Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3705. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16093705 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability
Article
Mainstreaming Climate Change Adaptation into Sectoral Plans:
An Assessment Based on the Logical Framework Approach
Antonio Ledda *, Viorio Serra, Maria Grazia Gavina Ruiu, Antoniea Bardi, Daniele Trogu,
Elisabea Anna Di Cesare and Andrea De Montis
Department of Agricultural Sciences, University of Sassari, Viale Italia 39A, 07100 Sassari, Italy;
vserra@uniss.it (V.S.); mgruiu.mgr@gmail.com (M.G.G.R.); antoniea.bardi@gmail.com (A.B.);
daniele.trogu@gmail.com (D.T.); elisabeaanna.dicesare@ciametropolitanacagliari.it (E.A.D.C.);
andreadm@uniss.it (A.D.M.)
* Correspondence: antonioledda@uniss.it; Tel.: +39-079-229-240
Abstract: Although climate change adaptation (CCA) and spatial planning are relevant to
promoting climate resilience, Italy shows a certain lack of studies focused on the coherence between
national CCA objectives and sectoral plans. We aim to investigate such a research gap and propose
and apply a logical framework approach (LFA)-based method to assess the coherence of sectoral
plans adopted in Sardinia (Italy) with the missions of the Italian National Climate Change
Adaptation Plan (NCCAP). We apply LFA to analytically scrutinize sectoral plans by reconstructing
their strategic framework—including objectives and actions—and comparing them to the CCA
objectives established by the NCCAP. The purpose is to provide the regional administrations with
a methodological approach and tangible findings, suggesting the need for updating plans lacking
CCA contents and contributing to the drafting or updating of the regional strategy for CCA. The
method adopted in this study allowed us to identify plan objectives and actions that fully or partially
integrate NCCAP objectives. Then, plans partially (or not at all) consistent with the NCCAP can be
integrated with CCA contents. This is relevant to promoting climate resilience issues in plans that
have clear effects in terms of spatial, landscape, and urban planning, according to different
governance levels.
Keywords: climate change adaptation governance; climate adaptation policy integration; climate
resilience promotion; South European context; regional spatial planning; sub-regional spatial
planning
1. Introduction
Climate change implies effects on anthropized and non-anthropized areas [1–4]. As
for the first type of areas, the positive effects of climate change regard the increase in crop
yield in some high-latitude zones and the possibility of having more than one harvest per
year [5,6]. On the other hand, negative effects include more frequent extreme weather
events, which are responsible for the loss of human lives, flooding, droughts,
desertification, reductions in crop yield and crop losses, loss of biodiversity, and
destruction of selements and transportation and mobility infrastructures [5,7,8].
Mitigation and adaptation are interlinked strategies to respectively address the roots and
the consequences of a changing climate [9]. The ‘mitigation’ approach addresses the
causes of climate change and aims at defining actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
The proactive concept of ‘adaptation’ deals with how humans can adapt to—and benefit
from—a changing climate, avoiding maladaptation phenomena [10–12]. Adaptation and
resilience can be considered complementary concepts. For the sake of clarity, in this
manuscript, we refer to adaptation and resilience as defined by the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), i.e., the “process of adjustment to the actual or expected
Citation: Ledda, A.; Serra, V.; Ruiu,
M.G.G.; Bardi, A.; Trogu, D.; Di
Cesare, E.A.; De Montis, A.
Mainstreaming Climate Change
Adaptation into Sectoral Plans: An
Assessment Based on the Logical
Framework Approach. Sustainability
2024, 16, 3705. hps://doi.org/
10.3390/su16093705
Academic Editor: Leonardo
Montagnani
Received: 17 March 2024
Revised: 18 April 2024
Accepted: 24 April 2024
Published: 28 April 2024
Copyright: © 2024 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Swierland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Aribution (CC BY) license
(hps://creativecommons.org/license
s/by/4.0/).
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3705 2 of 22
climate and its effects” [13] (adaptation), and the “capacity of social, economic and
environmental systems to cope with a hazardous event or trend or disturbance,
responding or reorganizing in ways that maintain their essential function, identity and
structure, while also maintaining the capacity for adaptation, learning and
transformation” [13] (resilience).
Over the past few decades, international and European bodies have proposed both
mitigation and adaptation strategies, such as the United Nations Framework Convention
on Climate Change, the Paris Agreement (mitigation; [14]), and the European Union
Strategy on Adaptation to Climate Change [15]. As for climate change adaptation (CCA),
in 2013, the European Commission adopted the European Union Strategy on Adaptation
to Climate Change to make member states more resilient to climate change effects. In 2021,
the EU Strategy was updated and replaced [16]. According to the EU Strategy, adaptation
measures must be implemented at all levels of governance especially in the Mediterranean
basin, an area considered significantly affected by vulnerability to climate changes [15].
Coordination between levels of public administration and coherence between planning
and management levels to respond to climate change should be improved through the
adoption of national adaptation strategies [15]. Consistently, in 2015, the Italian Ministry
of the Environment and Protection of Land and Sea—nowadays the Italian Ministry of the
Environment and Energy Security—adopted the National Climate Change Adaptation
Strategy (NCCAS) [17]. Italy is also currently in the process of adopting a National
Climate Change Adaptation Plan (NCCAP, latest version: December 2022) [18]. In 2019,
the Autonomous Region of Sardinia adopted the Regional Climate Change Adaptation
Strategy (RCCAS), with the purpose of increasing regional climate resilience [19]. The new
RCCAS has currently been updated (October 2023) but it is not in force yet.
In Sardinia, regional and sub-regional plans must be consistent with the framework
defined by RCCAS. In this regard, spatial planning can play a crucial role in encouraging
CCA [10,20–23] and “subnational level spatial planning tools are key to mainstreaming
[CCA]” [10].
The implementation of spatial planning processes incorporates a variety of entities
ranging from local to international scale, in coherence with frameworks that rely upon
custom and planning tradition [24]. Three tiers of government are typically involved in
spatial planning in EU member states [24]. Officially, state, region, province, and
municipality are the four administrative levels instituted in Italy [25]. However, the state
rarely releases national sector plans, according to a well-advanced process of
decentralization of planning responsibilities to lower-level administrative bodies. Regions
and sub-regional bodies adopt a range of tools to plan and manage their development,
serving three purposes: actuation, operative regulation (such as land-use zoning), and
coordination.
According to [26], the introduction of CCA concepts at regional and sub-regional
scales can be promoted by linking adaptation and spatial planning, for example, “for flood
protection and biodiversity protection” [26]. Carter et al. [27] quoted by Busayo et al. [28]
stated similar concepts. In terms of adaptation, Bruneniece and Klavins [20] stressed the
key role played by local and regional governments. These organizations typically have
up-to-date knowledge of the local seings and factors that may facilitate or impede
environmental change.
Although CCA and spatial planning are relevant to promoting climate resilience [10–
12,29,30], Italy shows a certain lack of studies that specifically focus on the coherence
between national CCA objectives and regional (and sub-regional) plans. We aim to
investigate such a research gap and answer two research questions (RQs): (i) can we
propose a methodological approach that allows us to assess the coherence of sectoral plans
with the objectives set by the NCCAP (RQ1)? (ii) Can we apply in practice such a
methodology for a European regional planning context (RQ2)? With RQ1, we investigate
if the logical framework approach (LFA) [31,32] is useful to assess if—and to what extent—
regional and sub-regional plans adopted in Sardinia are consistent with the national CCA
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3705 3 of 22
framework set by NCCAP. With RQ2, the purpose is ascertaining if the methodology
works in practice, i.e., if it allows one to provide public bodies with tangible results that
can be considered to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of the plans, which might be
the starting point for suggesting update processes.
Therefore, in this work, we aim to assess some regional and sub-regional plans for
ascertaining their coherence with the missions of the NCCAP. We apply LFA to scrutinize
the plans by reconstructing their strategic framework (including objectives and actions)
and assessing the plans with respect to the CCA objectives established by NCCAP.
The manuscript unfolds as follows. In the second section, we introduce and describe
the method based on the Logical Framework Approach (LFA). We adopt LFA to assess the
performance of the sectoral plans compared to the objectives of NCCAP. In the third and
fourth sections, we respectively show and discuss the findings. In the fifth section, we
answer the RQs and summarize the main concluding remarks.
2. Materials and Methods
Methods often adopted for the assessment of CCA mainstreaming in spatial, urban,
and regional plans are based on two clusters of tools [33]. The first cluster encompasses
qualitative surveys, which consist of questionnaires and semi-structured interviews that
are submied to planners, officials, and decision-makers responsible for approving or
evaluating plans [34–36]. According to this approach, Measham et al. [34] focused on
constraints to CCA at the local scale, i.e., the municipal level, which plays a critical role in
climate adaptation. The authors focused on three municipalities in Sydney, New South
Wales, Australia. The research represented the third phase of a broader project and
“involved case studies focusing on key adaptation barriers identified through the
workshops […] These barriers related to (a) infrastructure, (b) community aitudes, and
(c) planning processes” [34]. Similarly, Rauken et al. [35] stressed the need to promote
CCA mainstreaming locally. The authors assessed how five Norwegian municipalities
introduced CCA into existing policy sectors. To do so, “in-depth interviews with
politicians and administrative staff were conducted” [35]. Finally, Cuevas [36] applied a
mixed methodology to investigate CCA mainstreaming into local land-use planning in
Albay, Philippines. The four-stage methodology included “survey, in-depth interviews,
consultation with key informants, and document reviews” [36].
