The Politics of Urban Climate Change Policy

Abstract

Urban politics research has not kept pace—empirically or theoretically—with city governments’ engagement with climate change policy. Thousands of cities globally have made commitments to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions and are taking steps toward these goals. In the United States, research has examined the motivations for such actions and has described some of the implementation challenges cities are encountering, but we lack a theoretically informed understanding of how these actions intersect politically with existing interests, institutions, and fiscal realities in cities. This article identifies five political entry points that are specific to urban climate change policy and can provide a foundation for empirically and theoretically valuable research. The pursuit of such an interdisciplinary urban research agenda for climate change would enhance our understanding of when and how cities are successful in addressing climate change and would provide new answers to long-standing questions in urban politics.

“Take It or Leave It”: From Collaborative to Regulative Developer Dialogues in Six Swedish Municipalities Aiming to Climate-Proof Urban Planning

“…Cities are, through their various operations, contributing heavily to increased climate change and the current lock-in to carbon-dependency. Cities are also highly vulnerable to the consequences of a changing climate, signaling the urgency of urban responses to climate change and intensified research endeavors targeting urban practices [9][10][11]. Urban planning becomes a key arena for managing both the causes and effects of climate change in cities [12][13][14].…”

Learning in urban climate governance: concepts, key issues and challenges

“…Several key issues have surfaced in this debate. Firstly, urban climate governance shifts reflect the emerging politics of mitigation and adaptation, with potential winners and losers at different scales (Bulkeley and Betsill, 2013;Bulkeley et al, 2014;Hughes, 2017). Conflicting actor strategies are arising, drawing on the cognitive and normative reorientations provided by concepts such as "low-carbon", "transition", "resilience" or "decoupling".…”

Social Science Perspectives on Drivers of and Responses to Global Climate Change

“…The issues considered include governance capacity; social, political and institutional adjustments across different scales; dimensions of well-being; attitudes and behavior; benefits; innovation diffusion; equity and justice; conditions of data; information limitations and uncertainty (Betsill & Bulkeley 2006;Busby & Shidore 2016;Byravan et al 2017;Geels et al 2017). Co-benefits of climate change mitigation are also examined (Ibrahim 2017), and a growing literature considers such applications in cities and urban contexts (Bulkeley et al 2014;Hodson et al 2017;Hughes 2017;Luque et al 2013;McGuirk et al 2016).…”