Abstract

Research on urban climate action has identified a broad range of potential factors explaining why and how local governments decide to tackle climate change. However, empirical evidence linking such factors in order to explain actual urban climate action has so far been mixed. To address this roadblock, our paper relies on a novel approach, postulating that different configurations of factors may lead to the same outcome (“equifinality”), through a qualitative comparative analysis (QCA). It is based on an available data set of local climate mitigation plans in 885 European cities. We find that urban climate action is systematically associated with four qualitatively different configurations of factors, each with its own consistent narrative (“networker cities”, “green cities”, “lighthouse cities”, “fundraising cities”). Crucially, some factors play a positive role in some configurations, a negative in others, and no role in further configurations (e.g., whether a city is located in a country with supportive national climate policies). This confirms that there is no single explanation for urban climate action. Achieving greater robustness in empirical research about urban climate action may thus require a shift, both conceptual and methodological, to the interactions between factors, allowing for different explanations in different contexts.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call