The second cluster entails qualitative–quantitative analytical evaluations of plans,
according to tailored criteria and the assignment of scores, or through frequency analysis
[10,11,37–39]. According to this approach, Tang et al. [37] scrutinized fifty-three local
comprehensive land-use plans adopted in California to assess how the plans addressed
climate change mitigation and adaptation issues. Tang et al. [37] applied a set of twenty-
five indicators, with scores ranging from 0 (issue not addressed in the plan) to 2 (issue
fully addressed). Similarly, Baynham and Stevens [38] examined thirty-nine official
community plans adopted in the province of British Columbia, Canada, to investigate to
what extent these plans integrate climate change mitigation and adaptation
considerations. Woodruff [39] investigated how the CCA plan adopted by the City of
Chester, southeast Pennsylvania (USA), was coordinated with nineteen planning tools
prepared by different planning authorities. Woodruff [39]used a “content analysis and
information system of plan methodologies” [39]. Such methods allowed Woodruff [39] to
assess the level of mainstreaming, i.e., to what extent the plans integrated CCA. Ledda et
al. [10] scrutinized six regional plans adopted by the Autonomous Region of Sardinia
(Italy) by using a set of three criteria to assess the integration of CCA within the plans.
The authors assessed if the plans integrated a clear reference to CCA strategies and explicit
or implicit adaptation measures, and identified the responsible bodies for implementing
CCA measures. Ledda et al. [11] assessed the mainstreaming of CCA in Sardinian regional
plans and programs by using a set of four criteria, i.e., if the regional tools referred to CCA
strategies, included climate analysis, contained CCA measures, and defined indicators apt
for monitoring the effects of climate change and CCA measures.
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3705 4 of 22
Our methodological approach is closer to the second cluster of tools described above:
we adopt the Logical Framework Approach (LFA) [31,32,40–44] to evaluate the coherence
between objectives and actions set by sectoral plans and objectives set by NCCAP.
2.1. The Logical Framework Approach
The first version of the LFA, which was adopted in the development sector, dates
back to the 1960s [40,41]. Crawford and Bryce [41] focused on the gap in project
management literature concerning aid project management and pointed out the limitation
of the traditional LFA—the so-called LogFrame—in the context of project monitoring and
evaluation information systems. The authors pointed out four critical issues of the
LogFrame, including the lack of a time dimension and its static nature. Thus, the authors
proposed a modified—three-dimensional (3D)—version of the LogFrame, with the
purpose of facilitating “ongoing management functions […] beyond the design phase”
[41]. Such a 3D-LogFrame emphasizes, for example, the planner’s view and the project
manager’s view of the project, and the time dimension. Lamhauge et al. argue that “LFA
has been criticized for its top-down approach imposed by large development agencies on
smaller implementing partners” [42]. Despite its limitations, Lamhauge et al. [42] found
that six development agencies adopted LFA and the related LogFrames “to monitor and
evaluate their adaptation [to climate change] related and specific activities” [42]. Golini et
al. [43] remarked that the logical framework is widely adopted by non-governmental
organizations to implement social impact assessment and project execution concerning
international aid projects. One of the most recent forms of LFA is based on the use of a
matrix—a LogFrame Matrix—such as the one shown in Table 1.
Table 1. The LogFrame Matrix as in Schmidt [43].
Objectives Success Measures Verification Assumptions
Goal … … …
Purpose … … …
Outcomes … … …
Inputs … … …
According to Schmidt [44], the project design lies in the answers to four questions:
what are we trying to accomplish and why (that refers to the objectives)? How will we
measure success (measures and verifications)? What other conditions must exist
(assumptions)? How do we get there (inputs)?
Zoppi [31] proposed a spatial planning approach that can be applied to the definition
of conservation measures for EU Natura 2000 sites (N2Ss). The “methodology is based on
a process which entails a continuous and intertwining planning and assessment activity
founded on a logical framework (LF), which identifies conceptual connections between
sustainability objectives related to the spatial contexts at stake and the operational
planning actions concerning the integration of conservation measures related to N2Ss into
the [Regulation of the Marine protected areas]” [31]. The author implemented the
methodological approach in a protected marine area located in North-Eastern Sardinia,
Italy.
Leccis [32] focused on the integration—into local plans—of the objectives set by the
Regional Strategy for Sustainable Development adopted in Sardinia (Italy) in 2021. To do
so, she proposed a methodology inspired by LFA, which consisted of four phases: “the
definition of the sustainability-oriented objectives, the assessment of policy consistency,
the definition of the specific objectives and the definition of the actions” [32].
In this study, we follow Zoppi [31] and Leccis [32] and design a method consisting of
three stages: (i) the selection of adaptation objectives and actions set by NCCAP and
relevant to spatial planning, (ii) the selection of spatial plans adopted at the regional or
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3705 5 of 22
metropolitan level, and (iii) application of LFA to assess the level of integration of CCA
concepts into the plans.
The first phase is aimed at identifying CCA objectives and actions of interest to land
use and urban planning. The full set of 18 sectors covered by the NCCAP (including
aquaculture, agriculture, desertification, and other sectors) was considered as being of
potential interest to urban and spatial plans. The 18 sectors branch out into 137 adaptation
objectives, which are linked to 360 adaptation actions/measures. Both objectives and
actions have been preliminarily examined to assess the potential relevance to land use
governance. After this filtering, we obtained 74 objectives (see Appendix A) and 251
actions, which can be included in regional and sub-regional plans.
In the second phase, we selected four plans and assessed their performance, in terms
of CCA integration. The analysis focused on plans approved in recent years, after January
2015, when the Autonomous Region of Sardinia officially promoted the process of
adopting a regional adaptation strategy for CCA [19]. Thus, we selected the Regional
Cycle Mobility Plan (RCMP), the Strategic Plan of the Metropolitan City of Cagliari
(SPMCC), the Flood Risk Management Plan (FRMP), and the Regional Environmental
Energy Plan (REEP).
In the third phase, we scrutinized the plans by adopting LFA, according to Table 2.
Table 2. The Logical Framework Approach (LFA) adopted in this research.
(a)
Adaptation
Objectives Set
by NCCAP
(b)
Objectives
Set by the
Sectoral Plan
(c)
Assessment of
Coherence between
Plan Objectives and
Adaptation Objectives
Set by NCCAP
(d)
If Necessary,
Redefinition of
Objectives of the
Sectoral Plan to
Introduce CCA
Considerations
(e)
Measures Included in
the Sectoral Plans,
which are Consistent
with the Adaptation
Objectives Set by
NCCAP
(f)
Assessment of
Coherence
between Measures
Included in the
Plans and the
Adaptation
Objectives Set by
NCCAP
… … … … … …
The LFA has been applied as follows. First, the objectives defined by the sectoral plan
(Table 2, column b) have been compared to the 74 objectives selected from the NCCAP
(Table 2, column a). Second, column (c) has been populated with the objectives of the
NCCAP that were consistent with the objectives of the sectoral plan. In the case of non-
consistency, the correspondent rows have been excluded from the assessment. Third, for
each objective of the sectoral plan, we assessed the level of integration of the consistent
NCCAP objectives. Column (d) has been populated as follows: the objective of the sectoral
plan has been kept unchanged when it has been assessed as coherent with the NCCAP
objectives; it has been reframed and improved when partial integration occurred. Fourth,
we compared the objectives of the NCCAP relevant to the objectives of the sectoral plan
with the measures included in the sectoral plan (Table 2, column e), which are linked to
the objectives of the sectoral plan. In this step, column (f) has been populated making
explicit how each action contributes to achieving the objective set by the NCCAP. The
integration of CCA in the measures could be improved by suggesting plausible
corrections. Non-relevant measures have been excluded from the assessment.
Finally, for each sectoral plan, an ad hoc table summarized the extent to which the
objectives and measures of the sectoral plan integrated the adaptation objectives of the
NCCAP. In addition, we proposed a global score (i.e., a score that is calculated with
respect to the full set of objectives and measures defined by the sectoral plan) and a local
score (i.e., a score that is calculated with respect to the objectives and measures defined by
the sectoral plan and included in LFA; see Table 3).
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3705 6 of 22
Table 3. The LF matrix for the assessment of the coherence of the objectives (O)/actions (A) set by
the sectoral plans with respect to the objectives set by NCAAP.
