What motivates urban climate leaders? A study of urban climate governance in eight Swedish municipalities

ABSTRACT

This paper explores the motivations behind urban climate governance in eight Swedish municipalities. The study demonstrates that political consensus among, and willingness of, urban political leaders is of importance for motivating climate actions. Municipalities are moreover motivated by the accomplishments of other cities, national and subnational policies, and an increasing climate concern in society. In line with previous research, individual policy entrepreneurs have been important for local climate action; however, with the adoption of national and subnational policies, local climate policies are becoming increasingly institutionalised. Although some of the conclusions of the study confirm the significance of a polycentric governance approach, little relevance was attributed to citizen participation. The institutionalisation of urban climate governance deserves further attention so as to better understand how the dynamics of polycentric governance can be affected, and what implications this may have on climate policy-making process, and the engagement and support of urban residents.

KEYWORDS:

• Urban climate governance
• local environmental policies
• climate policies
• municipalities
• polycentric governance

1. Introduction

Cities and urban governments have gained recognition as frontrunners in the transition to a low-carbon society (Watts 2017; Van der Heijden 2019). While national governments have failed to deliver policies in line with the targets set in the Paris Agreement, urban leaders have often been praised for their ambitious commitments (Wolfram et al. 2019). Cities worldwide seem to be more progressive and perceptive, and when they act together, they can rise up to the low environmental ambitions of the nation-states (Katz and Nowak 2018; Romero-Lankao et al. 2018). The demographic and economic weight give cities a significant leverage, and by cooperating and inspiring and learning from each other, they can influence policymaking on both national and global levels (Gordon and Johnson 2017; Papin 2020; Acuto and Leffel 2021).

The notion of urban climate leadership has, however, been exposed to increasing criticism. Several scholars argue that the narrative of cities as agents of change is built on an idealistic and normative understanding of the transformative capacity of cities (Johnson 2018; Angelo and Wachsmuth 2020). The evidence is drawn from a relatively small number of cities, creating what Van der Heijden (2019) has defined as a potential ‘leadership delusion’. The empirical foundation linking local emissions reductions to urban mitigation strategies is limited, and several studies demonstrate an implementation gap between the ambitious aims and the actual policy performance (Khan and Sovacool 2016; Hsu et al. 2020). Regardless of communicated ambitions, climate action is often not prioritised by urban governments (Castán Broto 2017; Soni et al. 2022), and most cities tend to focus on environmental problems directly affecting urban residents, such as waste management (Van der Heijden 2019). The agency of urban governments is moreover restricted by the municipal proximity, constitutional mandate, and available resources (Hughes et al. 2018). Although cities can govern energy usage, urban planning, public transport, waste management, and even carbon sequestration, they are often reliant on regulations or funding of national governments (Hjerpe et al. 2015; Schoenefeld et al. 2023). As a result of a normative and idealistic understanding of urban climate governance, the particularities of specific urban contexts and barriers to progress or delay in various cities are often overlooked (Heijden van der 2018; Hickmann and Stehle 2019). There are indeed ambitious frontrunners among the cities of the world; however, this positive judgement can evidently not be attributed to all cities (Reckien et al. 2015; Salvia et al. 2021).

If it can be concluded that the transformative agency of cities is not a unique and inherent quality of any urban policy context, a pertinent question is why certain cities are progressive, and why others are lagging behind. The objective of this article is to respond to this question by exploring the motivations for climate action of urban policymakers in different cities. Addressing this issue might bring clarity to normative perceptions of urban climate policymaking and provide recommendations on how urban climate action can be encouraged and local climate policy capacity strengthened.

This article explores urban climate policymaking in eight Swedish cities. Sweden is a country with a tradition of strong local self-governance, and the Swedish constitution allows municipalities to act independently, often beyond the policies and targets set by the national government. This makes studies on urban climate policymaking especially interesting in the Swedish context.

The focus of this study is the perceptions of policymakers, and the results are primarily drawn from interviews with local politicians and civil servants in five Swedish municipalities that have been recognised as frontrunners, and three that are ranked as less ambitious in the environment policy index Miljöbarometern. There is a fairly well-established tradition of urban climate policy research in Sweden, identifying both strengths and challenges of local authorities (i.e. Granberg and Elander 2007; Hjerpe et al. 2015, 2018; Fenton and Gustafsson 2017; Glass and Newig 2019; Storbjörk et al. 2019; Wamsler et al. 2020), yet no studies have specifically compared policy progress between municipalities based on their environmental policy ranking.

2. Theoretical exploration

The reasons why cities take on a climate leadership beyond what is required by national policies and regulations are far from obvious. Climate change is a problem of global magnitude, and urban leaders are arguably trapped in a similar global collective action dilemma as is any individual (Gardner et al. 1994; Jordan et al. 2015). Why would cities undertake actions that are financially burdensome and have uncertain local benefits, if it is not required by national regulations?

In the literature on urban climate governance, considerable attention is paid to the theories of polycentric governance, particularly in the works of Elinor Ostrom. Ostrom contested the conventional theory of collective action by demonstrating that a surprisingly large number of local agents are cooperating and acting to reduce emissions, without any intervention by external agents. By participatory and polycentric governance approaches, collective-action dilemmas can be overcome, she argued (Ostrom 1990). In polycentric systems with self-organised governing units, communities, or organisations, collaboration can emerge spontaneously, innovation and learning fostered, trust built, and rules for resource management created (Jordan et al. 2015).

