000,000) [5].

The campaign continues to have traction in public debate. Citing the same findings provided in [b], the former UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-Moon, writing in The Guardian in 2019 stated that the “UK must stop investing in fossil fuels in developing countries […] Research indicates that a third of oil reserves, half of gas reserves and over 80% of current coal reserves need to remain in the ground in order to meet the target of 2C of global warming” [6].

4.2 Changing how investors and companies understand and report climate risk

This research was the first scientific study to highlight the consequences of a 2^oC climate target for fossil fuel reserves, and it formed a foundational part of the body of research that has changed the way investors understand climate risk. The Managing Director of the Centre of Sustainable Finance at HSBC described how the rigour of the UCL research made it particularly influential with stakeholders in finance: “The work has primarily contributed to our risk assessment of fossil fuel assets, by providing us with a geographical distinction to understand climate risks by country more effectively. It has also helped with knowledge capacity building on climate issues across client facing teams” [7]. The Managing Investment Director of the Board Governance and Sustainability department at the California Public Employees' Retirement System, with responsibility for strategic initiatives across their USD440,000,000,000 portfolio indicates a shift in their investment approach, citing the importance of [b]: “The work of UCL, in mapping the extent of challenge and opportunity faced by investors, has been vitally important to us framing our approach. The work makes a compelling argument that disclosure may be necessary but it is not sufficient to drive the energy transition, which needs both […] incentives and measures to overcome the drag of legacy on the financial markets’ capital allocation and stewardship decisions” [8].

The financial implications arising from the research were cited in advice for investors. In January 2016, it was highlighted in the United Nations Principles for Responsible Investment’s (UNPRI) quarterly advice to investors following the Paris Agreement. UNPRI’s Director of Policy and Research, said at the time: “As a consequence of fulfilling the Paris Agreement, 80% of proven coal reserves may go unused, along with half of proven gas reserves and one third of proven oil reserves. This analysis is provided in the first report in this month’s RI Quarterly by McGlade and Ekins […] As our academic and investment practitioner readers will be well aware - numbers do not lie. Following resolution of the Paris Agreement, it is time for investors to redo their sums” [9]. The IPCC Special Report on 1.5C (2018) further used the research to outline another financial challenge: the impending depreciation of infrastructure, assets, and exports related to extraction that would result from the need to leave so much of the world’s energy reserves in the ground [10].

Heeding such warnings, investors have used the research to rethink investment strategies, reflecting the financial consequences of leaving energy reserves untapped. A 2015 Citigroup report cited [b], advising that any investment in coal should be “stress-tested” against low-carbon scenarios, in which demand for coal was dramatically reduced or subject to a high carbon-tax [11]. The increasing pressure for companies to reveal their own financial risks related to decarbonisation can also be found in policy changes, such as the establishment of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TFCD). The TCFD controlled by the Financial Stability Board and chaired by Michael Bloomberg, has since developed guidelines for companies to report climate risks to investors, which has leant major credibility to the climate risk problem. Special Advisor to the TFCD attested to the change in mindset that took place upon reflecting on [b], stating that “the invest[ment] community now understands that we’re on a path towards 3 or 4 degrees of global warming and that’s really problematic for us, from both an investment perspective and indeed in terms of planetary health in its broadest sense. That’s been translated into direct engagement by various groups and shareholders, with the management teams of oil and gas companies putting them under pressure to change what they’re doing. That was not true 5 to 10 years ago” [12].

4.3 Impact on law and policy making

The research has been referenced in legislation constraining the extraction of fossil fuels, and in one example provided crucial evidence in support of banning Unconventional Coal Gasification (UCG) in Scotland.

In 2016, the Scottish Government commissioned the Independent Review on Underground Coal Gasification, which found that the technology might jeopardise the country’s climate targets. The review cited the research, alongside the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and high-profile US climate scientist James Hansen, as the three key sources for understanding the global case for constraining emissions. It used [b] as a key source to demonstrate the need to avoid additional carbon emissions [13]. The Scottish Government subsequently banned underground coal gasification.

