Harriet Bulkeley

Local Government and the Governing of Climate Change in Germany and the UK

This paper argues that, in order to address the challenges of climate change, attention needs to be focused not only at the international level but also on how climate protection policy is taking shape locally. It provides a comparative analysis of local climate change policy in Germany and the UK. By moving the focus from an analysis of the formal competencies of local government to the multiple modes of governing through which climate protection is taking place, the similarities between the two countries are brought into view. In both cases, actions are concentrated in the energy sphere and municipalities are increasingly deploying self-governing and enabling approaches to undertaken emissions reductions. The paper argues that the impacts of EU policies, financial crises and the political challenges of implementing climate change policies are changing the capacity for local intervention, with potentially significant consequences for medium- and long-term goals for climate protection.

Looking Back and Thinking Ahead: A Decade of Cities and Climate Change Research

To many observers of climate change politics, 1997 was an important milestone because of the completion of the Kyoto Protocol negotiations. With considerably less fanfare, 1997 was also the year in...

Cities, Europeanization and Multi-Level Governance: Governing Climate Change Through Transnational Municipal Networks

This article focuses on a variant of multi-level governance and Europeanization, i.e. the transnational networking of local authorities. Focusing on local climate change policy, the article examines how transnational municipal networks (TMNs) govern in the context of multi-level European governance. We find that TMNs are networks of pioneers for pioneers.

Transnational Climate Governance

In this article we examine the emergence and implications of transnational climate-change governance. We argue that although the study of transnational relations has recently been renewed alongside a burgeoning interest in issues of global governance, the nature of transnational governance has to date received less attention. We contend that transnational governance occurs when networks operating in the transnational political sphere authoritatively steer constituents toward public goals. In order to stimulate a more systematic study of the diversity and significance of this phenomenon, the article develops a typology based on the actors involved and their authoritypublic, private, or hybridand the primary governance functions performed in order to steer network constituentsinformation-sharing, capacity building and implementation, or rule-setting. A comparative discussion of transnational governance networks for climate change illustrates each category and the value of the typology in assessing the multiple mechanisms through which transnational governance occurs. In conclusion, we suggest that our typology provides a useful starting point for future research and reflect on the implications for the study of global affairs.

Conceptualizing Climate Governance Beyond the International Regime

The governance of climate change has traditionally been conceived as an issue of international co-operation and considered through the lens of regime analysis. Increasingly, scholars of global governance have highlighted the multiple parallel initiatives involving a range of actors at different levels of governance through which this issue is being addressed. In this paper, we argue that this phenomenon warrants a re-engagement with some of the conceptual cornerstones of international studies. We highlight the conceptual challenges posed by the increasing involvement of non-nation-state actors (NNSAs) in the governance of climate change and explore the potential for drawing from alternative theoretical traditions to address these challenges. Specifically, the paper combines insights from neo-Gramscian and governmentality perspectives as a means of providing the critical space required to generate deeper understanding of: (a) the nature of power in global governance; (b) the relationship between public and private authority; (c) the dynamics between structure and agency; and (d) the rationalities and practices of governance.

Revisiting the urban politics of climate change

In our 2005 paper, Rethinking Sustainable Cities, we made a case for the increasing significance of climate change in the urban politics of sustainability. Taking a multilevel governance perspective, we argued that the ‘urban’ governance of climate protection was not confined to a local arena or to the actions of the state, but rather was orchestrated through the interrelations between global, national and local actors across state/non-state boundaries. We revisit these arguments and examine their validity in the light of the rapidly changing landscape of urban responses to climate change and the growing academic literature in this field. We consider in turn: the ways in which climate change is shaping urban agendas; the utility of multilevel governance perspectives for understanding this phenomenon; and the extent to which we can identify a ‘new’ politics of urban climate change governance and its consequent implications for the development of theory and practice in this field.

Navigating the Anthropocene: Improving Earth System Governance

The United Nations conference in Rio de Janeiro in June is an important opportunity to improve the institutional framework for sustainable development. Science assessments indicate that human activities are moving several of Earths sub-systems outside the range of natural variability typical for the previous 500,000 years (1, 2). Human societies must now change course and steer away from critical tipping points in the Earth system that might lead to rapid and irreversible change (3). This requires fundamental reorientation and restructuring of national and international institutions toward more effective Earth system governance and planetary stewardship.

Urban Sustainability: Learning from Best Practice?

In the quest for sustainable development, numerous examples of ‘best practice’ have been created and circulated in national and international arenas. Yet despite the vast array of examples, demonstration projects, case studies, and the like, little is known about the ways in which best practices are produced and used, and their role in processes of policymaking. Focusing on best practice for urban sustainability, the author argues that, rather than conceptualising its role and impact in terms of policy transfer or lesson drawing, the creation, dissemination, and use of best practice can be better understood as a discursive process, in which not only is new knowledge created about a policy problem, but the nature and interpretation of the policy problem itself are challenged and reframed. Drawing on insights from concepts of governmentality, the author argues that best practices are at once a political rationality and a governmental technology through which the policy problem of urban sustainability is framed and defined. Illustrations of the practice of best practice show how contradictions emerge between claims for general applicability and the need for policy actors to understand the contingencies of the process of urban sustainability, in order to enrol it for their own struggles over sustainability. The local stickiness of best practices points to the very real struggles that the rationalities of urban sustainability have in competing with other governmentalities which seek to shape urban futures.

Discourse Coalitions and the Australian Climate Change Policy Network

Ever since the agreement of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, climate change has become the most prominent global environmental issue on domestic political agendas. The author examines how a policy-network approach can contribute to the analysis of domestic climate change responses. Consideration is given to the role of advocacy coalitions and discourse coalitions within policy networks. It is argued that the discourse-coalition approach offers a useful explanation of the processes of coalition formation, interaction, and policy learning. Although it cannot alone explain the outcomes of the policy process, its emphasis on the dynamics of meaning, legitimacy, and knowledge as an essential part of policymaking can usefully be incorporated into an analysis of policy networks.

Governing climate change: the politics of risk society?

This paper examines how the politics of climate change have taken shape within Australia through the construction and contestation of concepts of obligation and responsibility. Beck’s risk society thesis offers a conceptual starting point from which to address questions concerning the nature of contemporary risk politics, and the paper examines its relevance and applicability in this case. While Beck’s theory provides insight into the nature of risk and directs attention to the ways in which notions of obligation and responsibility structure risk politics, it fails to engage with why, and how, particular definitions of risk and responsibility come to dominate the political arena. It is argued that in Australia the novel challenges climate change poses to the institutions of modernity have been negated through ensuing policy responses which have reinforced links between industry and government, and have defined climate responsibilities within existing relations of production and the spatio-temporal frameworks of modernity.