Int. J. Global Environmental Issues, Vol. 11, No. 1, 2011 37

Copyright © 2011 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.

Opportunities and constraints for local and subnational climate change policy in urban areas: insights from diverse contexts

Rafael D’Almeida Martins* and Leila da Costa Ferreira Núcleo de Estudos e Pesquisas Ambientais (NEPAM), Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP), Rua dos Flamboyants, 155, Campinas – SP, 13083-867, Brazil E-mail: rdamartins@gmail.com E-mail: leilacf@unicamp.br *Corresponding author

Abstract: Climate change became the centre of public concern in the last years. Many cities and urban areas are particularly vulnerable to the effects of climate change. Local governments play an important role in implementing climate change policies. This paper explores the key factors shaping climate change policy in terms of both enabling conditions for action and the barriers that many urban centres face in taking on the challenge of mitigating and adapting to climate change. It goes beyond the analysis of single case study and captures the diversity of alternatives and contexts of cities involvement in climate action worldwide based on a meta-analysis of 38 cities worldwide. Enabling elements such as good governance, democratic and participatory institutions, and availability of different types of resources, knowledge and information on what and how to act together with the presence of a local champion often appear supporting climate change policy making.

Keywords: cities; local governments; climate change; adaptation; mitigation; urban climate policy; urban areas; meta-analysis; climate change policy; local action.

Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Martins, R.D.A. and Ferreira, L.C. (2011) ‘Opportunities and constraints for local and subnational climate change policy in urban areas: insights from diverse contexts’, Int. J. Global Environmental Issues, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp.37–53.

Biographical notes: Rafael D’Almeida Martins is a PhD candidate in Environment and Society at the Centre for Environmental Studies (NEPAM), University of Campinas (UNICAMP) in Brazil. He coordinates the Earth System Governance Research Network (Earth System Governance Project) and was a Visiting Research Fellow at the Institute for Environmental Studies, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Leila da Costa Ferreira is a Professor of Environmental Sociology at the University of Campinas (UNICAMP) in Brazil. She is an Associate Faculty of the Earth System Governance Project and was the President of the National Association of Graduate Programmes in Environment and Society (ANPPAS) during 2004 to 2008. She has been publishing on environmental sociology and sustainability in Brazil and Latin America for more than 15 years.

38 R.D.A. Martins and L.C. Ferreira

1 Introduction

Climate change has recently become the centre of public debate as one of the most pressing issues in modern society (Giddens, 2009). Although part of the scientific community has been expressing serious concerns about global warming and different types of global environmental change for at least 30 years, society has only awaked for the problem with the publication of the Fourth Assessment Report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 2007. IPCC stated on its latest assessment report that climate change is unequivocal and its impacts are underway (Solomon et al., 2007). These impacts are likely to play out everywhere including cities as well as rural areas, seacoasts, inland lakes and rivers, forests and other settlements (Parry et al., 2007).

Although surrounded by a great degree of uncertainty in terms of the real consequences of global warming and climate change for specific regions and places, the scientific community predicts a wide range of climate change impacts including flooding of low elevation coastal zones by sea level rise (McGranahan et al., 2007), increased intensity of extreme weather events, heat waves and stress and damage to vulnerable ecosystems and habitats (Parry et al., 2007; Hunt and Watkiss, 2007). These will have major impacts on human health (Confalonieri et al., 2007, 2009), infrastructure and environment (Wilbanks et al., 2007). In urban centres, these impacts will negatively impact water (Marengo, 2008), sewage, energy distribution, buildings and transport systems increasing illness and deaths especially among the most vulnerable population (Satterthwaite et al., 2007, 2009; Satterthwaite, 2008).

The relationship between cities and climate change is based on a complex balance between vulnerability and responsibility (Robinson and Gore, 2005). Urban centres are home to a large proportion of the world’s population, economic activity, and physical infrastructure that are at risk from floods, storms, landslides, heat waves, droughts and other climate-weather-related phenomena. Climate change is expected to exacerbate these impacts on cities around the world (Wilbanks et al., 2007; Satterthwaite et al., 2007; Hunt and Watkiss, 2007). At the same time, the local authority such as the municipality, county or the province, and their legal responsibility and jurisdiction provide opportunities to influence many activities that contribute to climate change and respond to it in terms of both mitigation and adaptation policies (Satterthwaite, 2008; Robinson and Gore, 2005; Bulkeley and Betsill, 2003).

By mitigation cities can substantially reduce their environmental impact and consequently transform their infrastructure and the behaviour and consumption patterns of their dwellers improving the global environment. By adaptation, cities can become resilient to the impacts of climate change and reduce risks from climate change and variability (Dawson, 2007; Prasad et al., 2009; Satterthwaite et al., 2009). Although these urban transformations will take tens of years and are probably reliant on significant developments in how cities are governed and planned, cities have a very direct interest in both mitigating environmental change and adapting to climate change (Boyd and Juhola, 2009; Satterthwaite et al., 2007, 2009).

If no action is taken across the world, research suggests that many aspects of city environment will deteriorate and the life and even viability of many cities will be threatened (Hunt, 2004; Grimm et al., 2008; Satterthwaite et al., 2009). Many cities are on coastal plains which will be subject to more frequent flooding from increased rainfall and sea level rise. In developing countries, one of the most critical environmental issues

Opportunities and constraints for local and subnational climate change policy 39

is the shortage of clean drinking water and sanitation in urban areas with huge and growing populations (Satterthwaite et al., 2007; Satterthwaite, 2008; Muller, 2009).