4.4 Impact on litigation in fossil fuel developments

The research provided important evidence that prevented the construction of a coal mine in Australia, stopping carbon emissions estimated at more than 38,000,000 tonnes.

In December 2017, Gloucester Resources Limited sued the Minister of Planning, appealing the denial of the company's application to construct an open cut coal mine in New South Wales. The Land & Environment Court of New South Wales upheld the government's denial of the application and found that the project was not in the public interest, in part because of the climate change impacts of the mine's direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions.

An expert witness and Emeritus Professor at the Australian National University, stated: "The McGlade and Ekins paper in Nature 2015 was a central part of the scientific case that I put forward to the Court that the proposed Rocky Hill Coal Mine near Gloucester NSW Australia should not be allowed to proceed. The Court denied the licence for the mine to proceed, and the McGlade and Ekins analysis was cited in the Court's decision as an important factor" [14].

Summing up, Chief Judge Brian Preston noted the witness’ arguments regarding the carbon budget: “Approval of the Project will not assist in achieving the rapid and deep reductions in GHG emissions that are needed now in order to balance emissions by sources with removals by sinks of GHGs in the second half of this century and achieve the generally agreed goal of limiting the increase in global average temperature to well below 2ºC above pre-industrial levels” [15].

In conclusion, this research has shaped how investors, companies, and governments understand the financial impacts of climate change, and as a result contributed to a global revaluation of assets, divestment, climate change policy and litigation.

4.1 Providing the evidence base for policymakers to improve indoor air quality in schools

Influencing the European Commission

Guidelines for Healthy Environments within European Schools [1], published by the European Commission Directorate General for Health and Consumers in 2014, and sponsored by the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Health and Consumers describes the guidelines for healthy environments within European schools. It has been translated into 25 European languages as part of the implementation of Regional Priority Goal III (RPG3) of the Children’s Environment and Health Action Plan for Europe (CEHAPE), which aims to prevent and reduce respiratory disease due to outdoor and indoor air pollution. SINPHONIE, as the world’s first and largest study reviewing the importance of indoor pollution factors including occupancy behaviour and mechanical design [c] [d] [e], was a key foundation for [1]. EU member states have adopted sections in their school planning approaches, ensuring that policy makers are equipped to account for indoor air quality in their school design plans.

Providing foundational research for the UK Department of Education

In 2014, the UK government introduced a GBP4,400,000,000 Priority School Building Programme (PSBP) to rebuild and refurbish school buildings in the worst condition. The scheme covers a total of 537 schools across the UK. In the same year (revised in 2018), the UK Department for Education (DfE) published ‘Building Bulletin (BB) 101: Ventilation, Thermal Comfort and Indoor Air Quality’. This document describes the factors that affect the indoor environment of schools, setting out the regulatory framework for ventilation in schools. BB101 also gives recommended performance levels for compliance with UK regulations and is mandatory for all new schools built under the PSBP scheme.

The dynamics of CO² in classrooms as described in ‘Ventilation in Schools’ [a] [b] differentiated how naturally and mechanically ventilated buildings affect the quality of teaching and learning spaces in the BB101 guidelines [2]. Furthermore, SINPHONIE indicators for indoor air quality monitoring form the foundation of Section 6 on Indoor Air Quality and Appendix C, with sources and research on the health effects of pollutants in schools presented in Annex B [3].

As PSBP requires planners to conform to BB101, it is integrated into the design of 537 new and refurbished schools, their budgets, and their carbon footprint planning. A Technical Manager at the Department for Education indicates the importance of [a] [b] in the 2014 version of BB101 and [c] [d] [e] in the 2018 revision of BB101: “This work was important to change the default mechanical ventilation design that could have significantly increased operational costs and associated carbon emissions, thus burdening school budgets and increasing the carbon footprint of the school building sector […] [the research] underpin[s] the decision-making process of designing healthy schools” [4].