A B C D E F G H I J K
Global Score Local Score
Sectoral plan
Objectives (O)/Actions (A)
Not relevant O/A
Not relevant O/A in %
O/A included in LF matrix
Fully consistent O/A
Partially consistent O/A
Fully consistent O/A in %
Partially consistent O/A in %
Fully consistent O/A in %
Partially consistent O/A in %
… … … … … … … … … … …
As for the objectives, the quantitative assessment reported in Table 3 involves the
following steps: (i) counting the number of objectives defined by the sectoral plan deemed
consistent and/or integrable in terms of CCA; (ii) assessment of the objectives that are
consistent with (or integrable in terms of) CCA. The assessment considered two classes:
fully satisfactory integration (no changes in the objective of the plan are required) and
partial integration (the objective of the plan needs to be integrated in terms of CCA
considerations); (iii) quantification and percentage of objectives with fully satisfactory and
partial CCA integration. Similarly, for the measures, the quantitative assessment involves
the following steps: (i) counting the number of measures defined by the sectoral plan
deemed consistent and/or integrable in terms of CCA; (ii) assessment of the measures that
are consistent with (or integrable in terms of) CCA. The assessment considered two
classes: (i) fully satisfactory integration (no changes in the measures are required) and (ii)
partial integration (the measures need to be integrated in terms of CCA considerations);
(iii) quantification and percentage of measures with fully satisfactory and partial CCA
integration. For both objectives and measures, the local scores refer to the percentage with
respect to objectives/measures deemed relevant to CCA objectives of the NCCAP, while
the global scores refer to the full set of objectives/measures defined by the sectoral plan.
As an example, considering Table 3, the global score (GS) in column D (GSD) is calculated
as in Equation (1) (in percentage):
GSD = C/B × 100%. (1)
While the local score (LS) in column J (LSJ) as in Equation (2) (in percentage):
LSJ = H/E × 100%. (2)
2.2. The Plans Considered in This Study
We considered plans adopted in Sardinia (Italy; Figure 1). Table 4 illustrates the plans
assessed in this study: Regional cycling plan (RCP), Strategic plan of the metropolitan city
of Cagliari (SPMCC), Flood risk management plan (FRMP), and Regional environmental
energy plan (REEP).
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3705 7 of 22
Figure 1. Geographical context. In red is the island of Sardinia (Italy).
Table 4. Sectoral plans considered in this study.
Plan Acronym Year Description References
Regional
cycling plan RCP 2018
The design of the regional cycling mobility system includes
bicycle routes connecting the places of arrival (ports and
airports) to the main selements, natural assets, and cultural
and historical landscapes. The overall rationale is encouraging
sustainable and seasonal tourism.
Autonomous Region
of Sardinia [45]
Strategic
plan of the
metropolita
n city of
Cagliari
SPMCC 2021
This plan is an intermediate coordination tool including spatial
planning and programming measures concerning seventeen
municipalities. The plan defines guidelines and development
goals for the medium and long term.
Metropolitan City of
Cagliari [46]
Flood risk
managemen
t plan
FRMP 2021
The plan aims at increasing territorial resilience to flooding over
Sardinia. Its general principles are: reducing floods by acting on
the frequency of occurrence, reducing vulnerability by acting on
the elements at risk, and increasing risk awareness by
developing actions that increase knowledge, culture, and
information about flood risk.
Autonomous Region
of Sardinia [47]
Regional
environmen
tal energy
plan
REEP 2016
The plan aims to address the regional energy system by
matching energy demand and supply and choosing renewable
and not renewable energy sources, according to international,
European, national, and regional plans and documents.
Autonomous Region
of Sardinia [48]
While RCP, FRMP, and REEP are regional plans, SPMCC is a sub-regional plan that
has been considered under the specific request of the regional administration. Table A1 in
Appendix A summarizes the full set of objectives and part of the measures defined by the
sectoral plans, which are totally or partially consistent with the national adaptation plan.
We do not report the full set of measures, for the sake of conciseness.
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3705 8 of 22
3. Results
In this section, we summarize the results of the application of LFA to the assessment
of the coherence of the sectoral plans to the NCCAP [18], by objectives (Table 5) and
actions/measures (Table 6).
Table 5. Coherence analysis by objectives: results. Global and local score (GS and LS).
A B C D E F G H I J K
Global Score Local Score
Sectoral plan
Objectives
Not relevant objectives
Not relevant objectives, GS
Objectives included in LF
Fully consistent objectives
Partially consistent objectives
Fully consistent objectives
Partially consistent objectives
Fully consistent objectives
Partially consistent objectives
RCP 12 0 0% 12 5 7 42% 58% 42% 58%
SPMCC 11 2 18% 9 6 3 55% 27% 67% 33%
FRMP 11 2 18% 9 2 7 18% 64% 22% 78%
REEP 17 6 35% 11 6 5 35% 29% 55% 45%
Table 6. Coherence analysis by actions/measures: results. Global and local score (GS and LS).
A B C D E F G H I J K
Global Score Local Score
Sectoral plan
Actions
Not relevant actions
Not relevant actions, GS
Actions included in LF
Fully consistent actions
Partially consistent actions
Fully consistent actions
Partially consistent actions
Fully consistent actions
Partially consistent actions
RCP 52 15 29% 37 34 3 65% 6% 92% 8%
SPMCC 30 6 20% 24 14 10 47% 33% 58% 42%
FRMP 49 0 0% 49 46 3 94% 6% 94% 6%
REEP 68 29 43% 39 34 5 50% <1% 87% 13%
Table A1 in Appendix A includes the objectives of the sectoral plans that are
consistent with the objectives set by the NCCAP. Objectives of the sectoral plan not fully
consistent with the objectives of NCCAP have been reframed in a more coherent
description. Actions/measures connected to the objectives are too many to be included in
this paper; we report on some examples.
In the remainder of this section, we comment on the results of each sectoral plan.
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3705 9 of 22
3.1. Regional Cycling Plan (RCP)
The full set of twelve objectives is consistent with the objectives of NCCAP: five have
been found to be fully consistent (GS 42%, LS 42%), while seven need to be integrated in
terms of CCA (GS 58%, LS 58%). Fully consistent objectives include ‘Identification of a
network of major regional bicycle routes to be implemented with a specific typology,
priority and hierarchy, through modification of the characteristics and/or functions of the
existing road network and/or construction of independent bicycle paths’ and ‘Design and
implement facilities and tools for the involvement of interested users (i.e., practitioners),
through marketing, communication, information, education, and knowledge actions’. The
construction of bicycle routes/paths is relevant to CCA as RCP emphasizes details such as
limiting the use of asphalt, using materials that facilitate water drainage, ensuring good
shading of cycling routes (useful in the hoest season), and planning cycle tourism
activities to avoid the hoest season in order to meet the need to implement CCA
strategies that safeguard the health of cyclists. An example of a partially consistent
objective is ‘Recover and modernize the heritage of decommissioned railway tracks,
redeveloping them into “greenways” and connecting them to Sardinia’s bicycle tourism
network’, which has been reformulated as ‘Recover and modernize the heritage of
decommissioned railway tracks, redeveloping them into “greenways” and connecting
them to Sardinia’s bicycle tourism network, making use of technologies and materials
resilient to high temperatures and the increase in extreme climate events’.
RCP includes fifty-two actions. Thirty-seven out of fifty-two actions have been found
to be relevant to climate adaptation: thirty-four are fully consistent with the objectives of
NCCAP (GS 65%, LS 92%), while three are partially consistent (GS 6%, LS 8%). As an
example, actions fully consistent included ‘In the preliminary design phase, it is necessary
to ask for verification of the possible interference of the works with the hydraulic or
geological-geotechnical hazard areas identified by the sector plans in force
(Hydrogeological Structure Plan, Fluvial Zone Plan, Flood Risk Management Plan)’,
which is associated with the objective ‘Promote the implementation of bicycle routes
considering naturalistic, scenic and historical-cultural features as well as hydrogeological
risk and climate change’. The actions not fully coherent with the objectives of the NCCAP
included, for example, ‘Design and implementation of specialized information signs’.
3.2. Strategic Plan of the Metropolitan City of Cagliari (SPMCC)
SPMCC shows a very good level of consistency with the objectives of the NCCAP.
Nine out of eleven objectives have been selected as consistent with the objectives of the
NCCAP: six objectives have been found to be fully consistent (GS 55%, LS 67%), while
three need to be integrated in terms of CCA (GS 27%, LS 33%). Some objectives of SPMCC
have been reformulated in terms of CCA. As an example, the objective ‘Improve
interaction with local stakeholders’ has been reformulated to ‘Improve interaction with
local stakeholders (for example, to promote aspects related to ecosystem services and
climate change adaptation; raise public awareness, etc.)’, ‘Qualitatively improve the urban
and peri-urban fabric’ to ‘Qualitative improvement and securing of urban and peri-urban
fabric’, and ‘Support innovation and quality in the production of raw materials’ to
‘Support innovation and quality in the production of raw materials, with emphasis on
sustainability’. The remaining objectives have not been reformulated.