It is clear that society cannot wait for scientific certainties to adopt measures that mitigate the global warming and adapt cities to protect its people and infrastructure from climate and environmental change. It is therefore important to direct attention to the local level and analyse the opportunities and barriers for local and subnational governments in climate change policy making in urban areas (Adger et al., 2005; Puppim de Oliveira, 2009; Betsill and Bulkeley, 2007). Based on that, the objectives of this paper are two-fold: to review the key factors shaping climate change policy in terms of both enabling conditions for action and the barriers that many urban centres face in taking on the challenge of mitigating and adapting to climate change; and to contribute with the emerging literature regarding cities and climate change that calls for a better understanding of the governance and institutional aspects of climate change going beyond the analysis of single case study of ‘best practices’ trying to capture the diversity of alternatives and contexts of local climate change action worldwide.

The paper starts with a short presentation of the research method followed by the discussion on subnational governments and climate change. It then describes the opportunities and constraints for local and subnational climate change action followed by the discussions and conclusion of the meta-analysis.

2 Research methods

Some studies have shown that local and subnational governments often appear as key actors in coordinating, facilitating and implementing climate change actions alone or cooperating with an array of different actors (Storbjörk, 2007; Lowe et al., 2009) as these governments are closer to where the impacts of climate change will happen and have the potential to undertake both mitigation and adaptation policies (Puppim de Oliveira, 2009; Dawson, 2007; Robinson and Gore, 2005; Wilbanks and Kates, 1999). In this sense, it is becoming increasingly clear that much of what will need to be done in terms of climate change policy making will be also within the responsibility of local governments.

However, many of these studies refer to barriers experienced by local governments in implementing climate change actions or highlight conditions and factors that supported, enabled and shaped these actions leading to questions of implementation and the governing of climate change in the local arena (Puppim de Oliveira, 2009; Hamin and Gurran, 2009; Bulkeley et al., 2009; Bulkeley and Kern, 2006; Storbjörk, 2007; Wilson, 2006). This literature has mostly adopted case study methodology and concentrated on individual countries, mostly high-income nations located in the global North (e.g., the USA, UK, Canada, Australia, Sweden and Norway) or on individual transnational city networks (e.g., Cities for Climate Protection – CCP and C40). Studies that go beyond one or two cities are scarce as well as international comparative approaches that include cases in the global South, making it difficult to draw lessons and assess these experiences in a broader perspective (Bulkeley et al., 2009; Alber and Kern, 2008; Bulkeley and Kern, 2006; Bulkeley and Betsill, 2003).

On the other hand, the correspondence in patterns of climate change policy action in terms of key factors that enable or hinder these measures across case studies from different urban centres in diverse contexts provides stronger evidence of what really

40 R.D.A. Martins and L.C. Ferreira

shapes climate action and leadership at the city scale. Seeking for an alternative approach for analysis that could go beyond the description of city planning process and listing of activities, we have carried out a meta-analysis to capture the reality of climate change policy making at the local and subnational level despite the diversity of natural, physical and socio-political environments of the urban centres that have been analysed.

Figure 1 Geographic distribution of subnational governments’ action analysed (see online version for colours)

Source: The authors (using Google Maps)

Meta-analysis was first proposed as a method for systematic quantitative summary of evidence across empirical studies. Drawing on Lankao and Tribbia (2009), and Rudel (2008), we define meta-analysis in this paper as an attempt to analytically identify key factors that shape climate change policy enabling or hindering action at the city level. We have reviewed various peer-reviewed journal articles and government reports with narratives of 38 subnational governments worldwide (Figure 1) to develop a metaframework (Figure 2) based on the literature regarding cities and climate change. Then we organised these factors by broad categories (Table 3) and identified empirically if there is more action towards mitigation, adaptation or both in the literature (Table 2). All the case studies analysed concerning the 38 cities have reported some kind of climate change policy action in terms of both mitigation and adaptation measures.

This meta-analysis contributes with a comparative account of the current state of progress to climate change policy making and action in cities across the world including realities from both developed and developing countries. The case studies analysed are comprehensive in terms of variety and diversity of world regions, climatic zones,

Opportunities and constraints for local and subnational climate change policy 41

geographical locations, political-administrative organisation, built environments and institutional and financial capacity.

3 Subnational governments and climate change

Climate change has been recognised by a large number of international organisations, scientific bodies, business organisations and governments as well as the international media as a critical problem for the present and for the future – a global problem requiring multi-level solutions (Gupta, 2007; Giddens, 2009; Bulkeley and Betsill, 2003). The cross-cutting challenge of climate change requires the analysis of all levels of action, from global to local, taking into consideration the ways in which social and political processes interact across different levels and systems of governance (Adger et al., 2005). In order to engage with these processes that shape political will and local capacity for climate change action, it is necessary to go beyond the local and look at the multiple levels and scales of governance in order to examine why these actions are taking place or not (Bulkeley and Betsill, 2003, 2005).

The signature of the Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, also known as the Rio Summit in 1992 presented a first step towards global action on the issue of climate change followed by the negotiations and ratification of the Kyoto Protocol by many countries. The responsibilities for implementing the commitments lay primarily with the national governments who have signed the convention. Analysis of climate change policies has thus largely focused on global and regional levels of governance. The vast majority of research concerning the climate change governance and policy making has focused on the development of the international regime and its implementation (Okereke et al., 2009; Bulkeley and Betsill, 2003). However, climate change has an important local dimension as most human activities that can lead to and are affected by climate change are local (Wilbanks and Kates, 1999; Puppim de Oliveira, 2009).

