Locating Cities and Their Governments in Multi-Level Sustainability Governance

A SHIFT towards interest-driven, opportunity-based and more voluntary actions by combining bottom-up with top-down elements (Falkner, 2016).Interactive learning and experimentation at different levels of global governance have become highly important, and these complex global interactions are increasingly regarded not as obstacles but as opportunities for innovation and interactive learning (Sovacool, 2011).Global climate governance relates not only to the legal system of the climate regime but also to various public and private initiatives at different scales and across sectors.Scholars studying the complex multi-actor and multi-sector characteristics of the system have therefore begun to conceptualize global multi-level climate governance as an opportunity structure for the generation and diffusion of climate-related innovation.The topic of this special issues is climate governance within a multi-level and multi-sectoral global system.The work argues that global climate governance today aims essentially to activate the dynamic potential of each level of the global governance system, the level of world regions as well as the level of provinces and local communities.Horizontal peer-to-peer learning between countries, cities and regions, as well as vertical up-scaling of best practice, has created a dynamic of change.The cross-sectoral approach has become important as far as the mobilizing of economic interests (e.g. in the construction sector) and the use of co-benefits is concerned.This special issue intends to offer a better understanding of the nature and variety of, and linkages between, initiatives taken and governance functions delivered within the broader 'climate governance landscape ' (Betsill et al., 2015).It analyses various climate governance activities in the European Union (EU), India and China through a systemic perspective.The EU may be regarded as the strongest regional sub-system of the global system, although the BRICS countries of China and India play a comparable role, as countries both with a similar scope and with explicit multi-level climate policy activities.The systematic dimension of global climate governance is described in the introductory article 'Multi-level climate governance as a global system' by Martin Jnicke.The author analyses the potential of the global climate governance system, which is characterized by a multiplicity of access points and incentives for innovation and interactive learning.It is regarded as a 'multi-impulse-system', where the sum of even weak impulses from different parts of the system can play the role of a strong instrument.The global multi-level climate governance structure is also characterized by a specific global knowledge base and a global policy arena, allowing for climate-related agenda-setting and the mobilization of interests at each level.It is taken as an opportunity structure for ambitious innovation-based climate strategies based on interactive lesson-drawing from best practice.The lesson to be learned at all levels of the system is the potential for economic co-benefits related to the socio-technical system of clean-energy innovation and the global clean-energy market.The following article, 'The EU system of multi-level climate governance', by Martin Jnicke and Rainer Quitzow provides an overview of the regional structure of the global climate governance system.The authors understand the EU as a system where 'multi-level reinforcement' has been observed several times and which can be considered as a leader by example in global climate governance.They point to the fact that the EU has the world's highest share of green electricity and since 1990 has made the largest reduction to its greenhouse gas emissions.They attribute the EU's relatively successful performance in climate and energy governance to two main factors: (1) multi-level reinforcement and (2) the mobilization of economic interests at different levels of governance through low-carbon industrial policy.While the multi-impulse system has fostered

Achieving the Sustainable Development Goals Requires Transdisciplinary Innovation at the Local Scale