The full set of actions is associated with multiple specific objectives of SPMCC. For
example, ‘Increasing administrative transparency and accessibility’ and ‘Reinforcing
participation’ are associated with ‘Improve interaction with local stakeholders’;
‘Reinforcing inter-municipal and inter-sectoral coordination’ and ‘Reinforcement of
management and organizational structures internal to metropolitan institutions’ with
‘Strengthen Capacity Building processes’. Twenty-four out of thirty actions have been
included in the LF matrix. Of these actions, fourteen have been identified as fully coherent
with all the objectives of NCCAP (GS 47%, LS 58%) and ten partially coherent (GS 33%,
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3705 10 of 22
LS 42%). An action with satisfactory CCA integration is, for example, ‘Increasing
administrative transparency and accessibility’ pertaining to five objectives of the NCCAP
linked to the specific objective ‘Improve interaction with local stakeholders’. Ensuring
easy access to documents (manuals, reports, guidelines, etc.) promoting CCA should
improve interactions with local communities, who can figure out why and how CCA is
relevant to potentially contribute to saving human lives and making buildings and
transport and mobility infrastructures more climate resilient. The actions that were not
fully coherent with the objectives of NCCAP included, for example, ‘Development of large
transport and mobility infrastructures’. In fact, this action is not consistent with the full
set of objectives set by the national plan that are related to the objective ‘Improvement of
internal and external mobility’.
3.3. Flood Risk Management Plan (FRMP)
FRMP shows a good level of consistency with the objectives of the NCCAP. Nine out
of eleven objectives have been assessed as consistent with the objectives of the NCCAP:
two have been found to be fully consistent (GS 18%, LS 22%), while seven need to be
integrated (GS 64%, LS 78%). The objectives that are strongly pertinent to the objectives of
the NCCAP are ‘Mitigation of damage to infrastructures that serve and maintain
economic activities (power plants and networks, water treatment plants, sewage
treatment plants, etc.)’ and ‘Mitigation of damage to real estate’. The less relevant objective
is ‘Mitigation of permanent or long-term adverse effects on the ecological status of water
bodies according to the WFD, with regard to the achievement of the environmental
objectives of Directive 2000/60/EC’.
The forty-nine measures were not directly linked to the specific objectives. Therefore,
a preliminary analysis was carried out to match the specific objectives with the relevant
actions to apply the LFA. Of these actions, forty-six have been identified as fully coherent
with all the objectives of the NCCAP (GS 94%, LS 94%), and three are partially coherent
with some objectives of the NCCAP (GS 6%, LS 6%). Fully coherent actions include, for
example, ‘Guidelines for the implementation of interventions with naturalistic
engineering techniques’ and ‘Measures for the improvement of territorial governance and
land use regulations aimed at reducing hydro geomorphological hazard and risk’.
3.4. Regional Environmental Energy Plan (REEP)
REEP shows an improvable level of consistency with the objectives of the NCCAP.
Eleven out of seventeen objectives have been found to be consistent with the objectives of
the NCCAP. Each of the eleven objectives has been compared with each objective of the
NCCAP. Six objectives were clearly related to spatial and urban planning and showed
strong relevance to the objectives of the NCCAP (GS 35%, LS 55%), while five are partially
consistent (GS 29%, LS 45%). The fully coherent objectives included ‘Develop and
integrate energy storage technologies’ (which can prevent power outages due to excessive
use of air conditioning, especially in the hoest season), ‘Increasing the flexibility of the
electric power system’, and ‘Promote energy production for self-consumption through
renewable sources’ (production of electricity from various sources, to ensure blackout-free
supply), ‘Strengthen the “governance” of the regional energy system’ (define adequate
strategies to address the high demand for energy due extreme hot or cold), and ‘Energy
monitoring’ (to design proper countermeasures against blackout). Some objectives of
REEP have been reformulated in terms of CCA: as an example, ‘Methanize the Region of
Sardinia through Liquefied Natural Gas’ has been reformulated into ‘Methanize the
Region of Sardinia through Liquefied Natural Gas as alternative energy source’ and
‘Manage the energy transition of fossil sources (Oil and Coal)’ into ‘Manage the energy
transition of fossil sources (Oil and Coal) towards the use of alternative energy sources’.
As regards the link ‘specific actions-objectives’, part of the actions are associated with
a single objective. For example, the action ‘Definition of Governance for the
implementation and monitoring of the Sardinian Energy and Environmental Plan’ is
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3705 11 of 22
associated with the objective ‘Energy Monitoring’. On the other hand, some actions are
linked to more than one specific objective of REEP: for example, the actions ‘Integration
of electric mobility and storage availability for the management of the electricity system
at the distributed level’ and ‘Development of a management system of the region’s water
storage system potential for utilizing the potential of reservoirs for energy storage
purposes thereby preserving their primary purposes’ are linked to the plan objective
‘Develop and integrate energy storage technologies’. REEP included sixty-eight actions:
the LF matrix contains thirty-nine of them linked, by groups, to the eleven specific
objectives. Thirty-four out of thirty-nine actions are fully satisfactory as regards the
integration of CCA considerations (GS 50%, LS 87%), while five actions show improvable
integration (GS < 1%, LS 13%). The actions fully consistent with the objectives of the
NCCAP included ‘Development of a management system for the potential of the region’s
water storage system for the use of the potential of water basins for energy storage
purposes, thus preserving their primary purposes’ and ‘Concertation at European and
national level of Capacity Payment instruments for increasing the flexibility of the
electricity system of the Region of Sardinia’. The actions not fully coherent with the
objectives of the NCCAP included, for example, ‘Communication Plan of the Regional
Energy Strategy and the Energy and Environmental Plan of the Region of Sardinia during
all its phases’ and ‘The Region of Sardinia considers it strategic to promote the
development of skills and technologies for the use of low-emission coal’, are correlated
with some objectives of the NCCAP (not necessarily the same objectives).
4. Discussion
LFA allowed us to assess if—and to what extent—the objectives and actions set in the
scrutinized sectoral plans were consistent with the objectives defined by the NCCAP. The
application of LFA highlighted a variable consistency of the plans with respect to the
NCCAP in terms of CCA integration. RCP shows remarkable coherence with the NCCAP.
All the objectives set by the plan are consistent with the NCCAP. This is likely due to the
recent adoption of the plan (2018). In fact, the planning process was developed when the
NCCAS was already in force [17], the draft of the NCCAP was available, and the Autono-
mous Region of Sardinia was working on the Regional Strategy for Adaptation to Climate
Changes (RSACC). SPMCC, FRMP, and REEP show partial but good coherence with the
objectives of the NCCAP. SPMCC, FRMP, and RCP are quite recent plans, while REEP
dates back to 2016. However, REEP unexpectedly shows eleven out of seventeen objec-
tives pertinent to the objectives of NCCAP: therefore, we think this could be considered a
satisfactory result as in 2016, CCA was in its infancy in Sardinia (and in Italy as well).
Finally, FRMP—which is arguably one of the most important plans for CCA—shows only
two out of nine objectives that are fully consistent with the NCCAP. In this regard, an
update of the plan would be desirable to make its objectives fully consistent with the na-
tional CCA framework. On the other hand, the full set of actions included in FRMP have
been considered in LFA and most of them are fully consistent with the NCCAP.
LFA has stressed both the strengths and weaknesses of the sectoral plans. This is rel-
evant to spatial planning as the lack of CCA consideration in the planning process could
lead to approved documents that have scarce relevance to address climate change. At
worst, the plans may include measures/actions that have negative effects on people and
environment (maladaptation) [12]. Thus, LFA appears to be a useful solution to integrate
climate resilience concepts—as well as sustainability concepts [31]—into planning tools.
The strategic environmental assessment (SEA) has the potential to address the inclusion
of both climate resilience and sustainability issues into strategic tools, e.g., policies and
plans [11,49]. According to the best practices, SEA should be applied in the early stages of
the planning process and allow the public to provide a significant contribution to the plan
during the so-called ‘public consultation process’ [10,50]. Then, we suggest LFA may also
be part of SEA to integrate CCA in plans that affect the environment and people’s life-
styles.
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3705 12 of 22
The LFA-based method adopted in this study can be replicated in other similar geo-
graphical and institutional contexts and other planning sectors as in Zoppi [31] and Leccis
[32]. This could be relevant to the promotion of CCA across different types of plans and
programs. In fact, these tools regulate human activities and land use at different scales,
from regional [51] to local [52]. Adequate integration of CCA objectives and actions set at
European and national levels into sectoral plans should be one of the first steps for defin-
ing operational measures, i.e., tangible measures for increasing the climate resilience of
people, landscapes, and infrastructures, such as green infrastructures, adaptive land use
management, early warning systems, and building insulation [30]. Tangible measures
must be context-specific, i.e., the measures need to be tailored to specific contexts to be
effective [10,53].
