Search

Partnerships emerge as part of an environmental governance paradigm shift towards less hierarchical, more collaborative, and non-regulative steering arrangements. This paper examines the prevalence of partnerships in environmental governance on an urban level in a semi-authoritarian setting, by exploring climate initiatives in cities in China. The paper presents exploratory qualitative analysis of governance in urban China through analysis of a database of 150 climate initiatives in 15 cities, which are seen at the forefront of climate protection. The analysis suggests that climate partnerships are used as a governance strategy in China. Moreover, partnerships perform a range of essential governance functions, from rule-setting and provision of public infrastructure and services, to supporting technology development and low carbon demonstration projects. The results indicate that partnerships can facilitate local climate action by creating access to resources, such as information, technology, and funding, as well as contribute to introduction of emission reduction technology and new policy approaches. However, the inclusion of non-state actors in the formulation and delivery of climate mitigation projects redefines the lines of authority over public issues. This draws attention to two key governance challenges in the context of a comparatively state-controlled, top-down political system: skewed participation and lack of deliberative opportunities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• A new spatial typology of climate change risk for European cities and regions. • Response to IPCC call to understand climate change risks at sub-national levels. • Uneven climate change risk across the 33 countries covered by the typology. • Differences in risk profiles facing urban, rural and peri -urban areas. • Evidence of spatial clustering in climate change risk across typology classes. This paper aims to contribute to the analysis of climate change risk through the development of a new spatially-explicit typology of climate risk for European cities and regions. In doing so, it offers a direct response to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) call to advance awareness of climate change risks at sub-national levels through the integration of hazard, exposure and vulnerability domains into a composite risk classification that covers the whole of Europe. K-means clustering was applied to 49 variables at NUTS3 level where the final classification resulted in an upper-tier of eight 'classes', which were subsequently partitioned to derive a lower-tier of 31 'sub-classes'. A three-stage analysis of the eight-fold class configuration was then undertaken focusing on the distribution of climate risk classes, raising significant issues to inform climate change adaptation planning policy, practice and research. The analysis revealed an uneven distribution of climate change risk across the 33 countries covered by the typology, reinforcing the IPCC message that adapting and building resilience to climate change risk is not a 'one-size-fits-all' exercise. In the second stage, the analysis focused on determining whether there was a difference in the climate change risk facing different settlement types in Europe. The analysis revealed the extent of variation in the climate change risk characteristics of Europe's urban and rural areas, revealing the potential for peri -urban areas to fall between climate change risk agendas or priorities when compared to urban–rural contexts. The final component of our analysis considered the extent to which climate change risk classes exhibit patterns of spatial clustering. Here we found that climate change risk exhibits evidence of spatial clustering but the extent of the clustering varies between different classes as the relationship between contiguous NUTS3 regions changes. This finding has notable implications for transboundary adaptation planning where discontinuities in political buy-in, competition, resourcing and awareness of risk could serve to undermine the coherence and adequacy of policy responses at a time when greater cooperation and alignment is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Two central issues of climate change have become increasingly evident: Climate change will significantly affect cities; and rapid global urbanization will increase dramatically the number of individuals, amount of critical infrastructure, and means of economic production that are exposed and vulnerable to dynamic climate risks. Simultaneously, cities in many settings have begun to emerge as early adopters of climate change action strategies including greenhouse gas mitigation and adaptation. The objective of this paper is to examine and analyze how officials of one city – the City of New York – have integrated a flexible adaptation pathways approach into the municipality's climate action strategy. This approach has been connected with the City's ongoing response to Hurricane Sandy, which struck in the October 2012 and resulted in damages worth more than US$19 billion. A case study narrative methodology utilizing the Wise et al. conceptual framework (see this volume) is used to evaluate the effectiveness of the flexible adaptation pathways approach in New York City. The paper finds that Hurricane Sandy serves as a “tipping point” leading to transformative adaptation due to the explicit inclusion of increasing climate change risks in the rebuilding effort. The potential for transferability of the approach to cities varying in size and development stage is discussed, with elements useful across cities including the overall concept of flexible adaptation pathways, the inclusion of the full metropolitan region in the planning process, and the co-generation of climate-risk information by stakeholders and scientists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Highlights • Cities predominantly focus on self-governing when it comes to adaptation. • Citizens are mainly governed by provision of information for adaptation. • Private sector is governed through partnerships for adaptation. • The more advanced a city is on adaptation planning, the more likely it will address other actors. Abstract Expectations of cooperation between local authorities, the private sector, and citizens in climate change adaptation in cities are high because involvement of many actors is seen as critical to success. Scholars and policymakers argue that the private sector could be more efficient than the public authorities in implementing adaptation measures and argue for the need to engage citizens to ensure legitimacy of adaptation and inclusion of locally relevant knowledge. To what extent do cities address the private sector and citizens in their adaptation initiatives? What modes of governance do they use to do this? What kinds of cities are the most likely to address the private sector and citizens? Going beyond the existing case study approaches, this paper answers these questions using a large N data set covering 402 cities around the world. We find that a majority of adaptation initiatives focus exclusively on the public sector and do not address the private sector or citizens. In the cases where they do, the private sector is more often governed through partnerships and participation, whereas citizen participation is relatively rare. Initiatives involving citizens rely more often on a provision of information that encourages citizens to adapt. We find that the more advanced a city is in its adaptation process, the more likely it is to address the private sector than citizens in its initiatives to adapt to climate change. Whereas with partnerships and participation the private sector can influence urban adaptation arrangements at a broader scale, the provision of information allows citizens only to implement individual adaptation measures according to their capacities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Cities are key sites where climate change is being addressed. Previous research has largely overlooked the multiplicity of climate change responses emerging outside formal contexts of decision-making and led by actors