This paper presents an overview of key global developments relevant to local climate and sustainable energy action, and leading the transition to a sustainable energy future. In light of the urgency and necessity for such action, the role of local governments in cities and towns is explored, considering the need for strong leadership, direction and accelerated action. Local climate and energy action are intertwined with sustainable development, embedded in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). It is unfolding through high impact global initiatives that support local action such as the Global 100% Renewable Energy Cities and Regions Network and the Global Covenant of Mayors for Climate & Energy (GCoM), as well as through city networks such as ICLEI that provide policy and technical assistance, deal with advocacy, and support integrated Measuring, Reporting and Verifying (MRV) of local action. People and leadership, responsibility, innovation, resilience, security and finance are a few key words illustrating how the sustainable energy transition is unfolding today. Cities of all sizes and their local governments are increasingly responding to the call for climate neutrality at the latest by 2050. They are using ICLEI’s GreenClimateCities™ program, with its step-by-step methodology, tools and guidance, to shape their communities’ future. By defining their sustainable energy transition roadmap and finding innovative approaches, local governments are making their cities and towns liveable, resilient and climate neutral. Here the underlying premise is access to affordable, reliable, clean, sustainable energy which is essential for sustainable development, quality of life and a just transition in a changing world where climate change and limited resources frame the context. The transition, when well-managed, offers multiple benefits, such as improved air quality and associated health impacts, reduced and avoided greenhouse gas emissions, and new (local) employment opportunities created, to mention but a few. In combination, these make this transition so relevant and interesting to different types of stakeholders at community level. Mayors, councillors and senior local government leaders have understood this, and are re-defining and implementing the sustainable energy transition in their governmental operations and communities. Yet, local governments acting in their territories—cities and towns of all sizes—do not work in isolation. They are embedded in a national context and are key action partners for other levels of government (subnational state or region, province, national), as closest to the local community and closest to where the action should be. Each level of government should have a clear, specific mandate and role to address climate and energy. However, practice often does not reflect this crucial component, with energy mostly remaining a national responsibility. Only by exploring all forms of renewable energy, including decentralised generation and use, can we achieve a climate neutral future. A constructive approach is needed to define what this could look like, exploring relevant scenarios and fully committing to move away from burning fossil fuels. The Talanoa Dialogues were launched in 2018 to address these issues, among others, through exploring improved multilevel governance and vertical integration. Here we addressed three key questions: “where are we”, “where do we need to go”, and “how do we get there”. Moving from the unique Local Government Climate Roadmap—a major global climate advocacy process—that has helped to set the scene, the focus is now on exploring multilevel governance as a cooperation model between all levels of government, and further mobilising local governments to scale up local climate and energy action. This complex space and relevant developments are addressed in this paper.

Private philanthropic foundations—nongovernmental, nonprofit organizations with assets provided by donors for socially useful purposes—have become key political actors in global sustainability governance. Their collective efforts amount to over USD 112 billion for the implementation of the United Nations (UNs)’s ambitious plan to deliver on seventeen interconnected Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This corresponds to about a quarter of governmental contribution through official development assistance for the same purposes. Many of these foundations implicitly or explicitly aim to foster global justice, through, for example, empowering women, reducing inequalities, and promoting democracy. They thus act as justice agents shaping the substance and practice of justice in global sustainability governance. But what does this direction of private money into supporting global justice norms really mean? This question deserves scrutiny, especially against a context of diverse and contested meanings of justice and because philanthropy—beyond an act of giving—is often an exercise of power. Using critical discourse analysis of texts produced by selected foundations that are key funders of the UN Sustainable Development Agenda, this paper examines how private foundations frame global justice and with what implications for sustainability governance.

Focusing on cities in the European Arctic, this book consolidates research on sustainable development, local and urban governance, and transnational cooperation in the region. It examines to what extent there is transnational cooperation between urban areas in remote locations and how it can be enhanced to better align with global sustainable development policies to successfully implement goals such as the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Paris Climate Agreement. Based on field research in seven cities in the European Arctic, Rovaniemi, Kolari, Nuuk, Akureyri, Tromsø, Kiruna, and Luleå, the authors explain why approaches to sustainable urban development differ between geographies, how policies relate to other local and global strategies, and to what degree the European Arctic is normative for remote regions at large. This book contributes to important conceptual debates on local governance and transnational cooperation by examining the benefits and potential issues of applying theoretical models of multi-actor engagement and participation in isolated populations. It argues that the participation of local actors in decision processes may encourage a better harmonisation of sustainable urban development approaches in the European Arctic and will have a greater impact at the global level if aligned transnationally. This book will be relevant to researchers, social scientists, policymakers, practitioners, and NGOs in the fields of global governance, sustainable development, sustainability research, and environmental studies. The Open Access version of this book, available at https://www.taylorfrancis.com, has been made available under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives (CC-BY-NC-ND) 4.0 license.

