Abstract
With heatwaves set to increase in frequency, intensity and duration, a policy shift is needed to build climate resilience on national and local levels. In London, a new strategy has been introduced to build urban heat resilience with the ‘Cool Spaces’ scheme. Cool spaces are free, public, indoor areas where people can escape hot weather and reduce heat-related health risks. Despite the scheme’s potential, it is unclear what type of resilience is built, by whom and how. Drawing on interviews ( n = 16) with practitioners and policy officials responsible for extreme heat management, our research identified original and significant findings on the limits of how heat resilience is conceptualised. We found that the cool spaces scheme: (1) prioritised reactive resilience over addressing why housing in London continues to exacerbate heat-related problems now and in the future; (2) no universal understanding of what heat resilience is existed nor agreement on how it should be managed, which led to (3) a misalignment between how cool spaces were supposed to be used and how they were actually used. Such findings highlight a concern that heat management solutions have become depoliticised as individuals are made responsible for reducing their own risk. We argue that transformational resilience is urgently needed for housing in London to resolve justice and equity implications of urban heat risk.