Urbanisation may have been shown to have no effect on climate change, but someresearchers suggest that cities are fully capable of responding to it. Urban Heat Islands (UHIs) represent dense urban areas within cities where the temperature is recordedto be higher than the neighbouring areas or those located in suburbia. Mitigation of UHI effects can help diminish detriments of climate change. This paper sets out to establish UHI mitigation strategies, their effectiveness and resilience to help provide recommendations for application of such strategies in future. Existing literature suggest that UK is facing with growing problem of UHI effects and sustainable development at urban scale can be improved if proportionate measures are taken to mitigate those effects. The lack of guidance for designers and planners with regards to UHI mitigation is also indicated in the literature where trees, shrubs and grass (TSG), use of high albedo materials (HAM) in external building surfaces and urban inland water bodies (UIWB) are identified as effective measures to mitigate UHI. This research identifies and tests resilience and effectiveness of UHI mitigation strategies,using ENVI-met simulations and through Urban Futures Assessment Method (UFAM). Assessed mitigation strategies (TSG, HAM, UIWB) are shown to have a similar level of resilience which could be improved if proper future-proof measures are taken inplace. As a result, some practical suggestions are provided to help improve the resilience of tested UHI mitigation strategies in this study

Buildings and the construction industry are top contributors to climate change, and structures account for the largest share of the upfront greenhouse gas emissions. While a body of research exists into such emissions, a systematic comparison of multiple building structures in steel, concrete, and timber alternatives is missing. In this article, comparisons are made between mass and whole‐life embodied carbon (WLEC) emissions of building superstructures using identical frame configurations in steel, reinforced concrete, and engineered timber frames. These are assessed and compared for 127 different frame configurations, from 2 to 19 stories. Embodied carbon coefficients for each material and life cycle stage are represented by probability density functions to capture the uncertainty inherent in life cycle assessment. Normalized results show clear differences between the masses of the three structural typologies, with the concrete frame approximately five times the mass of the timber frame, and 50% higher than the steel frame. The WLEC emissions are mainly governed by the upfront emissions (cradle to practical completion), but subsequent emissions are still significant—particularly in the case of timber for which 36% of emissions, on average, occur post‐construction. Results for WLEC are more closely grouped than for masses, with median values for the timber frame, concrete frame, and steel frame of 119, 185, and 228 kgCO₂e/m², respectively. Despite the advantage for timber in this comparison, there is overlap between the results distributions, meaning that close attention to efficient design and procurement is essential. This article met the requirements for a gold–gold JIE data openness badge described in http://jie.click/badges.