Contributing to the Mayor of London’s audit on air pollution in schools

In 2017, Professor Mumovic was commissioned by the Mayor of London’s Office, to review the existing evidence and investigate the level of indoor air pollution in London’s schools in the report ‘Indoor Air Quality in London’s Schools’ [5]. The report found notable differences in the characteristics of indoor air pollution between seasons and classrooms depending on their microenvironment, building characteristics, operation and maintenance, indicating that annual personal exposure to PM in London’s classrooms may be higher than WHO 2010 guidelines. The report was published through the Mayor’s Office, with the simultaneous announcement of the creation of a GBP1,000,000 fund to help the worst affected schools (200 additional schools across five London boroughs) based on an audit of schools run by global engineering consultancy WSP. Mumovic was on the Project Advisory Board of the GLA Audit. IEDE research continues to provide the scientific basis for the Greater London Authority (GLA)’s indoor air quality initiatives, and the researchers are currently collaborating with GLA on ‘Indoor Air Quality in Nurseries’.

4.2 Raising the profile of indoor air quality in schools in collaboration with industry partners

Setting the criteria for best practice for building engineers

The Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers (CIBSE) is the standard setter and authority on building services engineering in the UK. It publishes ‘CIBSE Guides and Codes’, which are internationally recognised as authoritative, and sets the criteria for best practice in the profession.

Co-founded by Mumovic (with CIBSE), the ‘CIBSE School Building Design Group’ is a professional network that shares knowledge on the design, operation, and environmental quality of schools. The network was founded based on IEDE research, with Mumovic a committee member for 12 years. Today, the School Building Design Group has over 10,000 members (including building services engineers, architects and facility managers) in 22 countries worldwide [6, 11].

CIBSE’s Technical Memoranda (TMs) offer in-depth technical guidance on specific topics. All 22,000 CIBSE members (including architects, facility managers, and people working in the building industry) in 91 countries across the world are given free access to full texts as electronic files. Mumovic led two Technical Memoranda (TM57 and TM61/64) focusing on ventilation, emission sources and mitigation measures schools. The inclusion of IEDE research in TM57 [a-e] and TM61/64 [a-f] ensures that insights from research on design and indoor air quality are distributed globally across the profession [7-10]. TM57 sold 794 copies between 2016 and July 2020, and this uptake is considered by the Head of Research at CIBSE to be a “significant achievement taking into account that approximately 580 schools [were] built or [underwent] major refurbishment during that period” across the network” [11].

Co-creating impact with industry.

Designing and testing innovative, low-carbon ventilation systems for schools was the focus of a knowledge transfer partnership between IEDE and Ventive [12]. Ventive is a London-based company focused on the design of naturally intelligent ventilation systems to deliver fresh air at minimal energy cost. The partnership developed and implemented an engineering design protocol and database. This enabled the embedding of indoor air quality and ventilation effectiveness in Ventive’s product development installed in schools. Using insights from [a-f], Ventive’s founder highlights how their Passive Ventilation with Heat Recovery (PVHR) technology products “now have better heat exchangers, and our systems are cloud-connected to enable remote, real-time performance monitoring, system adaptation and proactive maintenance”. The founder confirms the importance of this collaboration in the rollout of these products, indicating that it allowed them to “better understand and advance our design and test innovative, low-carbon ventilation systems for schools […] This enabled the embedding of new indoor air quality systems and improved ventilation effectiveness in schools, providing improved air quality for more than 8,000 children in over 40 schools across the UK” [13].

The results of AQ110 Advanced air quality monitors developed with Eltek [f] have been published as part of ‘CIBSE TM61 Operational Performance of Buildings’ and ‘CIBSE TM64 Indoor Air Quality: Emission Sources and Mitigation Measures’, again sharing IEDE research expertise across the industry [9, 10].