Dedicated versus mainstreaming approaches in local climate plans in Europe

D. Reckien, M. Salvia, F. Pietrapertosa, S.G. Simoes, M. Olazabal, S. De Gregorio Hurtado, D. Geneletti, E. Krkoška Lorencová, V. D'Alonzo, A. Krook-Riekkola, P.A. Fokaides, B.I. Ioannou, A. Foley, H. Orru, K. Orru, A. Wejs, J. Flacke, J.M. Church, E. Feliu, S. Vasilie, C. Nador, M. Matosović, A. Flamos, N.-A. Spyridaki, M.V. Balzan, O. Fülöp, S. Grafakos, I. Paspaldzhiev and O. Heidrich

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2019, vol. 112, issue C, 948-959

Abstract: Cities are gaining prominence committing to respond to the threat of climate change, e.g., by developing local climate plans or strategies. However, little is known regarding the approaches and processes of plan development and implementation, or the success and effectiveness of proposed measures. Mainstreaming is regarded as one approach associated with (implementation) success, but the extent of integration of local climate policies and plans in ongoing sectoral and/or development planning is unclear. This paper analyses 885 cities across the 28 European countries to create a first reference baseline on the degree of climate mainstreaming in local climate plans. This will help to compare the benefits of mainstreaming versus dedicated climate plans, looking at policy effectiveness and ultimately delivery of much needed climate change efforts at the city level. All core cities of the European Urban Audit sample were analyzed, and their local climate plans classified as dedicated or mainstreamed in other local policy initiatives. It was found that the degree of mainstreaming is low for mitigation (9% of reviewed cities; 12% of the identified plans) and somewhat higher for adaptation (10% of cities; 29% of plans). In particular horizontal mainstreaming is a major effort for local authorities; an effort that does not necessarily pay off in terms of success of action implementation. This study concludes that climate change issues in local municipalities are best tackled by either, developing a dedicated local climate plan in parallel to a mainstreamed plan or by subsequently developing first the dedicated and later a mainstreaming plan (joint or subsequent “dual track approach”). Cities that currently provide dedicated local climate plans (66% of cities for mitigation; 26% of cities for adaptation) may follow-up with a mainstreaming approach. This promises effective implementation of tangible climate actions as well as subsequent diffusion of climate issues into other local sector policies. The development of only broad sustainability or resilience strategies is seen as critical.

Keywords: Local climate policy/ planning; Mitigation; Adaptation; Urban areas/ cities; Urban audit; Europe; EU-28; Mainstreaming; Mitigation/ adaptation tracking; Mitigation/ adaptation stocktaking; Monetoring and evaluation (M&E) (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2019
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (9)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S136403211930320X
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:rensus:v:112:y:2019:i:c:p:948-959

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/600126/bibliographic
http://www.elsevier. ... 600126/bibliographic

DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2019.05.014

Access Statistics for this article

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews is currently edited by L. Kazmerski

More articles in Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().