other than municipal governments. Moreover, existing research has largely focused on case studies of climate change mitigation in developed economies. The objective of this paper is to uncover the heterogeneous mix of actors, settings, governance arrangements and technologies involved in the governance of climate change in cities in different parts of the world. The paper focuses on urban climate change governance as a process of experimentation. Climate change experiments are presented here as interventions to try out new ideas and methods in the context of future uncertainties. They serve to understand how interventions work in practice, in new contexts where they are thought of as innovative. To study experimentation, the paper presents evidence from the analysis of a database of 627 urban climate change experiments in a sample of 100 global cities. The analysis suggests that, since 2005, experimentation is a feature of urban responses to climate change across different world regions and multiple sectors. Although experimentation does not appear to be related to particular kinds of urban economic and social conditions, some of its core features are visible. For example, experimentation tends to focus on energy. Also, both social and technical forms of experimentation are visible, but technical experimentation is more common in urban infrastructure systems. While municipal governments have a critical role in climate change experimentation, they often act alongside other actors and in a variety of forms of partnership. These findings point at experimentation as a key tool to open up new political spaces for governing climate change in the city. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

There is increasing interest in the potential of cities to contribute to climate mitigation. Multiple assessments have evaluated the scale and composition of urban GHG emissions, while others have evaluated some aspects of urban mitigation potential. However, assessments of mitigation potential tend to be broadly focused, few if any have evaluated urban mitigation potential on a measure-by-measure basis, and fewer still have considered the economic case for investing in these measures. This is a significant knowledge gap as an economic case for action could be critical in building political commitment, strengthening institutional capacities, securing large-scale finance and targeting investment and implementation in cities. In this paper, we conduct a comparative analysis of the results of five recently completed studies that examined the economic case for investing in low-carbon measures in five cities: Leeds in the UK, Kolkata in India, Lima in Peru, Johor Bahru in Malaysia and Palembang in Indonesia. The results demonstrate that there is a compelling economic case for cities in both developed and developing country contexts to invest, at scale, in cost-effective low-carbon measures. The results suggest that these investments could generate significant reductions (in the range of 15–24% relative to business-as-usual trends) in urban carbon emissions over the next 10 years. Securing these savings would require an average investment of $3.2 billion per city, which if spread over 10 years equates to 0.4–0.9% of city GDP per year. However, the savings generated in the form of reduced energy bills would be equivalent to between 1.7% and 9.5% of annual city-scale GDP, and the average payback period of investments would be approximately 2 years at commercial interest rates. We provisionally estimate that if these findings were replicated and similar investments were made in cities globally, then they could generate reductions equivalent to 10–18% of global energy-related GHG emissions in 2025. While the studies offer some grounds for optimism, they also raise important questions about the barriers to change that prevent these economically attractive options from being exploited and about the scope for mitigation based on the exploitation of only the economically attractive options. We therefore discuss the institutional capacities, policy environments and financing arrangements that need to be developed before even these economically attractive opportunities can be exploited. We also demonstrate that, in rapidly growing cities, the carbon savings from such investments could be quickly overwhelmed – in as little as 7 years – by the impacts of sustained population and economic growth. We conclude by highlighting the need to build capacities that enable the exploitation not only of the economically attractive options in the short term but also of those deeper and more structural changes that are likely to be needed in the longer term. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Researchers, advocates and policymakers have proposed urban conservation as an emerging, integrative discipline that can contribute to sustainable cities by delivering co-benefits to human and non-human components of biodiversity. Given the recent growth in biodiversity-friendly designs and management schemes, there is an urgent need for a synthesis of this fragmented research base to inform planners and decision-makers. We conducted a systematic multidisciplinary literature review (787 papers) and found that the importance of urban areas for general conservation is not convincingly supported by empirical research. Only few studies demonstrated that cities can directly contribute to conservation efforts, by hosting viable populations of rare or endangered species, or by providing green corridors for the passage of natural populations. From a social perspective, while several studies demonstrated that green infrastructure could provide services for people (notably cultural services), only few studies explored the role of species diversity per se. Our review also shows strong geographical, location and taxonomic biases in urban biodiversity conservation research that make generalisations difficult. It is a disturbing paradox that while research in urban biodiversity conservation is rising exponentially, the main motivations for conserving urban biodiversity remain largely untested and unproven. We thus propose a framework for promoting integrative urban conservation research to bridge those gaps. Together, these findings warn against expanding cities under green planning and call for enhancing biodiversity experience by improving the quality of existing green spaces throughout the entire urban matrix. We provide a set of recommendations for practitioners and decision-makers to continue action. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent years, an increasing number of local governments are recognizing the impact of climate change on different urban sectors. This has led many to pursue climate adaptation planning, seeking to achieve preparedness through reducing vulnerability and enhancing resilience of populations, assets, and municipal operations. Although cities typically share these common goals, many are electing to pursue different planning approaches. In this paper, we examine three climate adaptation planning approaches in the cities of Quito (Ecuador), Surat (India), and Durban (South Africa) and analyze the trade-offs associated with different planning pathways and different forms of stakeholder involvement. We assess the potentials and limitations of these different approaches, including their implications for enhancing government integration and coordination, promoting participation and adaptive capacity of vulnerable groups, and facilitating overall urban resilience. We find that, in order to gain widespread commitment on adaptation, sustained political leadership from the top, departmental engagement, and continued involvement from a variety of stakeholders are integral to effective decision-making and institutionalization of programs in the long run. When climate adaptation is advanced with a focus on learning, awareness, and capacity building, the process will likely lead to more sustained, legitimate, and comprehensive adaptation plans and policies that enhance the resilience of the most affected urban areas and residents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]