Climate Adaptation Evidence and Local Plan Scenario Manager

- Climate evidence can sit across flood, heat, drought, wildfire, water, biodiversity and infrastructure teams with different assumptions and horizons. - Allocations may be assessed against one hazard while cumulative or lifetime risks are not carried into the plan record. - Policies can state climate ambition without showing the evidence or scenario that informed the requirement. - As projections and guidance change, officers can struggle to identify which allocations or policies require review.

The buyer is a planning-policy or climate-adaptation lead preparing a Local Plan or SDS, often supported by sustainability and specialist consultants. Senior governance and inspectors need an evidence chain; operational users need a manageable way to update it.

The gap is not lack of climate models; it is translating multiple specialist datasets into plan decisions and keeping that rationale current. A coordination and evidence product is more credible than building new hazard science.

Partner one authority beginning evidence scoping. Map existing climate studies to 20 allocations and policies, identify missing or dated evidence and run one update cycle. Ask an independent planning/climate consultant to review whether the audit trail improves plan defensibility.

A planning-specific schema linking hazard, scenario year, evidence source, affected allocation, adaptation action, policy response and review trigger could create durable workflow value. Historical scenario decisions across authorities could become a benchmark dataset.

Turn climate adaptation from a narrative aspiration into an auditable, updateable set of plan decisions and actions.

Proxy based — medium confidence.

£12,000–£35,000/year per authority; £20,000–£60,000 implementation/evidence migration. £10,000-£30,000/year per authority with evidence onboarding is plausible; consultancy partners could bundle it into climate and local-plan commissions.

Evidence basis: Agile AI Planning Validator (£15,000–£60,000 per licence) is the closest verified adjacent anchor used here. Its buyer, duration and scope are not assumed to be identical; implementation is separated where the opportunity requires integration, assurance or managed delivery.

Ask one planning authority, developer or planning consultancy with a live case pipeline to fund a paid test of Climate Adaptation Evidence and Local Plan Scenario Manager lasting 8–12 weeks, using an opening price of £20,000–£60,000 and covering 20 live applications, sites, conditions or evidence packs from one planning workflow. Paid scope: A multi-hazard planning evidence workspace that links climate scenarios to allocations, adaptation requirements and plan policies with a transparent evidence trail. Charge by authority, professional team, development site or assessed case and compare the fee with planning-officer and consultant time, avoidable invalid submissions and repeated evidence assembly. Measure validation time, missing-document rate, rework, officer overrides, applicant resubmissions and decision lead time. Continue only if handling or rework falls by at least 25%, at least 90% of required evidence is correctly identified and no material planning issue is suppressed. Stop or reprice if experienced officers find material false assurance, the workflow does not beat current practice or the buyer will not renew.

Raise above 86 if authorities identify recurring update and coordination pain after the initial climate audit. Reduce below 65 if the problem is primarily lack of specialist studies rather than evidence management.