While the framework of international negotiations remains important, cities are now greatly acknowledged as critical arenas in which the governance of climate change is taking place (Schroeder and Bulkeley, 2009; Bulkeley et al., 2009; Dodman, 2009; Satterthwaite, 2008; Prasad et al., 2009; Hamin and Gurran, 2009). Within academic and policy communities, this recognition led to an increased interest in framing climate change as an urban problem and the debate on cities and climate change has increasingly been given attention in research communities dedicated to studying the human dimensions of global environmental change (Lankao, 2007a; Betsill and Bulkeley, 2007; Satterthwaite et al., 2007; Bulkeley and Kern, 2006; Hogan, 2007, 2009).

The conclusion of the Kyoto Protocol negotiations was an important milestone (Betsill and Bulkeley, 2007). By then, there was increasing movement of subnational governments working to place climate change politically on the local agenda. Many cities around the world – most of them located in high-income nations – have developed their own climate change strategies even in countries where national governments have been reluctant to support international efforts for controlling climate change and greenhouse gases (GHGs) emissions such as in the USA (Kousky and Schneider, 2003). Some others have seen climate change as an opportunity to promote more sustainable patterns of urbanisation (Lankao, 2007a).

42 R.D.A. Martins and L.C. Ferreira

The development of an urban approach to climate change policy making is related to the emergence of transnational city networks. A number of local governments mainly in North America and Europe were pioneers in joining these national and transnational coalitions in late 1980s and early 1990s. In the beginning, the focus of these initiatives was to adopt GHGs emission targets (Schroeder and Bulkeley, 2009). The most significant examples of these networks are the CCP, an initiative of the ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability, the Climate Alliance of European Cities, and Energie-Cités.

Besides that, a wide variety of countries have increased the authority of local governments in order to make them more responsive and effective. In many countries, it had happened in the aftermath of dictatorships; in others it was a strategy to reduce the size and participation of the central government in the public sphere and increase public involvement and accountability in governmental decision-making. The foundation for having strong local governments is that only they can act to address certain key issues in regard to the public good likewise the provision of infrastructure and services essential for welfare and economic activities (Puppim de Oliveira, 2009; Satterthwaite et al., 2007; Robinson and Gore, 2005).

Climate change is related to urban centres and local governments in at least three different ways (Alber and Kern, 2008; Bulkeley and Betsill, 2005). First, an important share of GHGs emissions is generated in cities and there is a great need of mitigation (Lankao, 2007b; Dodman, 2009). Second, the impacts of climate change have direct implications on cities, their infrastructure and population and cities need to adapt to the changing situation as changes have been already reported unavoidable (Satterthwaite et al., 2009; Satterthwaite, 2008; Wilbanks et al., 2007). Third, linkages and synergies between climate change policies, urban sustainability and sustainable development become more evident at the local level and encourage cities to engender social and technological innovations (Bulkeley, 2006; Lankao, 2007b; Bulkeley and Betsill, 2003).

Many local governments are already familiar with sustainable development policies such as the implementation of Local Agenda 21 and they have the potential to develop city-scale pilot projects that can disseminate best practices on climate change action (Boyd and Juhola, 2009; Puppim de Oliveira, 2009). Typically, mitigation is dealt from the global to the national and locals levels. Adaptation has the opposite pathway. As the impacts of climate change are essentially local, the adequate governance scale for analysis should be those closest to the individuals and communities (Adger, 2005; Adger et al., 2005). As a result, the process of adaptation is strongly influenced by local contexts, choices and collective actions that are territorially visible at the city scale (Tanner et al., 2009).

Effective climate change action through local and subnational government’s conventional activities can bring significant improvements in many urban aspects (Dawson, 2007). Well-governed cities have populations and economies that are resilient to a broader range of shocks and stresses, including extreme weather events and other potential climate change impacts (Prasad et al., 2009; Satterthwaite et al., 2009; Bartlett et al., 2009). Table 1 shows a brief review of some common responsibilities in local governance held by local and subnational governments worldwide that have effect on both climate change mitigation and adaptation despite the great diversity in terms of administrative organisation.

Opportunities and constraints for local and subnational climate change policy 43

Table 1 Subnational government responsibility with effect to climate change

Responsibility Activities with major impact on climate change policy making and action

Building code

Urban planning

Land use regulation and urban zoning

Built environment

Public space preservation

Water resources management

Sanitation

Drainage

Streets, avenues and bridges

Energy (supply and/or regulation)

Infrastructure

Landfills

Solid waste management

Education

Public health

Public transport

Social welfare

Disaster response and civil defence

Firemen and fire brigade

Public services

Police and public order

Source: Adapted from Satterthwaite (2008) and Satterthwaite et al. (2007)

4 Opportunities and constraints for subnational governments

Local and subnational governments can reduce GHGs emissions and physical and urban vulnerability to climate and weather-related events through careful management of urban activities each of these responsibilities (Table 1, Figure 2). In many countries, subnational governments are responsible for significant proportions of public budget and expenditure that could be useful for adaptive improvements and adjustments. These governments have also direct and indirect control of areas such as transportation and energy use that account for more than 50% of domestic emissions (Satterthwaite et al., 2007; Satterthwaite, 2008; Robinson and Gore, 2005). This challenging combination of vulnerability and responsibility place the specific need and opportunity for local and subnational governments worldwide to respond to climate change (Robinson and Gore, 2005).

