David J. Gordon

Between local innovation and global impact: cities, networks, and the governance of climate change

Global climate governance conducted in settings such as the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), Major Economies Forum, and Group of Twenty (G20) has proven incapable, to date, of generating an effective response. Greenhouse gas emissions have steadily increased since the issue was added to the global agenda in the early 1990s and prospects appear slim for a single, all-encompassing international legal agreement. Outside the formal regime, however, there are signs of dynamism as non-nation state actors engage in a variety of climate governance experiments. Cities, and city-networks such as the C40 Climate Leadership Group, represent important sources of innovation in the broader system of global climate governance: they challenge prevailing norms regarding who should govern climate change, and how coordinated governance responses can be generated. This paper presents a brief history of the C40, and assesses, drawing on ideas from network theory, some of the opportunities and limitations of networked climate governance. Recognizing that cities, and city-networks, exist within a broader multi-level governance context, the paper concludes with some thoughts related to updating Canadian federal climate policy in order to leverage and enable innovative city-network governance initiatives, address gaps in current federal climate policy, and link climate change to other, pressing issues, on the urban agenda.

The Politics of Accountability in Networked Urban Climate Governance

Cities are increasingly seen as essential components of the global response to climate change: setting targets, taking action, and rendering themselves accountable to global audiences for their efforts. Why cities are making themselves globally accountable in the absence of compulsion or obligation, and what it means for cities to operate simultaneously as global and locally accountable actors, constitute important puzzles for scholars of global climate politics. In this article I set out the basic parameters of this phenomenon, and offer a conceptual framework with which to parse the politics of accountability in networked urban climate governance. I apply this framework to identify three distinct forms of accountability present in the C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group: an external politics of recognition; a network politics of ordering, and; an internal politics of translation. The article explores each for their distinct political processes, orientation, and power dynamics, and offers some propositions with respect to how they interact, and what it means both locally and globally when cities make themselves globally accountable.

The orchestration of global urban climate governance: conducting power in the post-Paris climate regime

ABSTRACT Cities have come to play an important role in the global governance of climate change, and are increasingly recognized as a crucial component of the post-Paris climate regime. Based in part on their jurisdictional authority, shared commitment to action and disdain for negotiations, there is considerable optimism that cities can meaningfully contribute to the creation of an effective bottom-up global response. Focusing on the processes through which cities themselves are being steered towards particular actions and objectives, attention is directed towards the recent explosion of efforts to engender coordinated efforts and activities between cities through the conceptual lens of orchestration. The practice of orchestration is unpacked, and the importance of identifying who orchestrates, how, and in the service of which/whose objectives is highlighted. Thus, analysis is oriented towards the politics and power dynamics of orchestration, and a step is taken towards critically assessing the promise and potential of ongoing activities in the realm of global urban climate governance.

Lament for a network? Cities and networked climate governance in Canada

There is substantial evidence that the global governance of climate change must pass through cities. While formal networks offer cities a means of generating effects that extend beyond their own borders, it remains unclear as to whether such networks can address collective action barriers and implementation gaps. City-networks, after all, are limited in their efforts to govern and must rely on information, service provision, and soft forms of coercion if they are to steer their members past these considerable challenges. This article contributes to extant efforts to assess their ability to do so by addressing two gaps in the literature. First, the article focuses on the Partners for Climate Protection (PCP), a city-network that has received little attention to date. Second, through analysis of two Canadian cities (Toronto and Winnipeg), the article provides an empirical illustration of the limitations of network authority and influence, and offers some thoughts on what this means for networked urban climate governance in Canada and beyond.

An Uneasy Equilibrium: The Coordination of Climate Governance in Federated Systems

With the prospects for reaching a binding international treaty on emissions mitigation seemingly remote, global climate governance in the near to mid-term future is likely to rely on bottom-up accretion of domestic efforts and initiatives. This opens up new possibilities but also raises questions about the ability of states to produce collective action internally. This is especially so in federated systems where shared jurisdictional authority and divergent interests present barriers to coordinated action. While political will, leadership, and public pressure are necessary conditions, each prioritizes the “whether” and marginalizes the “how.” This article focuses on the latter, exploring how domestic climate governance emerges from the intersection of three archetypal modes of coordination—coercion, competition, and collaboration—and arguing that bringing and holding together these three modes is essential to achieve, and sustain effective coordinated governance. Two cases—Canada and Australia—each with a common coordination challenge but divergent coordination outcomes, illustrate the analytic leverage that can be gained by adopting this approach.

Urban transformative potential in a changing climate

The SDGs and CitiesIPCC offer an unprecedented opportunity for urban transformation, but bold, integrated action to address the constraints imposed by economic, cultural and political dynamics is needed. We move beyond a narrow, technocentric view and identify five key knowledge pathways to catalyse urban transformation.