Why Cities Adopt Climate Action Richard C. Feiock Local Governance - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Why Cities Adopt Climate Action

Richard C. Feiock Local Governance Research Lab

Florida State University

rfeicok@fsuc.edu

RCN Virtual Collaboratory Call #1: September 6, 2003

Salience of Cities

• Source of the Problem

– Cities and Urban Metropolitan Areas

• Are accounting for increasing shares of population and production
• Generate more than 2/3s of GHG emissions
• Source of the Solution

– Land Use Regulation – Zoning and Building Codes – Transpiration Infrastructure – Service Delivery

Climate Action in Cities

Local governments are voluntarily getting involved in climate protection despite rationale to the contrary

Source: US Conference of Mayors

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Percentage of in-house & city wideInitiatives In House Community Wide

The Dilemma of Scale

• GHG Reduction is a Global Common Pool Resource

– Subject to Free Rider Problems

• How Can Cities Overcome Free Rider Dilemma?

– Motivations of Decision Makers – Targets of Behavior Change – Institutions – Social and Geographic Distribution of Impacts

Early Local Climate Research

• First academic paper on topic: Collier, 1997
• Early research dominated by case studies that

focused on “early joiner” or “best practice” cities and the functioning of specific climate networks

– Findings emphasize role of co-benefits and policy entrepreneurs

• Exclusive focus on explicitly climate-committed cities

Quantitative local climate research

Large-n quantitative research began around 2008 The “first generation” of quantitative studies examined why cities adopted climate protection goals

– MCPA or ICLEI – Adoption of climate goals does not necessarily translate into action

The “second generation” of studies utilize different measures of climate policy implementation

Research Questions

• What actions are municipal governments taking that

abate local greenhouse gas emissions?

• Why are municipal governments becoming involved in

climate protection?

• What explains the variation in the type and extent of city

GHG-reducing actions?

• What impacts can and do local efforts have on net GHG

emissions?

12 Possible Explanations

• Community climate concern/Environmentalism
• Climate Risk/Geo-physical characteristics
• Financial /Cost Savings
• Service Co-Benefits
• Partisanship/Ideology
• Political/Intergovernmental mandates or incentives
• Memberships Networks/Peer effects
• Institutions/Career interest of decision makers
• Capacity/Fiscal and Technical Resources
• Interest groups and entrepreneurs
• Regional collaboration networks

Research Highlights

• Results depend on what is measured as climate

action

– Goals/Affiliations – Plans – Policy Adoption – Implementation – Targeted to government vs. community – Geographic scope is local or regional – Policy instruments

• Extent to which they reduce GHG

– Outcomes of policy action

Predicted probability of climate planning by cities with and without high climate concern

Community Climate Concern Matters a Lot

Rachel Krause (2011)

Political Market Approach

Policy Demand

• Problem severity – property rights
• Interest groups’ demands
• Growth machine development interests
• Environmental interests

Governmental Supply

• Election driven politicians
• Career advancement driven administrators

Scope of City Carbon Reduction Policies

Urban Studies 2013

Independent Variables Governmental Community Operations At-Large Operations Supply-Side Factors Council-Manager Government .089** -.105** Separate Sustainability Office .234*** .124** Lacks of Funds

• . 031 -.013

Conflict with Other Budget Priorities

• .020 -.069***

Central City . 047 .004 Demand-Side Factors Public Support .039 .102** Business Group Support .075*** .113*** Environmental Group Support .004 -.000 Per Capita Personal Income .083 .007 Population .089* .063** Density .048* .047 Non Hispanic White

• .027 -.062

Issue Salience .137*** .219*** Constant

• .776 -1.180

Observations Log likelihood Regression R2 479 477

• 1375.59*** -1281.71***

.22 .17

Entrepreneurs and Multilevel Governance

Research Questions

Roles of States and Local Entrepreneurs

Theory

Multilevel Governance Policy Entrepreneurship

Research Design

Survey and Measures Multilevel Analysis

14

Result

Predictor Variable Model 1 Model 2 Model 3

• Coeff. S.E. Coeff. S.E. Coeff. S.E.

Level 1 Independent Variables Public Entrepreneurs Civic Entrepreneur Elected Entrepreneur Bureaucratic Entrepreneur Organized Interests Group Support Business Groups Environmental Groups Civic Groups Need or Problem Severity Public Awareness Population Density City Capacity Separated Sustainability Office City Utilities Control Variables Political Institutions Form of Government Community Characteristics Population Race Income Level 2 Independent Variables Climate Change Advisory Groups Climate Actions GHG Report Fiscal Stress 1.75*** 0.52 1.78*** 0.51 0.83* 0.43 0.77* 0.43

• 0.46 0.40 -0.42 0.40

0.06 0.16 0.06 0.17

• 0.57** 0.24 -0.58** 0.02

0.31 0.31 0.34 0.30 1.02 0.50 0.93* 0.53 0.30 0.24 0.29 0.30 0.50*** 0.11 0.51*** 0.11