The successful achievement of desired objectives depends on the coherence between
policies [54]. In this regard, LFA has contributed to linking national CCA objectives with
regional and sub-regional plans that affect land use in Sardinia and this is relevant to CCA
governance as “the consideration of European or national [CCA] principles in the [strate-
gies, plans, programs, and projects] should be interpreted as the willingness of policy
makers to promote vertical coherence towards climate-resilient cities in operational
terms” [30]. The method adopted in this research has been used for drafting the new Sar-
dinian regional strategy for CCA [33].
5. Conclusions
In this manuscript, we aimed to answer two research questions (RQs): (i) can we pro-
pose a methodological approach that allows us to assess the coherence of sectoral plans
with the objectives set by the national climate change adaptation plan (NCCAP; RQ1)? (ii)
Can we apply in practice such a methodology for a European regional planning context
(RQ2)?
As for RQ1, the logical framework approach (LFA) proved to be useful to assess if—
and to what extent—regional and sub-regional plans adopted in Sardinia were consistent
with the national climate change adaptation (CCA) framework set by the NCCAP. The
method based on an application of LFA allowed us to point out the relevance and coher-
ence between the objectives set by NCCAP and the objectives and actions defined in sec-
toral plans.
As for RQ2, the purpose was ascertaining if the methodology worked in practice, i.e.,
if it allowed one to provide the regional administration with tangible results that can be
considered to highlight strengths and weaknesses in the plans, which may be the starting
point for suggesting updates of both the plans and current regional strategy for CCA. The
application of LFA on four plans considered in this study allowed us to identify objectives
and actions that integrate the goals of the NCCAP in a satisfactory way. Objectives not
fully consistent with the national plan can be integrated with CCA contents. This is rele-
vant to promoting climate resilience issues in plans that have clear effects in terms of spa-
tial, landscape, and urban planning.
The method shows strengths and weaknesses. As regards the strengths, the method
may be replicable in similar institutional and geographical contexts as it is rooted in a
scientific basis and similar approaches have already been applied somewhere else. LFA
provides a simplified overview of the findings obtained in the plan assessment process,
which is described step by step by the assessor. Thus, the assessment is transparent, i.e.,
policy-makers, decision-makers, the public, and interested bodies can go through the en-
tire plan evaluation process. Ensuring participation and transparency in the planning pro-
cess is key to achieving consensus-based final decisions. As regards the limitations, the
LFA matrices show the results clearly, but as in any evaluation process, the findings are
affected by the evaluator’s subjectivity. Finally, plans with several objectives and/or ac-
tions imply the use of huge LF matrices that are difficult to manage. As an example, the
LF matrix of FRMP consisted of more than 26,000 words in almost 7200 records. Then, the
management of similar matrices may be challenging.
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3705 13 of 22
From 2020 to 2023, we were involved in the updating of the Regional Climate Change
Adaptation Strategy (RCCAS) adopted by the Autonomous Region of Sardinia in 2019.
We had a twofold objective: on the one hand, we aimed to assess if the principles and
contents of the former RCCAS (2019) were already partially or fully integrated within
spatial planning tools (mainstreaming), i.e., the sectoral plans; on the other hand, based
on the results obtained, we aimed at understanding how we could update/improve the
RCCAS. In this regard, the NCCAP was used as a reference framework to integrate the
new RCCAS in terms of CCA contents. Both the methodological approach and findings of
this research are part of the new RCCAS, which is currently under approval by the Au-
tonomous Region of Sardinia. As future research, we aim to investigate if the new regional
strategy will be integrated into regional and sub-regional planning practice.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization: A.L. and A.D.M.; methodology: A.L. and A.D.M.; formal
analysis: A.L., E.A.D.C., V.S., M.G.G.R., A.B., and D.T.; investigation: A.L., A.D.M., E.A.D.C., V.S.,
M.G.G.R., A.B., and D.T.; writing—original draft preparation: A.L.; writing—review and editing:
A.L. and A.D.M.; data curation: A.L., E.A.D.C., V.S., M.G.G.R., A.B., and D.T. All authors have read
and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This study has been developed and funded in the framework of the technical and scientific
agreement between the Autonomous Region of Sardinia, the University of Sassari (Italy) and Uni-
versity of Cagliari (Italy), concerning the update of the Regional Climate Change Adaptation Strat-
egy (SRACC). The authors are supported by the Agritech National Research Center (CN00000022,
Concession Decree 1032 of 17/06/2022) and the National Biodiversity Future Center—NBFC
(CN00000033, Concession Decree 1034 of 17/06/2022 adopted by the Italian Ministry of University
and Research), European Union Next-GenerationEU, Projects funded under the National Recovery
and Resilience Plan (NRRP; Piano Nazionale di Ripresa e Resilienza), Mission 4 Component 2 In-
vestment 1.4.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: The data sources are listed in the references section.
Acknowledgments: This manuscript reflects only the authors’ views and opinions, and neither the
European Union nor the European Commission can be considered responsible for them. We thank
the reviewers for their constructive comments on the first version of this manuscript.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Appendix A
Objectives of NCCAP considered relevant to spatial and urban planning:
1. improve thermal comfort and quality of living in peri-urban areas, suburbs, historic
centers, and public spaces;
2. improve water supply system efficiency in peri-urban areas, suburbs, historic centers,
and public spaces;
3. increase soil permeability and hydraulic system efficiency in peri-urban areas, sub-
urbs, historic centers, and public spaces;
4. promote planning and design for risk prevention and facilitating monitoring;
5. increasing knowledge, education and training on vulnerability and adaptation at the
urban scale;
6. counteract the degradation of materials and structures;
7. assess irreversible loss of cultural artifacts and the natural landscape;
8. transfer knowledge and preserve traditional building construction and landscape
management techniques and practices;
9. experiment with materials, structures, facilities, and technologies that are more resil-
ient to increasing temperatures and rainfall variability;
10. integrate climate change risks into planning and design toward resilience and adap-
tation;
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3705 14 of 22
11. securing land with respect to hydrogeological risk;
12. improve the effectiveness of monitoring, warning and emergency response systems
to transport services;
13. raise awareness, train and engage key players in the transport sector on climate
change adaptation;
14. adapt tourism offerings to changing climate conditions and the unavailability of tra-
ditional tourist aractions;
15. reduce impacts through green infrastructure
16. improvement of risk management for tourism operators;
17. preventing health risks to tourists due to extreme events or other negative situations
that may jeopardize the tourist destination;
18. increase the use of alternative energy sources;
19. increase the resilience of the energy system;
20. promote and increase beer management of heating and cooling energy demand;
21. reduce energy losses from transmission and distribution networks;
22. adapt ecological corridors and protected areas to changing species ranges;
23. countering biodiversity loss and alien species invasion and adapting ecological cor-
ridors and protected areas to changing species ranges;
24. improve the integration of adaptation into biodiversity planning, management and
conservation;
25. encourage research, knowledge and monitoring of the impacts of climate change and
adaptation on flora and fauna and ecosystem services;
26. promote education, outreach and awareness, and deepen socio-economic aspects re-
lated to ecosystem services;
27. conservation and protection of natural marine environments to maintain high levels
of functionality and production of ecosystem goods and services;
28. counteract the loss of biodiversity and invasion of alien species;
29. promotion of sustainable management practices of marine ecosystems;
30. reduction of direct anthropogenic impacts in marine ecosystems;
31. ensure the functionality of river ecosystems even in lean periods, environmental sus-
tainability concerning the use of water resources, and socio-economic sustainability
of related activities;
32. Monitor the supply of nutrients and suspended solids in transitional environments
to plan actions upstream or downstream of the watercourses that flow into the tran-
sitional systems;
33. regulate water concessions and uses from an ecosystem management perspective;
34. restore optimal conditions of transitional environments and recreating refuge and
trophy conditions for benthic macrofauna and fish […];
35. implementation of agricultural practices beneficial to climate and environment;
36. promote and support research for risk assessment and development of adaptation
and mitigation solutions;
37. improve education and training for resource management in the agricultural sector;
38. increase resilience in forestry and maintenance of ecosystem services by promoting
sustainable forest planning and management, supporting ecosystem service-based
solutions;
39. promote the sustainable and efficient use of forest resources by upgrading and im-
proving facilities and infrastructure;
40. promote forest planning, including from the perspective of risk prevention and man-
agement;
41. protect and preserve biodiversity and increase forestry resilience […];
42. promote and strengthen actions related to education and training;
43. increase resilience through planning of aquaculture sites and facilities and farming
systems;
44. improve water resource management for inland aquaculture;
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3705 15 of 22
45. improve environmental sustainability of production activities […];
46. reduce the vulnerability of aquaculture productions, market and trade;
47. development of a network for monitoring the impacts and adaptation to climate
change of the aquaculture sector;
48. prevent and mitigate the effects of extreme events with non-invasive interventions
[…];
49. encourage and support ecosystem service-based solutions aimed at preventing and
mitigating the effects of extreme events aributable to climate changes;
50. develop public-private governance tools for increasing resilience;
51. increase awareness and knowledge of the risks and vulnerabilities of hazardous ac-
tivities and infrastructure exposed to NaTech events aributable to climate change
and promoting training of practitioners;
52. help to reshape and reduce fishing activity, with possible declines in mortality for
stocks;
53. increase or change the speed and volume of water runoff;
54. improve the effectiveness of resource use regulation and planning, including by im-
proving the effectiveness of monitoring to prevent water crises;
55. improve the efficiency of water infrastructure;
56. improve efficiency in the use of the resource;
57. increase communities awareness;
58. ensure the preservation and protection of ecosystems and habitats, increase biodiver-
sity;
59. structurally protect the coast from the action of sea rise, erosion and storm surge
events;
60. reduce and manage any agricultural losses caused by flooding and storm surge
events;
61. reduce and/or prevent the exposure of human assets and infrastructure to risks re-
lated to exposure to the effects of flooding and erosion by protecting shorelines;
62. reduce exposure and vulnerability of coastal communities to storm surge events;
63. reduce the risk of contamination due to sewage and urban runoff;
64. improve knowledge through the development of a system of indicators and a moni-
toring network of land degradation and drought impacts;
65. improve the effectiveness/efficiency of monitoring actions;
66. prevent and mitigate salinization in coastal areas;
67. raise awareness of decision makers and citizens about desertification and land deg-
radation and the impacts of drought;
68. improve knowledge of critical geological and hydraulic issues in the territory and the
risks associated with them, and land monitoring for the production of up-to-date da-
tabases;
69. improve knowledge of the state of artifacts and infrastructure to increase their resili-
ence;
70. improve emergency management by administrations and increasing public partici-
pation;
71. improve land management and maintenance;
72. improve adaptive capacity through increased knowledge and enhanced air quality
monitoring;
73. risk assessment procedures and resilience enhancement of integrated water services;
74. develop information and monitoring systems related to urban heat islands.