Abstract: There exists a knowledge gap in the literature on how international actors address artificial intelligence (AI) in international sustainability governance. By addressing this gap and bringing a critical perspective, this paper aims to enrich discussions on AI within international relations. First, this paper shows that the development and deployment of AI-based technologies are mainly seen as an opportunity to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in international politics, while their drawbacks are only considered to a limited extent. Second, this paper refers to the tendency to rely on AI to address societal challenges that are considered too complex for humans to comprehend as potential "AI solutionism." It defines this approach as being based on an insufficient understanding of the operation and socio-environmental impacts of AI, arguing that these two aspects should be thoroughly analyzed by actors in global sustainability governance.

Purpose This contribution argues that there is a fundamental problem for the multi-level governance (MLG) approach in that what the approach is trying to explain has never been fully agreed by the vast group of scholarship that references it. The chapter then examines and proposes that ideas and concepts from network governance, principal–agent (PA) and learning can provide the necessary micro foundations for the MLG approach. Methodology/approach The chapter examines and critiques the original MLG formulations and the later efforts at elaboration. It then reviews the literature and concepts for three public policy approaches that have been associated with European governance to see how core explanations can be elaborated upon in a multi-level context: network governance, principal–agent (PA) and learning. Findings This contribution suggests that co-ordination, and the resources that help maintain this co-ordination, is the key dependent variable that underpins the MLG approach. With multiple principals and multiple agents, operating at a number of levels of analysis, direct authority and control is harder to evoke. The key explanatory variable underpinning this MLG co-ordination is learning by the participants. Research implications Researchers need to concentrate both their theoretical and empirical efforts in understanding the conditions that support multi-level governance and that sustain its effort. Practical implications The contribution outlines some of the key practical questions that policy-makers must face. Can they manage resources and induce learning from all the relevant public and private stakeholders to engage in the MLG effort? Social implications Not only does an effective MLG process involve engaging a wide range of societal stakeholders, these stakeholders have to be persuaded to invest effort in learning about the nature of the governance system, the challenges of the policy problem and the implications of the efforts to resolve these problems. Originality/value This chapter isolates the fundamental lacuna at the heart of the MLG project and offers academics and practitioners a conceptual lens for building a clearer analytical structure for studying MLG.

Cohesion Policy is a major investment policy of the EU, aiming at reducing disparities between regions. This policy’s key specificity is its regional and multilevel governance approach, mobilising stakeholders from several layers of government (e.g., EU, national, regional, local) for its design and implementation. Analysing its contribution to digitalisation can thus fuel wider reflections on the territorial dimension of innovation, and more specifically on the role that public policies can play to develop it. Indeed, Cohesion Policy has a long history of support to digitalisation, i.e., the process of diffusion of Information and Communication Technologies and their uses for diverse applications. Since the 1990s and 2000s, Cohesion Policy has highlighted the importance of a holistic approach to digitalisation, going beyond sole technological aspects. The prioritisation of digitalisation within Cohesion Policy has also been consecrated in recent strategies, such as the Digital Agenda, and through a gradual increase of dedicated funding. Several rationales and expected benefits exist for a regionalised and multilevel governance approach towards digitalisation. The ability to adapt to local contexts, especially for less developed regions, and the potential to bridge top-down with bottom-up initiatives, are for instance notable assets. In practice, the Cohesion Policy framework has integrated regulatory mechanisms and other initiatives that could help to reap these benefits. During the 2014–2020 period, it notably includes the concentration of funding and specific requirements for ICT projects, strategic approaches/methodologies (Smart Specialisation Strategies—S3) and territorialised instruments (e.g., Integrated Territorial Investments—ITI). First empirical evidence from the literature and examples of specific projects allows identifying successes and limits on how the framework of Cohesion Policy helps to secure the benefits of a multilevel governance and regional approach towards digitalisation. A key contribution of its framework is its ability to favour strategy-building and partnerships between stakeholders at different levels, for instance through ITI or S3. Success conditions for digitalisation-related activities also include administrative capacity and the quality of strategic planning. However, the less developed regions that could benefit the most from Cohesion Policy’s intervention for digitalisation may lack these favourable conditions. It is hence critical to support capacity building to fully secure benefits for all regions.

