Editing IPCC:AR6/WGIII/Chapter-8 (section)

=== 8.5.1 Multi-level Governance ===

<div id="h2-23-siblings" class="h2-siblings"></div>

IPCC SR1.5 identified multi-level governance (see Glossary for full definition) as an enabling condition that facilitates systemic transformation consistent with keeping global temperatures below 1.5°C ( [[#IPCC--2018a|IPCC 2018a]] , pp. 18–19). The involvement of governance at multiple levels is necessary to enable cities to plan and implement emissions reductions targets ( ''high confidence'' ) ( [[#Seto--2021|Seto et al. 2021]] ) (Boxes 8.3 and 8.4). Further, regional, national, and international climate goals are most impactful when local governments are involved alongside higher levels, rendering urban areas key foci of climate governance more broadly ( ''high confidence'' ) ( [[#Fuhr--2018|Fuhr et al. 2018]] ; [[#Kern--2019|Kern 2019]] ; [[#Hsu--2020b|Hsu et al. 2020b]] ).

Since AR5, multi-level governance has grown in influence within the literature and has been defined as a framework for understanding the complex interaction of the many players involved in GHG generation and mitigation across geographic scales – the ‘vertical’ levels of governance from neighbourhoods to the national and international levels, and those ‘horizontal’ networks of non-state and subnational actors at various scales ( [[#Corfee-Morlot--2009|Corfee-Morlot et al. 2009]] ; Seto et al. 2014; [[#Castán%20Broto--2017b|Castán Broto 2017b]] ; [[#Fuhr--2018|Fuhr et al. 2018]] ; [[#Peng--2018|Peng and Bai 2018]] ; [[#Kern--2019|Kern 2019]] ), as well as the complex linkages between them ( [[#Vedeld--2021|Vedeld et al. 2021]] ). This more inclusive understanding of climate governance provides multiple pathways through which urban actors can engage in climate policy to reduce emissions.

<div id="8.5.1.1" class="h3-container"></div>

<span id="multi-level-multi-player-climate-governance-in-practice"></span>
==== 8.5.1.1 Multi-level, Multi-player Climate Governance in Practice ====

<div id="h3-17-siblings" class="h3-siblings"></div>

A multi-level, multi-player framework highlights both the opportunities and constraints on local autonomy to engage in urban mitigation efforts ( [[#Castán%20Broto--2017b|Castán Broto 2017b]] ; [[#Fuhr--2018|Fuhr et al. 2018]] ; [[#Vedeld--2021|Vedeld et al. 2021]] ). When multiple actors – national, regional, and urban policymakers, as well as non-state actors and civil society – work together to exploit the opportunities, it leads to the most impactful mitigation gains ( [[#Melica--2018|Melica et al. 2018]] ). This framework also highlights the multiple paths and potential synergies available to actors who wish to pursue mitigation policies despite not having a full slate of enabling conditions ( [[#Castán%20Broto--2017b|Castán Broto 2017b]] ; [[#Keller--2017|Keller 2017]] ; [[#Fuhr--2018|Fuhr et al. 2018]] ; [[#Hsu--2020b|Hsu et al. 2020b]] ,a; [[#Seto--2021|Seto et al. 2021]] ).

For example, Sections 8.4.3. and 8.4.5 highlight how instigating the electrification of urban energy systems requires a ‘layered’ approach to policy implementation across different levels of governance (see [[#8.4.3.1|Section 8.4.3.1]] for specific policy mechanisms associated with electrification), with cities playing a key role in setting standards, particularly through mechanisms like building codes ( [[#Hsu--2020c|Hsu et al. 2020c]] ; [[#Salvia--2021|Salvia et al. 2021]] ), as well as through facilitation between stakeholders (e.g., consumers, government, utilities) to advocate for zero-emissions targets ( [[#Linton--2021|Linton et al. 2021]] ; [[#Seto--2021|Seto et al. 2021]] ). Local governments can minimise trade-offs associated with electrification technologies by enabling circular economy practices and opportunities ( [[#Pan--2015|Pan et al. 2015]] ; [[#Gaustad--2018|Gaustad et al. 2018]] ; [[#Sovacool--2020|Sovacool et al. 2020]] ). These include public-private partnerships between consumers and producers, financial and institutional support, and networking for stakeholders like entrepreneurs, so as to increase accessibility and efficiency of recycling for consumers by providing a clear path from consumer waste back to the producers ( [[#Pan--2015|Pan et al. 2015]] ; [[#Prendeville--2018|Prendeville et al. 2018]] ; [[#Fratini--2019|Fratini et al. 2019]] ). Box 8.3 discusses the mitigation benefits of coordination between local and central government in the context of Shanghai’s GHG emissions reduction goals.

