Urban planning has long relied on traditional zoning documents that primarily designate development rights based on land use types. The indirect environmental impacts of development are typically assessed through separate Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) commissions, which lack legal authority, while official zoning plans carry binding legal power. This division creates a disconnect between the impacts identified in EIAs (intended to be avoided) and the impacts facilitated by zoning plans (designed to be achieved). The legal authority of zoning plans often outweighs the procedural influence of EIAs. In this study, we explore whether exchanging the thematic roles of zoning and EIAs could yield better results. To investigate this, we conceptualize a transformative approach by reassigning the traditional designations in an existing zoning plan to focus instead on climate impact-oriented categories and apply this approach to a real-world case study. Using a Critical Realist analytical framework, we compare the potential impacts of this climate-centric zoning concept with those of traditional zoning. Our findings reveal extensive societal linkages embedded in what appear to be purely technical zoning decisions. We demonstrate how reimagined zoning, informed by contemporary climate impact knowledge, can drive significant systemic change in urban development - surpassing the influence of isolated strategies, policy guidelines, or EIAs, and addressing environmental effects that often fall outside the scope of conventional EIA processes.
Jama et al. (Mon,) studied this question.