Purpose This chapter examines the relations between local civil society organizations and the European Union as a way to assess the functioning of multi-level governance in the field of employment policy. Methodology/approach The chapter draws on primary organizational survey data collected in the EU FP7 funded project entitled ‘Youth, Unemployment and Exclusion in Europe’ (Younex, grant agreement n.216111) and for the approach it places itself in the tradition of critical civil society–EU relations research. Findings For more than two decades, civil society has occupied a prominent position in the rhetoric of European Union multi-level governance. The EU rhetoric conceives of the inclusion of civil society in policy making as a necessary step towards linking the various levels of government (from local to European) as well as the different societal and institutional actors implied by a multilevel governance approach. Moreover, the rhetoric of civil society also serves the goal of tackling the multi-faceted issues of a democratic ‘deficitaire’ EU. This chapter, however, offers a critical appraisal of such a rhetoric by confirming what other studies had unveiled: access to European institutions requires substantial human (‘capital in knowledge’) and economic resources and as such the link existing between the European Union and local civil society organizations is a very thin one, one which is limited to a very few, rich in resources, organizations. The rhetoric of civil society as the connector of levels and types of actors in the multi-level governance approach promoted by the EU should thus be mitigated. The European policy process should be conceived of more pragmatically as an arena where European institutions and member states still act as gate keepers that select and decide which societal interest and voice should have a place within the European agenda. What consequences this has for the overall democratic quality of the European policy process is an issue which should concern us all. Research implications The chapter allows scrutinizing horizontal and vertical dimensions of multi-level governance while expanding knowledge on civil society at both local and European level. Although multi-level governance has become a popular concept it still lacks a consistent empirical assessment, which is something the data discussed here do. Thus, the chapter has implications for research on civil society and citizens’ engagement in public affairs but it is also relevant for scholars working on EU policy-making issues. Practical implications Civil society organizations could contribute improving the quality of policies at European level as well as strengthening EU legitimacy to rule. The findings contribute explaining which factors limit civil society access to EU institutions and how these could be overcome. Societal implications The chapter corroborates critical views of the EU–civil society relations, the findings suggest that the EU should work with further commitment to offer local civil society organizations and citizens groups real opportunities for their voices and expertise to be heard and considered. Originality/value The chapter adopts a critical view of EU–civil society relations challenging the EU multi-level governance rhetoric and discusses the features obstructing civil society actors’ engagement with policy making at the EU level.

Philanthropic foundations are key players in global sustainability governance. This paper explores the legitimation strategies these foundations use to justify their actions and positions in the sustainable development community. By combining Theo van Leeuwen’s legitimation framework with our novel analytical justice framework, we offer a new tool to analyse hard-to-research actors. Analysing data from 41 foundation websites, we find that foundations emphasize Global Egalitarian Cosmopolitanism in their values and objectives to align with global sustainability discourses. However, Libertarian ideas dominate when discussing programs and founders. This indicates there may be internal conflicts within foundations over the relationship between extreme wealth accumulation required for global philanthropy and sustainability objectives. In turn, this has implications for how foundations position themselves as agents of justice in sustainable development. While discourse analysis provides valuable insights into philanthropic legitimation strategies, further research is needed to fully understand how justice intersects with organizational decision-making.