Tab l e A 1 . The full set of objectives after filtering, which allowed us to remove plans objectives in-
consistent with the national adaption plan. Objectives and measures after the application of the Log-
ical Framework Approach: an asterisk * identifies the improved objectives; in italics the changes.
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3705 16 of 22
Plan Objectives Measures (M)
Regional cycling
plan (RCP)
(RCP01*) Plan a regional, metropolitan, and urban
bicycle mobility system that includes physical and
social infrastructure components also considering the
risks associated with climate change among the infra-
structure planning criteria.
(RCP02) Identification of a network of major re-
gional bicycle routes to be implemented with a spe-
cific typology, priority and hierarchy, through
modification of the characteristics and/or functions
of the existing road network and/or construction of
independent bicycle paths.
(RCP03*) Establish facilities to be used as cycle ser-
vices for different uses (stopping, shelter, vehicle
repair, refreshment, etc.) along the routes, also with
the aim of preventing risks to the cyclist’s health if ex-
treme events linked to climate changes occur.
(RCP04*) Identify the location of intermodal nodes
with public/private transport, which allow the cyclist
to choose alternative routes even in the event of emergen-
cies linked to climate change (e.g., sudden adverse
weather conditions).
(RCP05*) Identify areas of land suitable for bicycle
use, which allow the enjoyment of natural, histori-
cal landscape and cultural resources while respect-
ing their peculiarities -by ensuring the protection of
ecosystems and habitats- and which integrate with
other sustainable mobility and local development
actions.
(RCP06) Design and implement facilities and tools
for the involvement of interested users (i.e., practi-
tioners), through marketing, communication, infor-
mation, education, and knowledge actions.
(RCP07*) Promote the implementation of bicycle
routes that have homogeneous characteristics and
the use of environmentally desirable technologies
and products, which offer the best performance in terms
of climate resilience (increase in temperatures and varia-
bility of rainfall).
(RCP08*) Promote the implementation of bicycle
routes that pay aention to naturalistic, scenic and
historical-cultural features and take into account
the critical issues of the regional land in regard to
(RCP03*_M01) Identification and implementa-
tion of rest areas, one every 7/10 km of route.
(RCP07*_M01) Introduce minimum environ-
mental criteria in the acts of provision of re-
sources for the implementation of individual
projects.
(RCP08*_M01) Where possible, plan the route of
cycle paths along shaded roads and, where nec-
essary, plan the planting of trees and shrubs to
shade the routes during the hoest hours of the
day.
(RCP09*_M01) Redevelopment of large infra-
structure (tunnels, bridges).
[…]
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3705 17 of 22
Plan Objectives Measures (M)
hydrogeological disruption and climate change
phenomena (extreme weather events, heat islands etc.).
(RCP09*) Recover and modernize the heritage of
decommissioned railway tracks, redeveloping them
into “greenways” and connecting them to Sar-
dinia’s bicycle tourism network, making use of tech-
nologies and materials resilient to high temperatures and
the increase in extreme climate events.
(RCP10) Wherever practicable, locate facilities for
bicycle tourism by recovering disused buildings, re-
developing artifacts, while respecting the contexts
in which they are placed.
(RCP11) Encourage Local Authorities to equip
themselves with planning tools for an urban, mu-
nicipal, wide-area cycling mobility system (e.g.,
municipal and inter-municipal cycle-plans), to be
included within General Urban Traffic Plans and
Sustainable Mobility Plans for large urban sele-
ments.
(RCP12) Identify bicycle routes to be interconnected
to European and national bicycle networks.
Strategic plan of
the metropolitan
city of Cagliari
(SPMCC)
(SPMCC01*) Improve interaction with local stake-
holders (for example, to: promote aspects related to eco-
system services and climate change adaptation; raise
public awareness, etc.).
(SPMCC02) Strengthen Capacity Building pro-
cesses.
(SPMCC03) Improve internal and external mobility.
(SPMCC04) Strengthen the energy and digital infra-
structure system.
(SPMCC05*) Know, safeguard, improve, and moni-
tor natural capital.
(SPMCC06) Qualitatively improve the urban and
peri-urban fabric.
(SPMCC07*) Support innovation and quality in the
production of raw materials, with emphasis on sus-
tainability.
(SPMCC08) Strengthen industry and handicrafts.
(SPMCC01*_M01) Improve administrative
transparency and accessibility.
(SPMCC01*_M02) Strengthening participation.
(SPMCC05*_M01) Fire risk mitigation.
(SPMCC05*_M02) Reduction of coastal erosion.
(SPMCC06_M01) Restoration of real estate as-
sets
(SPMCC07*_M01) Strengthen the productive ac-
tivity of wetlands.
(SPMCC07*_M02) Strengthen and differentiate
the agricultural production supply.
[…]
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3705 18 of 22
Plan Objectives Measures (M)
(SPMCC09) Support digital transformation and ser-
vice diversification.
Flood risk man-
agement plan
(FRMP)
(FRMP01*) Mitigate the risk to life and health, both
as an immediate impact and as a secondary conse-
quence, improving the efficiency in the use of the re-
source (increasing the use of new, more resilient materi-
als).
(FRMP02*) Increase the permeability of soils to reduce
damages to systems that ensure livelihoods such as
power and water networks and strategic systems
such as hospitals, schools, universities, nursing
homes, shelters, city halls, prefectures, barracks,
prisons, ...
(FRMP03*) Increase soil permeability and mitigate
possible flood damage to the landscape system.
(FRMP04*) Safeguard the heritage of cultural, his-
torical, and architectural assets, including archaeo-
logical sites, monuments, museums, buildings to
avoid irreversible loss.
(FRMP05*) Mitigate damage to the transportation
infrastructure network (roads, highways, railways,
airports, etc.) through the integration of the concepts of
risk, climate adaptation, and resilience in planning and
design.
(FRMP06) Mitigate damage to infrastructure that
enables the maintenance of economic activities
(power plants and networks, hydro-power, water
treatment plants, sewage treatment plants, etc.).
(FRMP07*) Improve landscape management and
maintenance by mitigating damage to agricultural and
rural activities (livestock, crops, silvicultural activi-
ties, fishing, mining).
(FRMP08*) Mitigate damage to public and private
economic and productive system, commercial and
industrial activities, and ensure the conservation and
protection of ecosystems and habitats.
(FRMP09) Mitigate damage to real estate.
(FRMP01*_M01) Measures for the improvement
of land-government and land-use regulations
aimed at reducing hydro geomorphological haz-
ard and risk.
(FRMP01*_M02) Update of the Atlas concerning
the areas of interference between Natura 2000
sites and areas of hydraulic hazard.
(FRMP01*_M03) Update of the technical direc-
tives for the design, construction, and mainte-
nance of new road crossing works.
(FRMP02*_M01) Measures for the improvement
of land-government and land-use regulations
aimed at reducing hydro geomorphological haz-
ard and risk.
(FRMP02*_M02) Regulatory guidance and
guidelines for the relocation of elements ex-
posed to risk and the reduction of buildings’
vulnerability.
(FRMP02*_M03) Update of the technical direc-
tives for engineering works and maintenance of
slopes.
[…]
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3705 19 of 22
Plan Objectives Measures (M)
Regional envi-
ronmental en-
ergy plan (REEP)
(REEP01*) Increase knowledge, education, and training
on the integration of electrical, thermal and mobility
energy systems through Information and Commu-
nication Technology enabling technologies.