44 R.D.A. Martins and L.C. Ferreira

Figure 2 Subnational governments’ climate change action

Source: The authors based on the meta-analysis

However, there are still many constraints for a robust involvement of subnational governments in the policy making of climate change. Many subnational administrations do not recognise the global climate change as a local problem. In addition, they are usually overloaded with short-term priorities and climate change is always down in the priority list as it is seen as a long-term problem (Satterthwaite et al., 2007; DeAngelo and Harvey, 1998). Others do but face lack of autonomy and jurisdiction to take action in policies that affect climate change or they do not have institutional capacity or the financial resources necessary to implement climate change actions, especially adaptation measures (Parzen, 2008; Puppim de Oliveira, 2009; Roberts, 2008; Mukheibir and Ziervogel, 2007, 2009; Bulkeley et al., 2009). Some studies also have shown that subnational governments are more motivated to free-riding in a global public good as most of the time they do not have the incentives for implementing climate change mitigation policies if others do not do (Kousky and Schneider, 2003; Puppim de Oliveira, 2009; Bulkeley et al., 2009).

There is also an important mismatch between what subnational governments need to act locally and what is currently being given globally to generate knowledge and capacity to these governments particularly in the developing countries (Patwardhan et al., 2009; Wilbanks and Kates, 1999; Kates and Wilbanks, 2003). The capacity of subnational governments to deal with climate change may be strengthened by the participation in transnational city networks or by partnerships with other subnational governments, NGOs and private sector. This can be done by improving the capacity of government mobilisation with other non-state actors to implement climate change actions (Bulkeley et al., 2009; Satterthwaite et al., 2007; Puppim de Oliveira, 2009).

Opportunities and constraints for local and subnational climate change policy 45

5 Climate change action at the subnational level

Research on urban climate change policy emerged more than a decade ago (Betsill and Bulkeley, 2007). Over the years, this literature tended to focus on mitigation rather than adaptation and the research on cities and urban adaptation is still in its early stages (Lindseth, 2005; Naess et al., 2005; Alber and Kern, 2008; Bulkeley et al., 2009) although there are calls to give greater attention to adaptation in the research on local climate policy (Granberg and Elander, 2007). Also, most of the adaptation literature has covered ecological changes or has focused on agriculture and rural areas (Satterthwaite et al., 2009; Hogan, 2009) and adaptation policies at the local level are still in their infancy in most of places (Bulkeley et al., 2009; Alber and Kern, 2008; Zahran et al., 2008; Lindseth, 2005) and research on local adaptation strategies and its governance is limited (Bartlett et al., 2009; Carmin et al., 2009). Table 2 presents the results of the meta-analysis in terms of mitigation and adaptation actions considering that all the case studies analysed have reported some kind of policy response in both directions. Table 2 Status of the mitigation and adaptation policies analysed

Early stages Planning Implementation Status

Number % Number % Number % Mitigation 9 23.68 13 34.21 16 42.11 Adaptation 18 47.37 7 18.42 13 34.21

Source: The authors based on meta-analysis

The analyses of these figures show that the majority of climate change action in the 38 cities that can be considered in the most advanced status, namely implementation, are those related to mitigation policies. Not surprisingly, adaptation measures are the majority of those reported as being in the most preliminary level of policy consideration or design (early stages). These data corroborate with previous literature that have already pointed in the same direction (i.e., Lindseth, 2005; Naess et al., 2005; Alber and Kern, 2008; Bulkeley et al., 2009). The cities in which have been reported adaptation measures that could be considered in the most advanced status in our dataset are mainly those located in high-income nations with just few exceptions (Durban and Quito).

Despite the stage in which these measures are, the benefits from urban mitigation and adaptation can be direct for the city as these policies in general provide many local improvements (Dawson, 2007; Bulkeley et al., 2009; Prasad et al., 2009). The development of more competent, capable and accountable local governance structures is a fundamental primary step in addressing climate change mitigation and adaptation (Satterthwaite et al., 2007, 2009). The review around the current urban responses to climate change has shown that it can vary considerably and a number of factors appear to support and constraint its implementation in cities although these measures are strongly context dependent (Storbjörk, 2007; Wheeler, 2008).

Local governments have the central role in climate change action within their jurisdiction and it is obvious that they need a supportive institutional, regulatory and financial framework from higher levels of government (Parzen, 2008; Satterthwaite, 2008). The political and institutional constraints on local governments’ ability to develop appropriate policies and measures for climate adaptation are still not recognised in much of the literature on both mitigation as well as adaptation (Satterthwaite et al., 2007).

46 R.D.A. Martins and L.C. Ferreira

Based on the meta-analysis of several case studies, the elements that support climate change action at the subnational level are (Table 3): the perception of vulnerabilities and risks by citizens and policy makers; the capability and authority to regulate climate-relevant issues; national programmes to support local initiatives specially from those local governments that lack the resources to follow the pioneers; the engagement of cities in transnational networks; the presence of a committed local champion that can put climate change on the political agenda; the creation of a specific interagency or interdepartmental organisation to lead the adaptation process ensuring the collaboration of relevant stakeholders; the collaboration of a local community of strong researchers prepared to work with local governments on climate change impacts and adaptation; the allocation of financial and human resources; strong communication and outreach and stakeholder engagement strategy. Table 3 Key factors that support or hinder climate change action at the subnational level