Scrutinizing environmental governance in a digital age: New ways of seeing, participating, and intervening

هدف: رویکرد حکمروایی خوب روستایی با تأکید بر سه رکن اصلی دولت، بخش خصوصی و جامعة مدنی به حضور فعال و اثرگذار این ارکان در سایة مشارکت، شفافیت، پاسخ گویی، قانون‌مندی، عدالت، اجماع گرایی، مسؤولیت پذیری،کارآیی و توسعة انسانی تأکید دارد. هدف از این پژوهش، بررسی جایگاه مدیریت روستایی مبتنی بر رویکرد حکمروایی خوب در توسعة پایدار روستایی «مقایسة بخش مرکزی کوهدشت و بخش لواسانات شمیرانات» است. روش: پژوهش از نوع توصیفی- تحلیلی بوده و روش پژوهش از نظر هدف کاربردی و از نظر نحوة گردآوری داده ها، پیمایشی است. جامعة آماری؛ شامل خانوارهای روستایی دو منطقة مورد مطالعه با 27 روستای نمونه و 280 خانوار است. ابزار گردآوری داده ها از نوع پرسش نامه بوده که به صورت تصادفی در روستاهای نمونه تکمیل شد. به منظور تحلیل داده ها و آزمون فرضیه ها نیز از مدل ویکور و آزمون های آنوا توکی و رگرسیون چند متغیره استفاده شده است. یافته‌ها: مطابق یافته های مدل ویکور، مدیریت مبتنی بر رویکرد حکمروایی خوب و سطح پایداری سکونت گاه ها در دو منطقة مورد مطالعه از وضعیت بسیار متفاوتی برخوردار است؛ به طوری که در هر دو منطقه، روستاهایی که از وضعیت حکمروایی خوبی برخوردارند، پایداری بهتری نیز دارند. هم‌چنین، تحلیل رگرسیون چند متغیره، نشان دهندة تأثیر و ارتباط معنی دار بین مؤلفه های حکمروایی خوب و توسعة پایدار روستایی است. محدودیت ها: محدودیت های این پژوهش شامل وسیع‌بودن حجم نمونه و جامعة مورد مطالعه و تطابق مدل نظری پژوهش با مدل تجربی آن بود. راه‌کارهای عملی: درنظرگرفتن رویکرد حکمروایی خوب در نظام مدیریت روستایی می تواند موجب سرعت بخشی روند توسعة پایدار روستایی شده و از ناپایداری سکونت گاه ها جلوگیری کند. اصالت و ارزش: این مقاله ضمن مقایسة تطبیقی دو منطقه با نظام مدیریت، سطح حکمروایی و پایداری متفاوت، می تواند کاستی‌های موجود در ساختار مدیریت یک‌پارچة کنونی روستاهای کشور را واضح تر نشان دهد.

This contribution recalls the existing interdependencies across levels of government and elaborates on the multi-level governance gaps framework to identify coordination and capacity reinforcement tools to improve public policy outcomes in decentralised contexts. It details how the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development has adopted this approach. This paper then focuses on one of the tools used by countries and regions – Contracts. Contracts across levels of government, though not exempt of drawbacks, can favour information-sharing and mutual understanding as to how to address common policy priorities, while reducing the transaction costs of policy implementation; and generate trust between public actors for their future endeavours. The last section underlines some more general observations and questions like the use of multi-level governance approach to preserve the ‘biodiversity’ of regions. The note concludes with the need to re-insert relationships with people and not only among public authorities in a ‘new generation’ multi-level governance framework.

This article critically examined Indonesia’s policies to mitigate and adapt to climate change within the global climate regime and local political dynamics. A qualitative method and a multilevel governance approach were utilized, emphasizing the dispersion of power both vertically among various levels of governance and horizontally among different quasi-governmental and non-governmental organizations and actors. The analysis unveiled that Indonesia’s climate change policies have involved supranational governance facilitated by global-level regimes and institutions. The government has played a strategic role in aligning itself with these global environmental regimes by implementing laws and policy measures to limit greenhouse gas emissions, control deforestation rates, and address forest degradation. Achieving these governance tasks involved active participation from local governments, municipalities, and non-state actors such as businesses and the community.

Engaging the Public and the Private in Global Sustainability Governance