(REEP02) Develop and integrate energy storage
technologies.
(REEP03) Increasing the flexibility of the electric
power system.
(REEP04) Promote energy production for self-con-
sumption through renewable sources.
(REEP05*) Methanize the Region of Sardinia
through Liquefied Natural Gas as alternative energy
source.
(REEP06*) Manage the energy transition of fossil
sources (Oil and Coal) towards the use of alternative
energy sources.
(REEP07*) Save energy in the electric, thermal, and
transport sectors and increase the use of alternative en-
ergy sources.
(REEP08*) Promote energy research and innovation
with emphasis on renewable sources and energy saving.
(REEP09) Strengthen the “governance” of the re-
gional energy system.
(REEP10*) Promote energy awareness by ensuring
active participation in the implementation of plan
choices and promoting the use of alternative sources and
energy saving.
(REEP11) Energy Monitoring.
(REEP04_M01) Implementation in regional and
municipal public buildings of interventions to
achieve 50% self-consumption of already in-
stalled production.
(REEP06*_M01) The Autonomous Region of Sar-
dinia considers the promotion of the develop-
ment of skills and technologies for the use of
low-emission coal to be strategic.
(REEP07*_M01) Replacement by 2030 of 30 per-
cent of thermal production systems for build-
ings powered by biomass and electricity with
more efficient systems according to Best Availa-
ble Technology.
(REEP07*_M02) Establishment of the Regional
Energy Efficiency Fund for the promotion of en-
ergy efficiency actions in the domestic sector to
reduce thermal energy consumption by at least
20 percent by 2030 compared to 2013.
[…]
References
1. Cochrane, M.A.; Barber, C.P. Climate Change, Human Land Use and Future Fires in the Amazon. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2009, 15,
601–612. hps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2008.01786.x.
2. Steenbergen, R.D.J.M.; Koster, T.; Geurts, C.P.W. The Effect of Climate Change and Natural Variability on Wind Loading Values
for Buildings. Build. Environ. 2012, 55, 178–186. hps://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2012.03.010.
3. Kabisch, N.; Franeskaki, N.; Pauleit, S.; Naumann, S.; Davis, M.; Artmann, M.; Haase, D.; Knapp, S.; Korn, H.; Stadler, J.; et al.
Nature-Based Solutions to Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation in Urban Areas: Perspectives on Indicators, Knowledge
Gaps, Barriers, and Opportunities for Action. Ecol. Soc. 2016, 21, 39. hps://doi.org/10.5751/ES-08373-210239.
4. Anderson, L.O.; Neto, G.R.; Cunha, A.P.; Fonseca, M.G.; De Moura, Y.M.; Dalagnol, R.; Wagner, F.H.; De Aragão, L.E.O.E.C.
Vulnerability of Amazonian Forests to Repeated Droughts. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 2018, 373, 20170411.
hps://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2017.0411.
5. Iglesias, A.; Garrote, L.; Quiroga, S.; Moneo, M. A Regional Comparison of the Effects of Climate Change on Agricultural Crops
in Europe. Clim. Chang. 2012, 112, 29–46. hps://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0338-8.
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3705 20 of 22
6. Masson-Delmoe, V.; Zhai, P.; Pörtner, H.-O.; Roberts, D.; Skea, J.; Shukla, P.R.; Pirani, A.; Moufouma-Okia, W.; Péan, C.; Pid-
cock, R.; et al. (Eds.) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Global Warming of 1.5 °C: IPCC Special Report on Impacts of
Global Warming of 1.5 °C above Pre-Industrial Levels in Context of Strengthening Response to Climate Change, Sustainable Development,
and Efforts to Eradicate Poverty Poverty; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK; New York, NY, USA, 2022; 616p.
hps://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157940; ISBN 978-1-00-915795-7.
7. Viola, F.; Celauro, C. Effect of Climate Change on Asphalt Binder Selection for Road Construction in Italy. Transp. Res. Part D
Transp. Environ. 2015, 37, 40–47. hps://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2015.04.012.
8. Sen, S.; Li, H.; Khazanovich, L. Effect of Climate Change and Urban Heat Islands on the Deterioration of Concrete Roads. Results
Eng. 2022, 16, 100736. hps://doi.org/10.1016/j.rineng.2022.100736.
9. Klein, R.J.T.; Eriksen, S.E.H.; Næss, L.O.; Hammill, A.; Tanner , T.M.; Robledo, C.; O’Brien, K.L. Portfolio Screening to Support
the Mainstreaming of Adaptation to Climate Change into Development Assistance. Clim. Chang. 2007, 84, 23–44.
hps://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-007-9268-x.
10. Ledda, A.; Di Cesare, E.A.; Saa, G.; Cocco, G.; Calia, G.; Arras, F.; Congiu, A.; Manca, E.; De Montis, A. Adaptation to Climate
Change and Regional Planning: A Scrutiny of Sectoral Instruments. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3804.
hps://doi.org/10.3390/su12093804.
11. Ledda, A.; Di Cesare, E.A.; Saa, G.; Cocco, G.; De Montis, A. Integrating Adaptation to Climate Change in Regional Plans and
Programmes: The Role of Strategic Environmental Assessment. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2021, 91, 106655.
hps://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2021.106655.
12. Serra, V.; Ledda, A.; Ruiu, M.G.G.; Calia, G.; De Montis, A. Integrating Adaptation to Climate Change into Sustainable Devel-
opment Policy and Planning. Sustainability 2022, 14, 7634. hps://doi.org/10.3390/su14137634.
13. Mach, K.J.; Planton, S.; von Stechow, C. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2014: Annex II: Glossary. In Climate Change
2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change; Core Writing Team, Pachauri, R.K., Meyer, L.A., Eds.; IPCC: Geneva, Swierland, 2014; pp. 117–130.
14. Lackner, M.; Sajjadi, B.; Chen, W.-Y. Handbook of Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation, 3rd ed.; Springer International Pub-
lishing: Cham, Swierland, 2022; p. 3970; ISBN 978-3-030-72579-2.
15. European Commission. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and
Social Commiee and the Commiee of the Regions an EU Strategy on Adaptation to Climate Change; European Commission: Brussels,
Belgium, 2013.
16. European Commission. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and
Social Commiee and the Commiee of the Regions. Forging a Climate-Resilient Europe—The New EU Strategy on Adaptation to Climate
Change; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2021.
17. Ministry of the Environment and Protection of Land and Sea Strategia Nazionale Di Adaamento Ai Cambiamenti Climatici
[National Strategy for Adaptation to Climate Change] (SNACC) Approvata Con Il Decreto Direoriale n. 86 Del 16 Giugno
2015; Rome, Italy 2015. Available online: hps://www.mase.gov.it/notizie/strategia-nazionale-di-adaamento-ai-cambiamenti-
climatici-0 (accessed 31 December 2022).
18. Ministry of the Environment and Protection of Land and Sea Piano Nazionale Di Adaamento Ai Cambiamenti Climatici
[National Adaptation Plan]; Versione Giugno 2018, in via Di Approvazione; Rome, Italy 2018. Available online:
hps://va.mite.gov.it/it-IT/Oggei/Documentazione/7726/11206 (accessed on 31 December 2022).
19. Autonomous Region of Sardinia Strategia Regionale Di Adaamento Ai Cambiamenti Climatici; Adoata Dalla Giunta
Regionale Con La Deliberazione n. 6/50 Del 5 Febbraio 2019. RAS, Cagliari. Regione Autonoma Della Sardegna 2019. Available
online: hps://portal.sardegnasira.it/strategia-regionale-di-adaamento (accessed on 31 December 2022).
20. Bruneniece, I.; Klavins, M. Normative Principles for Adaptation to Climate Change Policy Design and Governance. In Climate
Change Governance. Climate Change Management; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2013; pp. 41–65.
hps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29831-8_4.
21. Hurlimann, A.C.; March, A.P. The Role of Spatial Planning in Adapting to Climate Change. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Clim. Chang.
2012, 3, 477–488. hps://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.183.
22. Biesbroek, G.R.; Swart, R.J.; van der Knaap, W.G.M. The Mitigation-Adaptation Dichotomy and the Role of Spatial Planning.
Habitat Int. 2009, 33, 230–237. hps://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2008.10.001.
23. Wilson, E. Developing UK Spatial Planning Policy to Respond to Climate Change. J. Environ. Policy Plan. 2006, 8, 9–26.
hps://doi.org/10.1080/15239080600634045.
24. European Commiee of the Regions, Commission for Territorial Cohesion Policy and EU Budget; Dallhammer, E.; Gaugitsch,
R.; Neugebauer, W.; Böhme, K. Spatial Planning and Governance within EU Policies and Legislation and Their Relevance to the New
Urban Agenda; Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2018; ISBN 978-92-895-0959-6.
25. Larsson, G. Spatial Planning Systems in Western Europe: An Overview; IOS Press: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2006; ISBN 978-1-
58603-656-0.