Key factors Enabling environment Obstacles and constraints

Institutional and financial capacity to undertake climate change actions

Lack of financial, human and technological resources

Presence of a local champion Lack of commitment from political leaders

Allocation of financial and human resources

Lack of attention to environmental issues

Resource and capacity

Long-term urban planning Short-term view

Strong communication and outreach Business as usual approach

Vulnerability perception and strong risk management approach

Lack of vulnerability assessment and poor understanding in terms of impacts and extend of climate change

Knowledge and information

Strong science-policy interface Mismatch between policy makers and scientific community

Authority to coordinate and regulate climate change actions

Lack of authority and jurisdiction

National programmes to support local initiatives

Lack of national and international support

Participation in transnational city networks

Poor vertical and horizontal coordination across levels and policies

Institutions and governance

Good governance stakeholder involvement and participation strategy

Poor governance structures and difficulties in getting key sectors involved

Source: The authors based on meta-analysis

On the other hand, there are many barriers that cities encounter in developing their climate change policies. There are many examples of barriers to implement such strategies, such as: weak understanding of climate change impacts and how these changes can impact life in the city; uncertainty about the timing and extend of some impacts that

Opportunities and constraints for local and subnational climate change policy 47

makes it difficult for policy makers to set their priorities; focus on the short-term costs rather than the long-term planning of ‘business as usual’ as many options require upfront investments; difficulty in getting attention and commitment of political leaders as local politicians have relatively short mandates and face more frequent elections calling them to respond to problems that their constituents are facing now; problems coordinating it across local government departments or different levels of government; difficulties in involving some stakeholders that do not want to get involved; inadequate or lack of financial resources; lack of a national strategy to guide local governments; mismatch between scientific organisations and policy makers.

The case studies analysed suggest that there is not a blueprint for implementing climate change policies at the subnational level (Prasad et al., 2009; Satterthwaite et al., 2009). It is necessary a combination of several factors including different types of actors, resources, knowledge, data, stakeholder participation, governance arrangements and institutional and regulatory frameworks. These are all relevant for climate change action. Rather than being influenced by external incentives or pressures like in the case for mitigation where there are robust activity of transnational networks and the international regime, the evidence shows that adaptation action is mostly driven by local action and rely on the physical and built environment, the perception of vulnerability and risks by citizens and policy makers or a long history in dealing with natural hazards and disasters (Satterthwaite, 2008).

There are key factors shaping climate change action that have been revealed important to achieve climate change strategies at the subnational level. These factors typically lead to questions of resources and capacity, including funding and political leadership; collaboration of the scientific community through local universities and the governance and institutions that support these initiatives including the central coordination of climate action by the local government (Lowe et al., 2009; Ligeti et al., 2007; Parzen, 2008).

5.1 Resources and capacity

The availability of financial and human resources is crucial for planning and implementing adaptation. Some adaptation measures require building or improving urban infrastructure that may be far beyond the financial capacity of local governments and in some cases even the national governments (e.g., for least developed countries). It links to the issue of funding for adaptation (Parzen, 2008; Ayers, 2009a; 2009b). In some countries, local governments have more power and fiscal autonomy than others (Bulkeley et al., 2009). But for many developing countries, there will be the need for additional funding for urban adaptation. Despite the importance of financial resources, human and political resources are important to initiate and sustain climate adaptation policies (Carmin et al., 2009). Well-trained and dedicated staff to take care of climate change adaptation planning seems to be an important feature from the cities that have initiated adaptation actions (Roberts, 2008; Satterthwaite et al., 2009). The leadership of a local champion to introduce climate change in the local agenda and develop it over time is also central in order to mobilise resources and explore innovative ways sometimes even beyond the city’s boundaries so that the lack of resources cannot be used as an excuse for doing nothing (Ligeti et al., 2007; Lowe et al., 2009; Bulkeley et al., 2009).

48 R.D.A. Martins and L.C. Ferreira

5.2 Knowledge and information

Knowledge and information available to design and implement long-term climate change strategies at the local and subnational levels is a major step in addressing mitigation and adaptation to climate change. Some cities with capability to assess its vulnerability and develop scenarios show that having a good base of information about the impacts of climate change helps to foster action as decision-makers can rely on some baseline information. It is common knowledge that decision-makers are not able to make decisions under great uncertainty. Climate change deals with high levels of uncertainty especially at the local level. So, efforts in the direction of offering guidance on where the critical areas are and how it can be attenuated seem to enable at the least the discussion about the options to be followed. Unfortunately, many studies have shown that the available data and climate change scenarios are low at the local level in general. Even when it is available there are many mismatches and communication gaps between the science and policy interface (Cash and Moser, 2000; Bradshaw and Borchers, 2000; Lowe et al., 2009).

5.3 Institutions and governance

Enabling institutional frameworks and governance structures are important factors that support the implementation of adaptation measures at the local level (Bulkeley et al., 2009). Some examples as how governance structures and institutions shape climate change action include democratic and participatory local governance and ability to dialogue and engage with different stakeholders such as the business sector, non-governmental organisations, community-based organisations, academia, research centres (Moser, 2009; Dovers and Hezri, 2010). Many local institutions allow local governments to plan the urban environment and provide infrastructure and service delivery that have a direct effect on climate change policy making. In some cases, local governments created specific offices to deal with climate changes issues (Lowe et al., 2009). These offices are not affiliated to any department or previous sector within the local administration. By doing so, they were able to coordinate intergovernmental efforts from different departments and governmental bodies, engage with universities and other municipal governmental and have visibility and dedicated resources to implement climate adaptation actions (Carmin et al., 2009; Roberts, 2008; Satterthwaite et al., 2007).