• 0.62 0.55 -0.61 0.62
• 0.57* 0.35 -0.61 0.38

0.71*** 0.25 0.68*** 0.24

• 0.84 1.08 -0.77 1.25

0.06 0.15 0.05 0.14

• 0.12 0.91 0.47 0.53

0.08 0.06 0.05 0.05

• 0.65 0.43 -0.70*** 0.22
• 0.16 0.18 -0.18* 0.10

The ICSD Project

The Integrated City Sustainability Database (ICSD)

• The first comprehensive nation-wide dataset of US

municipal governments’ sustainability programs

• The ICSD will harmonize data from seven nation-wide

surveys of city sustainability programs conducted in 2010-2011

• All seven surveys included all cities with

populations over 50,000 in their sampling frame;

• Over 90% of all cities larger than 50,000 responded

to at least one of these seven surveys;

• Four surveys additionally included smaller cities.

ICSD Source Data

Survey Name Sampling Frame

Respondents

Response Rate

ICMA 8,569 local governments with a population over 10,000 2,176 25.4% NLC 1,708 mayors in cities over 10,000 442 26.6% EECBG Grantee Implementation

(NSF Feiock)

970 municipal governments receiving EECBG awards, including all cities

• ver 30,000

747 77.0% Implementation of Energy Efficiency and Sustainability

(IBM Foundation Feiock)

1,180 cities: all with pops over 50,000 and a random sample of 500 cities with pops btwn 20,000 and 50,000 679 57.5% National Survey of Sustainability Mgmt

(Hawkins UCF)

601 cities with populations over 50,000 263 44.0% Municipal Climate Protection

(Krause Indiana)

664 cities with populations over 50,000 329 49.5% Municipal Government Questionnaire

(Krause UTEP)

425 cities with populations over 50,000 that have explicit involvement in climate protection 255 60.0%

Data Management and Processing

Identifying similar questions across surveys and re- coding relevant data into a consistent form Imputing missing data within and across surveys Aggregating into 3 tiers of over-arching variables

• Questions for which there is a direct match
• Questions which measure the same concept or

activity with different wording

• Questions which measure different components of

a broader concept

Link ICSD to Performance

Survey data treat all programs as having equal impact although it is widely acknowledge that some programs have a much greater impact than others;

• Develop a comprehensive set of generalizable weights

that can be applied to estimate the relative climate impact of municipal programs or actions;

• Expert panels of practitioners and scholars
• Transforming Local Government – Denver, April 23-25, 2014
• Expert panel of practitioners and scholars

Enable cities and researchers to better use the data they already have to measure performance

RCN Project: An Institutional Analysis of Strong and Weak Mayor City Charters

Chris Weible, David Carter, and Tanya Heikkila School of Public Affairs University of Colorado Denver & Rick Feiock, Cali Curley, and Aaron Deslatte Askew School of Public Administration and Policy Florida State University

Constitutional Rules and City Charters

Constitutional rules are the institutions that structure the fundamental components of a government (IAD Framework). “Constitution” refers to the basic architecture of government or any human organization, including actual constitutions but also charters of cities, private companies, and nonprofits. Two major forms of city government: Strong mayor vs. weak mayor, often treated as a dichotomy. Unquestionably, there are variations in charter structures.

Start with a written public policy

Coding

Start with a written public policy

1 . All people must not smoke in a hospital or pay a fine.

• 2. Every employee shall have

the right to a smoke free area . . . . . . n = Statement

Divide into statements

Start with a written public policy

1 . All people must not smoke in a hospital or pay a fine.

• 2. Every employee shall have

the right to a smoke free area . . . . . . n = Statement

Divide into statements Dissect the statements

Regulatory Statements

• 1. All people = “attribute”

must not = “deontic” smoke = “aim” in a hospital = “condition/object”

• r pay a fine = “or else”

Constitutive Statements (X is Y under certain conditions) or (There shall be X)

• 2. Every employee = “attribute”

shall have = “aIm” the right to a a smoke free area = “condition/object” . . .

• n. Dissected statements

Start with a written public policy

1 . All people must not smoke in a hospital or pay a fine.

• 2. Every employee shall have

the right to a smoke free area . . . . . . n = Statement

Divide into statements Dissect the statements

Regulatory Statements

• 1. All people = “attribute”

must not = “deontic” smoke = “aim” in a hospital = “condition/object”

• r pay a fine = “or else”

Constitutive Statements (X is Y under certain conditions) or (There shall be X)

• 2. Every employee = “attribute”

shall have = “aIm” the right to a a smoke free area = “condition/object” . . .

• n. Dissected statements

Code by functional type

Boundary Procedural Rule Boundary Credential Rule Position Rule Choice Rule Information Rule Aggregation Rule Scope Rule Payoff Rule

Code and analyze by topically specific properties (e.g., duties of a mayor)

Social Actor Theme Workshop

• Winter 2013-14
• Develop Link between Charters and Climate

Actions

• Research Project Analyzing Low and High

Performing Cities

Local Gov. Lab

The Jerry Collins Local Governance Research Laboratory Askew School of Public Administration & Policy Florida State University Tallahassee FL 32306-2250 rfeiock@fsu.edu

http://localgov.fsu.edu