Still, there are constraints on urban autonomy that might limit urban mitigation influence. The capacity of subnational governments to autonomously pursue emissions reductions on their own depends on different political systems and other aspects of multi-level governance, such as innovation, legitimacy, and institutional fit, as well as the resources, capacity, and knowledge available to subnational technicians and other officials ( [[#Widerberg--2015|Widerberg and Pattberg 2015]] ; [[#Valente%20de%20Macedo--2016|Valente de Macedo et al. 2016]] ; [[#Green--2017|Green 2017]] ; [[#Roger--2017|Roger et al. 2017]] ). Financing is considered one of the most crucial facets of urban climate change mitigation. It is also considered one of the biggest barriers, given the limited financial capacities of local and regional governments (Sections 8.5.4 and 8.5.5).

When sufficient local autonomy is present, local policies have the ability to upscale to higher levels of authority, imparting influence at higher geographic scales. Established urban climate leaders with large institutional capacity can influence small and mid-sized cities, or other urban areas with less institutional capacity, to enact effective climate policies, by engaging with those cities through transnational networks and by adopting a public presence of climate leadership ( [[#Chan--2015|Chan et al. 2015]] ; [[#Kern--2019|Kern 2019]] ; [[#Seto--2021|Seto et al. 2021]] ) ( [[#8.5.3|Section 8.5.3]] ). Increasingly, subnational actors are also influencing their national and international governments through lobbying efforts that call on them to adopt more ambitious climate goals and provide more support for subnational GHG mitigation efforts ( [[#Linton--2021|Linton et al. 2021]] ; [[#Seto--2021|Seto et al. 2021]] ). These dynamics underscore the importance of relative local autonomy in urban GHG mitigation policy. They also highlight the growing recognition of subnational authorities’ role in climate change mitigation by national and international authorities.

The confluence of political will and policy action at the local level, and growing resources offered through municipal and regional networks and agreements, have provided a platform for urban actors to engage in international climate policy ( [[#8.5.3|Section 8.5.3]] ). This phenomenon is recognised in the Paris Agreement, which, for the first time in a multilateral climate treaty, referenced the crucial role subnational and non-state actors like local communities have in meeting the goals set forth in the agreement ( [[#UNFCCC--2015|UNFCCC 2015]] ). The Durban Platform for Enhanced Action ( [[#Widerberg--2015|Widerberg and Pattberg 2015]] ), as well as UN-Habitat’s NUA and the 2030 Development Agenda, are other examples of the international sphere elevating the local level to global influence ( [[#Fuhr--2018|Fuhr et al. 2018]] ). Another facet of local-to-global action is the emergence of International Cooperative Initiatives (ICIs) ( [[#Widerberg--2015|Widerberg and Pattberg 2015]] ). One such ICI, the City Hall Declaration, was signed alongside the Paris Agreement during the first Climate Summit for Local Leaders. Signatories included hundreds of local government leaders, in partnership with private sector representatives and NGOs, who pledged to enact the goals of the Paris Agreement through their own spheres of influence ( [[#Cities%20for%20Climate--2015|Cities for Climate 2015]] ). Similar Summits have been held at each subsequent UNFCCC COP ( [[#Hsu--2018|Hsu et al. 2018]] ). Like transnational climate networks, these platforms provide key opportunities to local governments to further their own mitigation goals, engage in knowledge transfer with other cities and regions, and shape policies at higher levels of authority ( [[#Cities%20for%20Climate--2015|Cities for Climate 2015]] ; [[#Castán%20Broto--2017b|Castán Broto 2017b]] ).

<div id="box-8.3:-coordination-of-fragmented-policymaking-for-low-carbon-urban-development:-example-from-shanghai,-china" class="h2-container box-container"></div>

<span id="box-8.3-coordination-of-fragmented-policymaking-for-low-carbon-urban-development-example-from-shanghai-china"></span>