Governments as static and bureaucratic organisations take time to change and internalise new issues and priorities (Berkhout et al., 2006). So, instead of starting new plans or new policies, it seems easier to build upon initiatives that are already ongoing local projects and that the public servants and citizens are already familiar with. So, the local administration can set more general guidelines to establish a common vision among different areas of the public administration (Roberts, 2008).

6 Conclusions

Impacts of climate change are likely to threaten hundreds of millions of people in several parts of the world. A substantial proportion of these people lives in vulnerable areas within urban centres and is exposed to many risks. The scale of these risks is much influenced by the quality of the urban infrastructure and the governance structures that

Opportunities and constraints for local and subnational climate change policy 49

plan, coordinate, manage and implement the provision of policies and services. This paper reviewed the literature on cities and climate change by carrying a meta-analysis of the current status of subnational responses that have been reported in peer-reviewed publications.

Based on the meta-analysis, it has explored the elements that enable or hinder local and subnational governments’ climate change action looking at the policy making and implementation of these measures. While science is advancing to provide increasingly reliable data, methodologies, tools and frameworks to help society to mitigate GHGs emissions and adapt to the current and future impacts of climate change, many countries and local governments are still struggling to provide even the most basic urban services. That is probably the one of the reasons why urban adaptation has been entering slowly into the policy realm. The lack of financial and human resources, the high level of uncertainty to the extent of impacts and the need for climate change scientific data at the local level also contribute to the lack of action toward adaptation.

Even though this paper was based on a limited collection of case studies available in the literature, it is possible to draw some lessons on what are the elements that enable and influence the implementation of urban climate adaptation. Some of them appear to be essential in implementing climate action like an enabling institutional environment, good governance, democratic and participatory institutions, availability of different types of resources, knowledge and information on what and how to adapt and the presence of a local champion.

So far, mitigation has received greater attention from local and subnational governments mainly in high-income nations with only a very small proportion of urban centres in low and middle income nation have given any attention to mitigation or adaptation. With increasingly scientific evidences of climate change across different regions of the world and unavoidable impacts that are likely to manifest during this century according to several projections, there is a clear need for both mitigation and adaptation measures in urban centres. There is also the need to mainstream adaptation across different sectors particularly in the developing world where adaptive capacity is lower and climate change is expected to be higher. Mitigation and adaptation measures can have several synergies and be complementary at some levels, but they can also be contradictory. The analysis presented in this paper shows that climate change action in urban areas demands not only intense planning, participation, and coordination of multilevel efforts but also the availability of knowledge and information for an effective climate change policy at the local level.

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the financial support received from the State of São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP) and the Brazilian Federal Agency for Support and Evaluation of Graduate Education (CAPES) as well as the hospitality granted by the Department of Environmental Policy Analysis (EPA), Institute of Environmental Studies (IVM), Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, The Netherlands during visiting fellowship of one of the authors. Comments received from anonymous reviewers helped to improve the original manuscript.

50 R.D.A. Martins and L.C. Ferreira

References Adger, W.N. (2005) ‘Scales of governance and environmental justice for adaptation and mitigation

of climate change’, Journal of International Development, Vol. 13, No. 7, pp.921–931. Adger, W.N., Arnell, N. and Tompkins, E. (2005) ‘Successful adaptation to climate change across

scales’, Global Environment Change Part A, Vol. 15, pp.77–86. Alber, G. and Kern, K. (2008) ‘Governing climate change in cities: modes of urban climate

governance in multi-level systems’, Paper presented at OECD Conference on Competitive Cities and Climate Change, Milan, OECD.

Ayers, J. (2009a) ‘International funding to support urban adaptation to climate change’, Environment and Urbanization, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp.225–240.

Ayers, J. (2009b) ‘International funding to support urban adaptation to climate change’, in Bicknell, J., Dodman, D. and Satterthwaite, D. (Eds.): Adapting Cities to Climate Change: Understanding and Addressing the Development Challenges, pp.339–358, Earthscan, London.

Bartlett, S., Dodman, D., Hardoy, J., Satterthwaite, D. and Tacoli, C. (2009) ‘Social aspects of climate change in urban areas in low-and middle income countries’, Paper presented at the World Bank 5th Urban Symposium on Climate Change, Marseille.

Berkhout, F., Hertin, J. and Gann, D.M. (2006) ‘Learning to adapt: organisational adaptation to climate change impacts’, Climatic Change, Vol. 78, pp.135–156.

Betsill, M.M. and Bulkeley, H. (2007) ‘Looking back and thinking ahead: a decade of cities and climate change research’, Local Governments, Vol. 12, No. 5, pp.447–456.

Boyd, E. and Juhola, S. (2009) ‘Stepping up to the climate change: opportunities in reconceptualising development futures’, Journal of International Development, Vol. 21, pp.792–804.

Bradshaw, G.A. and Borchers, J.G. (2000) ‘Uncertainty as information: narrowing the science-policy gap’, Conservation Ecology, Vol. 4, No. 1, p.7.

Bulkeley, H. (2006) ‘Urban sustainability: learning from best practice?’, Environment and Planning A, Vol. 38, pp.1029–1044.

Bulkeley, H. and Betsill, M.M. (2003) Cities and Climate Change: Urban Sustainability and Global Environmental Governance, Routledge, London.

Bulkeley, H. and Betsill, M.M. (2005) ‘Rethinking sustainable cities: multilevel governance and the ‘urban’ politics of climate change’, Environmental Politics, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp.42–63.

