Municipal planning represents a key avenue for local adaptation, but is subject to recognised constraints. To date, these constraints have focused on simplistic factors such as limited resources and lack of information. In this paper we argue that this focus has obscured a wider set of constraints which need to be acknowledged and addressed if adaptation is likely to advance through municipal planning. Although these recognised constraints are relevant, we argue that what underpins these issues are more fundamental challenges affecting local, placed-based planning by drawing on the related field of community-based environmental planning (CBEP). In considering a wider set of constraints to practical attempts towards adaptation, the paper considers planning based on a case study of three municipalities in Sydney, Australia in 2008. The results demonstrate that climate adaptation was widely accepted as an important issue for planning conducted by local governments. However, it was yet to be embedded in planning practice which retained a strong mitigation bias in relation to climate change. In considering the case study, we draw attention to factors thus far under-acknowledged in the climate adaptation literature. These include leadership, institutional context and competing planning agendas. These factors can serve as constraints or enabling mechanisms for achieving climate adaptation depending upon how they are exploited in any given situation. The paper concludes that, through addressing these issues, local, place-based planning can play a greater role in achieving climate adaptation.

Adaptation is now firmly embedded in the societal discourse regarding the management of climate risk. In this discourse, adaptation planning and implementation at the local level are seen as particularly important for developing robust responses to climate change. However, it is not clear whether the mantra that adaptation is local holds true given the multi-level nature of climate risk governance. Using a multi-method approach, this paper examines the extent to which adaptation should be framed as a local issue and, specifically, the role of local government in adaptation relative to other actors. In so doing, the paper first explores the extent to which the local framing of adaptation is embedded in the international adaptation literature. This is followed by a specific case study from Southeast Queensland, Australia, which focuses on the critical examination of the processes of responsibility shifting and taking among actors involved in coastal adaptation planning. Results indicate the assumption that adaptation is local remains widely held in adaptation science, although counter arguments can be readily identified. Interviews with adaptation actors revealed unclear divisions of responsibility for climate change adaptation as a significant constraint on actors' willingness to implement adaptation. Furthermore, attributing responsibility for adaptation to local actors might not necessarily be a robust strategy, due to the existence of particularly strong constraints and value conflicts at local levels of governance. Greater appreciation by researchers and practitioners for the interactions between local actors and those at higher levels of governance in shaping response capacity may contribute to more equitable and effective allocations of responsibilities for adaptation action.Griffith Sciences, Griffith School of EnvironmentFull Tex