26. European Commiee of the Regions, Commission for the Environment, Climate Change and Energy; Lukat, E.; Trölsch, J.;
Cazzola, G.; Terenzi, A.; Peleikis, J.; Latinos, V.; Purdy, R.; Hjerp, P. Regional and Local Adaptation in the EU since the Adoption of
the EU Adaptation Strategy in 2013; Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2016; ISBN 978-92-895-0906-0.
27. Carter, J.G.; Cavan, G.; Connelly, A.; Guy, S.; Handley, J.; Kazmierczak, A. Climate Change and the City: Building Capacity for
Urban Adaptation. Prog. Plan. 2015, 95, 1–66. hps://doi.org/10.1016/j.progress.2013.08.001.
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3705 21 of 22
28. Busayo, E.T.; Kalumba, A.M.; Orimoloye, I.R. Spatial Planning and Climate Change Adaptation Assessment: Perspectives from
Mdantsane Township Dwellers in South Africa. Habitat Int. 2019, 90, 101978. hps://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2019.04.005.
29. Ledda, A.; Kubacka, M.; Calia, G.; Bródka, S.; Serra, V.; De Montis, A. Italy vs. Poland: A Comparative Analysis of Regional
Planning System Aitudes toward Adaptation to Climate Changes and Green Infrastructures. Sustainability 2023, 15, 2536.
hps://doi.org/10.3390/su15032536.
30. Serra, V.; Ledda, A.; Ruiu, M.G.G.; Calia, G.; Mereu, V.; Bacciu, V.; Marras, S.; Spano, D.; De Montis, A. Adaptation to Climate
Change across Local Policies: An Investigation in Six Italian Cities. Sustainability 2022, 14, 8318.
hps://doi.org/10.3390/su14148318.
31. Zoppi, C. Integration of Conservation Measures Concerning Natura 2000 Sites into Marine Protected Areas Regulations: A
Study Related to Sardinia. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3460. hps://doi.org/10.3390/su10103460.
32. Leccis, F. Beyond Environmental Protection and Conservation: Local-Level Implementation of the 2030 Agenda to Deliver Universal Goals
and Targets. Lessons from Sardinia, Italy; Universidad Politécnica de Cartagena: Murcia, Spain, 2022.
hps://doi.org/10.31428/10317/10596.
33. De Montis, A.; Zoppi, C.; Ledda, A.; Serra, V.; Bardi, A.; Di Cesare, E.A.; Ruiu, M.G.G.; Trogu, D.; Leone, F.; Isola, F.; et al.
Accordo Di Collaborazione Tecnico-Scientifica per La Realizzazione Di Aività Istituzionali Finalizzate All’auazione e
Revisione Della “Strategia Regionale Di Adaamento Ai Cambiamenti Climatici” (SRACC), Stipulata Tra La RAS, l’Università
Di Sassari (UNISS) e l’Università Di Cagliari (UNICA). Macroazione 2, Mainstreaming Della SRACC e Asseo Del Territorio:
Governance e Valutazione Ambientale. Rapporto Di Ricerca Completo Relativo Alla Macroazione 2. 2023 (in press).
34. Measham, T.G.; Preston, B.L.; Smith, T.F.; Brooke, C.; Gorddard, R.; Withycombe, G.; Morrison, C. Adapting to Climate Change
through Local Municipal Planning: Barriers and Challenges. Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Chang. 2011, 16, 889–909.
hps://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-011-9301-2.
35. Rauken, T.; Mydske, P.K.; Winsvold, M. Mainstreaming Climate Change Adaptation at the Local Level. Local Environ. 2015, 20,
408–423. hps://doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2014.880412.
36. Cuevas, S.C. The Interconnected Nature of the Challenges in Mainstreaming Climate Change Adaptation: Evidence from Local
Land Use Planning. Clim. Chang. 2016, 136, 661–676. hps://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-016-1625-1.
37. Tan g, Z.; Hussey, C.M.; Wei, T. Assessing Local Land Use Planning’s Awareness, Analysis, and Actions for Climate Change.
Int. J. Clim. Chang. Strateg. Manag. 2009, 1, 368–381. hps://doi.org/10.1108/17568690911002898.
38. Baynham, M.; Stevens, M. Are We Planning Effectively for Climate Change? An Evaluation of Official Community Plans in
British Columbia. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 2014, 57, 557–587. hps://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2012.756805.
39. Woodruff, S.C. Coordinating Plans for Climate Adaptation. J. Plan. Educ. Res. 2022, 42, 218–230.
hps://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X18810131.
40. Dale, R. The Logical Framework: An Easy Escape, a Straitjacket, or a Useful Planning Tool? Dev. Pract. 2003, 13, 57–70.
hps://doi.org/10.1080/0961452022000037982.
41. Crawford, P.; Bryce, P. Project Monitoring and Evaluation: A Method for Enhancing the Efficiency and Effectiveness of Aid
Project Implementation. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2003, 21, 363–373. hps://doi.org/10.1016/S0263-7863(02)00060-1.
42. Lamhauge, N.; Lanzi, E.; Agrawala, S. The Use of Indicators for Monitoring and Evaluation of Adaptation: Lessons from De-
velopment Cooperation Agencies. Clim. Dev. 2013, 5, 229–241. hps://doi.org/10.1080/17565529.2013.801824.
43. Golini, R.; Corti, B.; Landoni, P. More Efficient Project Execution and Evaluation with Logical Framework and Project Cycle
Management: Evidence from International Development Projects. Impact Assess. Proj. Apprais. 2017, 35, 128–138.
hps://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2016.1239495.
44. Schmidt, T. Strategic Project Management Made Simple: Solution Tools for Leaders and Teams, 2nd ed.; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA,
2021; ISBN 978-1-119-71817-8.
45. Autonomous Region of Sardinia Regional Cycling Plan [Piano Regionale Della Mobilità Ciclistica Della Sardegna] 2018.
Available online: hps://www.regione.sardegna.it/ai-bandi-archivi/ai-amministrativi/liste-elenchi/piano-regionale-della-
mobilita-ciclistica-della-sardegna (accessed on 31 December 2021).
46. Metropolitan City of Cagliari Strategic Plan of Metropolitan City of Cagliari. Il Piano Strategico—Cià Metropolitana Di
Cagliari, 2019. Available online:
hps://www.ciametropolitanacagliari.it/portale/page/it/piano_strategico_metropolitano_documento_strategico_definitivo_e
_i_suoi_allegati?contentId=DOC10411 (accessed on 31 December 2021).
47. Autonomous Region of Sardinia Flood Risk Management Plan [Piano Di Gestione Del Rischio Di Alluvioni] 2021. Available
online: hps://pianogestionerischioalluvioni.regione.sardegna.it (accessed on 31 December 2021).
48. Autonomous Region of Sardinia Regional Environmental Energy Plan [Piano Energetico Ambientale Della Regione Sardegna
2015-2030. Rapporto Ambientale. Approvato Con D.G.R. n. 45/40 Del 02/08/2016] 2016. Available online: hps://sardegnaener-
gia.regione.sardegna.it/pears/ (accessed on 31 December 2021).
49. Runhaar, H.; Wilk, B.; Persson, Å.; Uienbroek, C.; Wamsler, C. Mainstreaming Climate Adaptation: Taki ng Stock about “What
Works” from Empirical Research Worldwide. Reg. Environ. Chang. 2018, 18, 1201–1210. hps://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-017-1259-
5.
50. Italian Republic. Decreto Legislativo 3 Aprile 2006, n. 152 e s.m.i. Norme in Materia Ambientale. Gazzea Ufficiale n. 88 Del 14 Aprile
2006; 2006.Available online: hps://www.gazzeaufficiale.it/deaglio/codici/materiaAmbientale (accessed on 31 December
2021).
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3705 22 of 22
51. de Bruin, K.; Goosen, H.; van Ierland, E.C.; Groeneveld, R.A. Costs and Benefits of Adapting Spatial Planning to Climate
Change: Lessons Learned from a Large-Scale Urban Development Project in the Netherlands. Reg. Environ. Chang. 2014, 14,
1009–1020. hps://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-013-0447-1.
52. Zucaro, F.; Morosini, R. Sustainable Land Use and Climate Adaptation: A Review of European Local Plans. TeMA-J. Land Use
Mobil. Environ. 2018, 11, 7–26. hps://doi.org/10.6092/1970-9870/5343.
53. Dubois, C.; Cloutier, G.; Rynning, M.K.R.; Adolphe, L.; Bonhomme, M. City and Building Designers, and Climate Adaptation.
Buildings 2016, 6, 28. hps://doi.org/10.3390/buildings6030028.
54. Darjee, K.B.; Sunam, R.K.; Köhl, M.; Neupane, P.R. Do National Policies Translate into Local Actions? Analyzing Coherence
between Climate Change Adaptation Policies and Implications for Local Adaptation in Nepal. Sustainability 2021, 13, 13115.
hps://doi.org/10.3390/su132313115.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual au-
thor(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