Bulkeley, H. and Kern, K. (2006) ‘Local government and the governing of climate change in Germany and UK’, Urban Studies, Vol. 43, No. 12, pp.2237–2259.

Bulkeley, H., Schroeder, H., Janda, K., Zhao, J., Armstrong, A., Chu, S.Y. and Ghosh, S. (2009) ‘Cities and climate change: the role of institutions, governance and urban planning’, Paper presented at the World Bank 5th Urban Symposium on Climate Change, Marseille.

Carmin, J., Roberts, D. and Anguelovski, I. (2009) ‘Planning climate resilient cities: early lessons from early adapters’, Paper presented at the World Bank 5th Urban Symposium on Climate Change, Marseille.

Cash, D.W. and Moser, S.C. (2000) ‘Linking global and local scales: designing dynamic assessment and management processes’, Global Environmental Change, Vol. 10, pp.109–120.

Confalonieri, U.E.C., Marinho, D.P. and Rodriguez, R. (2009) ‘Public health vulnerability to climate change in Brazil’, Climate Research, Vol. 40, pp.175–186.

Confalonieri, U.E.C., Menne, B., Akhatar, R., Ebi, K.L., Hauengue, M., Kovats, R.S., Revich, B. and Woodward, A. (2007) ‘Human health’, in Parry, M., et al. (Eds.): Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, pp.391–431, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Dawson, R. (2007) ‘Re-engineering cities: a framework for adaptation to global change’, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, Vol. 365, pp.3085–3098.

Opportunities and constraints for local and subnational climate change policy 51

DeAngelo, B. and Harvey, L.D. (1998) ‘The jurisdictional framework for municipal action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions: case studies from Canada, USA and Germany’, Local Environment, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp.111–136.

Dodman, D. (2009) ‘Blaming cities for climate change? An analysis of urban greenhouse gases emissions inventories’, Environment and Urbanization, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp.185–201.

Dovers, S.R. and Hezri, A.A. (2010) ‘Institutions and policy processes: the means to the ends of adaptation’, Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, Vol. 1, No. 2, DOI: 10.1002/wcc.29.

Giddens, A. (2009) The Politics of Climate Change, Polity Press, Cambridge, UK. Granberg, M. and Elander, I. (2007) ‘Local governance and climate change: reflections on the

Swedish experience’, Local Environment, Vol. 12, No. 5, pp.537–548. Grimm, N., Faeth, S., Golubiewski, N., Redman, C., Wu, J., Bai, X. and Briggs, D. (2008) ‘Global

change and the ecology of cities’, Science, Vol. 319, pp.756–760. Gupta, J. (2007) ‘The multi-level governance challenge of climate change’, Environmental

Sciences, Vol. 4, No. 3, pp.131–137. Hamin, E. and Gurran, N. (2009) ‘Urban form and climate change: balancing adaptation and

mitigation in the US and Australia’, Habitat International, Vol. 33, pp.238–245. Hogan, D.J. (2007) ‘Human dimensions of global environmental change’, Ambiente & Sociedade,

Vol. 10, No. 2, pp.161–166. Hogan, D.J. (2009) ‘População e mudanças ambientais globais’, in Hogan, D.J. and Marandola, E.,

Jr. (Eds.): População e Mudança Climática: Dimensões Humanas das Mudanças Ambientais Globais, pp.11–24, UNICAMP, Campinas.

Hunt, A. and Watkiss, P. (2007) Literature Review on Climate Change Impacts on Urban City Centres: Initial Findings, Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), ENV/EPOC/GSP(2007)10/FINAL, OECD Publishing.

Hunt, J. (2004) ‘How can cities mitigate and adapt to climate change?’, Building Research & Information, Vol. 32, No. 1, pp.55–57.

Kates, R.W. and Wilbanks, T.J. (2003) ‘Making the global local’, Environment, Vol. 4, No. 3, pp.13–23.

Kousky, C. and Schneider, S.H. (2003) ‘Global climate policy: will cities lead the way?’, Climate Policy, Vol. 3, pp.359–372.

Lankao, P.R. (2007a) ‘How do local governments in Mexico city manage global warming?’, Local Environment, Vol. 12, No. 5, pp.519–535.

Lankao, P.R. (2007b) ‘Are we missing the point? Particularities of urbanization, sustainability and carbon emissions in Latin American cities’, Environment and Urbanization, Vol. 19, pp.159–175.

Lankao, P.R. and Tribbia, J.L. (2009) ‘Assessing patterns of vulnerability, adaptive capacity and resilience across urban centres’, Paper presented at the World Bank 5th Urban Symposium on Climate Change, Marseille.

Ligeti, E., Penney, J. and Wieditz, I. (2007) Cities Preparing for Climate Change: A Study of Six Urban Regions, Clean Air Partnership, Toronto.

Lindseth, G. (2005) ‘Local level adaptation to climate change: discursive strategies in the Norwegian context’, Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp.61–84.

Lowe, A., Foster, J. and Winkelman, S. (2009) Ask the Climate Question: Adapting to Climate Change Impacts in Urban Regions, Center for Clean Air Policy.

Marengo, J.A. (2008) ‘Water and climate change’, Estudos Avançados, Vol. 22, No. 63, pp.83–96. McGranahan, G., Balk, D. and Anderson, B. (2007) ‘The rising tide: assessing the risks of climate

change and human settlements in low elevation coastal zones’, Environment and Urbanization, Vol. 19, No. 1, pp.17–37.

52 R.D.A. Martins and L.C. Ferreira

Moser, S.C. (2009) ‘Governance and the art of overcoming barriers to adaptation’, IHDP Update, No. 3, pp.31–36.

