Search

China has established three rounds of low-carbon pilot city initiatives. However, a gap exists between policy making and successful implementation, and the effects on greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction were found to be different among pilots. This paper considers the question of how low-carbon policies in cities can be implemented effectively and how policy combinations are adopted for GHG emissions reduction. It uses a mixed research approach, including Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) and field investigation in Pilot Y (situated in the southwest China). The results show that, first, financial support and monitoring systems are necessary conditions, while political leadership is a sufficient condition. This means that the absence of financial support or monitoring systems could lead to increased GHG emissions, while the presence of political leadership always promotes the reduction of GHG emissions but may not be sufficient on its own to achieve them. Second, the target responsibility system (TRS) – a system used by higher government levels to assess the policy implementation of lower government levels – and human resource mechanisms cannot effectively lead to the promotion of GHG emissions reduction. Finally, in the absence of TRS and human resource mechanisms, environmental information disclosure (EID) was found to effectively promote low-carbon urban development by encouraging public participation. This paper reveals the complexity of the implementation of low-carbon policies in cities, identifies the link between city-level and national action, and enriches the theoretical explanation of governance and low-carbon policy implementation gaps in China. Key policy insights China's low-carbon pilot city project is critical for reducing GHG emissions, however, the effects of the low-carbon pilot city programmes varied greatly. Financial support and monitoring systems are necessary conditions, while political leadership is a sufficient condition to achieve cities' GHG emissions reduction goals. Local low-carbon development is limited and not put into practice at the city level in China, in part because of the absence of financial support and limited political attention. This study highlights the key conditions of organizational behaviour at the meso-level, and enriches the theoretical explanation of environmental policy implementation gaps in China. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Urbanisation is truly a global phenomenon. Starting at 39% in 1980, the urbanisation level rose to 52% in 2011. Ongoing rapid urbanisation has led to increase in urban greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Urban climate change risks have also increased with increase in climate-induced extreme weather events and more low-income urban dwellers living in climate sensitive locations. Despite increased emissions, including GHGs and heightened climate change vulnerability, climate mitigation and adaptation actions are rare in the cities of developing countries. Cities are overwhelmed with worsening congestion, air pollution, crime, waste management, and unemployment problems. Lack of resources and capacity constraints are other factors that discourage cities from embarking on climate change mitigation and adaptation pathways. Given the multitude of problems faced, there is simply no appetite for stand-alone urban climate change mitigation and adaptation policies and programmes. Urban mitigation and adaptation goals will have to be achieved as co-benefits of interventions targeted at solving pressing urban problems and challenges. The paper identifies administratively simple urban interventions that can help cities solve some of their pressing service delivery and urban environmental problems, while simultaneously mitigating rising urban GHG emissions and vulnerability to climate change. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Abstract: Low carbon cities. What, exactly, are we talking about? Are we talking about lifestyles, activities, or enterprises? Are we talking about individual or group voluntary behavior change or a policy framework that seeks to encourage behavior change by regulatory force? Faced with an enormous literature that mixes related topics like sustainable development/climate change/energy conservation/low carbon, it is not surprising to hear about local governments’ or planners’ “climate change initiatives”. This paper describes/reflects on how officials in Broward County, Florida, are dealing with issues of awareness, governance, measurement, and instruments for challenges arising from the combined threats of energy depletion and climate change. The overriding objective of this paper is to provide some pith for the discussion of planning for low carbon cities. To this end, we describe and reflect on the planning management responses of Broward County, Florida, USA – as an illustrative local government – in dealing with climate change challenges (CCC), energy conservation (EC) and greenhouse gas reduction (GHG). Both description and reflection are important as it is primarily the latter that provides the critical perspective necessary for assessing both potential and effect. The paper is organized into five sections. The first two sections address the “contextual” questions raised above: what is the level of knowledge and/or awareness among the collection of planners and/or local governments; and, what are/is appropriate responses of different levels of government. In the next section, we review overall levels of knowledge and awareness of basic science and policy dimensions, with particular attention paid to (a version of the) US planning profession. This is followed by a discussion of “theoretical” prescriptions for actions at different levels of government. The third and fourth sections focus on Broward County. The third section describes the county and presents a current measurement of its carbon footprint (at least at the level to which it can be measured). The fourth section describes the operational response of Broward County government. The final section returns to the original questions of knowledge and appropriate types of responses and argues that while the Broward response is generally effective in certain aspects, the current policy paradigm contains both strengths and weaknesses, which are generally outlined and discussed. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]