Mukheibir, P. and Ziervogel, G. (2007) ‘Developing a municipal adaptation plan (MAP) for climate change: the city of Cape Town’, Environment and Urbanization, Vol. 19, No. 1, pp.143–158.

Mukheibir, P. and Ziervogel, G. (2009) ‘Developing a municipal adaptation plan (MAP) for climate change: the City of Cape Town’, in Bicknell, J., Dodman, D. and Satterthwaite, D. (Eds.): Adapting Cities to Climate Change: Understanding and Addressing the Development Challenges, pp.271–290, Earthscan, London.

Muller, M. (2009) ‘Adapting to climate change: water management for urban resilience’, in Bicknell, J., Dodman, D. and Satterthwaite, D. (Eds.): Adapting Cities to Climate Change: Understanding and Addressing the Development Challenges, pp.291–309, Earthscan, London.

Naess, L., Bang, G., Eriksen, S. and Vevatne, J. (2005) ‘Institutional adaptation to climate change: flood responses at the municipal level in Norway’, Global Environmental Change, Vol. 15, pp.125–138.

Okereke, C., Bulkeley, H. and Schroeder, H. (2009) ‘Conceptualizing climate governance beyond the international regime’, Global Environmental Politics, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp.58–78.

Parry, M.L., Canziani, O.F., Palutikof, J.P., van der Linden, P.J. and Hanson, C.E. (Eds.) (2007) Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

Parzen, J. (2008) ‘Lessons learned: creating the Chicago climate action plan’, available at http://www.chicagoclimate.org (accessed on 08 March 2010).

Patwardhan, A., Downing, T., Leary, N. and Wilbanks, T. (2009) ‘Towards an integrated agenda for adaptation research: theory, practice and policy’, Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, Vol. 1, pp.219–225.

Prasad, N., Ranghieri, F., Shah, F., Trohanis, Z., Kessler, E. and Sinha, R. (2009) Climate Resilient Cities: A Primer on Reducing Vulnerability to Disasters, World Bank, Washington DC.

Puppim de Oliveira, J.A. (2009) ‘The implementation of climate change related policies at the subnational level: an analysis of three countries’, Habitat International, Vol. 33, pp.253–259.

Roberts, D. (2008) ‘Thinking globally, acting locally – institutionalizing climate change at the local government level in Durban, South Africa’, Environment and Urbanization, Vol. 20, No. 2, pp.521–537.

Robinson, P.J. and Gore, C.D. (2005) ‘Barriers to Canadian municipal response to climate change’, Canadian Journal of Urban Research, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp.102–120.

Rudel, T.K. (2008) ‘Meta-analyses of case-studies: a method for studying regional and global environmental change’, Global Environmental Change, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp.18–25.

Satterthwaite, D. (2008). Climate Change and Urbanization: Effects and Implications for Urban Governance, United Nations Expert Group Meeting on Population Distribution, Urbanization, Internal Migration and Development, UN/POP/EGMURB/2008/16, New York.

Satterthwaite, D., Huq, S., Pelling, M., Reid, H. and Lankao, P.R. (2007) ‘Adapting to climate change in urban areas: the possibilities and constraints in low-and middle-income nations’, Discussion Paper No. 1, International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED), London.

Satterthwaite, D., Huq, S., Pelling, M., Reid, H. and Lankao, P.R. (2009) ‘Adapting to climate change in urban areas: the possibilities and constraints in low-and middle-income nations’, in Bicknell, J., Dodman, D. and Satterthwaite, D. (Eds.): Adapting Cities to Climate Change: Understanding and Addressing the Development Challenges, pp.3–50, Earthscan, London.

Schroeder, H. and Bulkeley, H. (2009) ‘Global cities and the governance of climate change: what is the role of law in cities?’, Fordham Urban Law Journal, Vol. 36, No. 2, pp.313–359.

Opportunities and constraints for local and subnational climate change policy 53

Solomon, S., Qin, D., Manning, M., Chen, Z., Marquis, M., Averyt, K.B., Tignor, M. and Miller, H.L. (Eds.) (2007) Climate Change 2007 – The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

Storbjörk, S. (2007) ‘Governing climate adaptation in the local arena: challenges of risk management and planning in Sweden’, Local Environment, Vol. 12, No. 5, pp.457–469.

Tanner, T., Mitchell, T., Polack, E. and Guenther, B. (2009) ‘Urban governance for adaptation: assessing climate change resilience in ten Asian cities’, IDS Working Paper 315, Institute for Development Studies (IDS), Brighton.

Wheeler, S. (2008) ‘State and municipal climate change plans: the first generation’, Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 74, No. 4, pp.481–495.

Wilbanks, T.J. and Kates, R.W. (1999) ‘Global change in local places: how scales matters’, Climatic Change, Vol. 43, pp.601–628.

Wilbanks, T.J., Lankao, P.R., Bao, M., Berkhout, F., Cairncross, S., Ceron, J-P., Kapshe, M., Muir-Wood, R. and Zapata-Marti, R. (2007) ‘Industry, settlement and society’, in Parry, M., et al. (Eds.): Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, pp.357–390, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Wilson, E. (2006) ‘Adapting to climate change at the local level: the spatial planning response’, Local Environment, Vol. 11, No. 6, pp.609–625.

Zahran, S., Grover, H., Brody, S.D. and Vedlitz, A. (2008) ‘Risk, stress and capacity’, Urban Affairs Review, Vol. 43, No. 4, pp.447–474.