The polycentric approach assumes ‘internal motivation’, as stated by Homsy and Warner (2015), yet it is not entirely clear what factors are motivating local climate actions, and if incentives can be found in the urban context, or if such actions are prompted by external factors, such as policies adopted by national and subnational authorities, such as the EU. Knowing that climate policy progress differs between different cities (Day and Hall 2016; Salvia et al. 2021), it may also be assumed that the motivating factors differ between cities, as well as the receptiveness to external influence. Kern et al. (2023) and Schoenefeld et al. (2023) apply the concept of ‘policy diffusion’ to describe how climate policy initiatives and strategies are communicated and spread to and between municipalities. Policy diffusion can occur vertically when one level of governance influences another, or horizontally when different units at the same level of governance influence each other.

Within urban climate governance literature, focus has often been placed on the inherent agency of cities. Urban governments are claimed to possess certain advantages over national governments as they can take on more flexible and adaptive governance approaches, and thereby adjust and tailor measures and responses for challenges that arise in specific local circumstances (Boyd and Juhola 2015). The adaptive governance models of several cities make them less constrained by the barriers of administrative sectors and more open to engage with citizens, civil society organisations, and private business (Osthorst 2020). The participation of citizens and civil society can help to generate legitimacy and acceptance for mitigation and adaptation policies (Ziervogel et al. 2016; Juhola et al. 2020; Araos 2023), and adjust policies to local conditions (Uittenbroek et al. 2019; Wamsler et al. 2020). Cities are moreover claimed to be more innovative than national governments, adopting experimental tools for climate governance and testing new ideas and innovations in the policy process (Evans et al. 2021; Bulkeley 2023). The flexible and adaptive approach makes cities more prone to take on ideas and policies developed by others, and the collaborations or networks such as C40 or EU Covenant of Mayors have shown to be relevant for horizontal policy diffusion (Bansard et al. 2017; Steffen et al. 2019; Soni et al. 2022; Heikkinen 2022).

Studies suggest moreover that climate policy ambitions and internal motivations are determined by contextual aspects such as socioeconomic conditions, energy infrastructure, geographic locations, housing stock, transportation, and demography (Reckien et al. 2015; Yeganeh et al. 2019; Otto et al. 2021). The exposure or experience of climate risks and consequences, such as heatwaves, flooding, and sea-level rise, have also been identified as an important motivating factor for both mitigation and adaptation measures (Soni et al. 2022; Heikkinen 2022; Switzer and Jung 2022; Braunschweiger and Ingold 2023).

Another strong internal motivating factor is support from urban residents for climate action, yet research shows that the interest of citizens differs depending on factors such as population size, economic development, and coastal proximity (Reckien et al. 2015; Yeganeh et al. 2019; Otto et al. 2021). Cities with these socioeconomic or geographic features generate better opportunities for civil society mobilisation and political engagement, and they tend to pull young, educated, environmentally concerned, and liberal-leaning individuals (Zeigermann et al. 2022; Haupt et al. 2022; Switzer and Jung 2022; Herdt and Muñoz Sanz 2023). These are the sociodemographic characteristics of individuals who are more likely to push for actions and vote for environmentally progressive parties, which have been shown to be relevant for urban climate ambitions (Ford and King 2015; Abel 2021; Hess and McKane 2021).

Several studies furthermore identify the role of creative and pioneering political leaders, sometimes defined as policy entrepreneurs, in placing certain municipalities in a frontrunning position (Wurzel et al. 2019; Touchant 2022; Haupt and Kern 2022). Policy entrepreneurs can be elected officials, but also experts or civil servants operating within the urban bureaucracy (Krause 2011; Hjerpe et al. 2015; Kalafatis and Lemos 2017; Herdt and Muñoz Sanz 2023). Such policy entrepreneurs might be motivated by their own interest to adhere to scientific recommendations (Herdt and Muñoz Sanz 2023), but also by pragmatic aims, such as the cost-benefits of climate action in terms of cost savings and public health (Svara et al. 2013), or an interest in attracting investors, companies, and creative citizens, or generating green growth (McCann 2013; Homsy 2018; Heijden van der 2018).

In contrast to the theories of polycentric actions, several studies show that urban climate action is often encouraged by policies set at subnational or national level (Homsy and Warner 2015; Dale et al. 2018; Otto et al. 2021; Kern et al. 2023). In their evaluation of the mitigation outcomes of 1,066 cities engaged in the EU Covenant of Mayors, Hsu et al. (2020) concluded that the most successful cities are found in countries with more ambitious national climate policies. EU climate policies have also become an important driver for change (Kern 2019), placing a set of actionable duties on cities. The importance of this kind of top-down vertical policy diffusion demonstrates that cities’ motivation for climate actions does not solely emerge from an inherent capacity. External pressure and support are vital to bring about, inspire, or reinforce urban climate action, although the adoption of national and subnational policies at local level is dependent on the willingness of local leaders and residents. It might thus be difficult to define the origins of different motivating factors, knowing that cities, as well as agents within cities, such as residents, civil society, and business leaders, can be influenced by various external factors in the surrounding society.

3. Methods, selected cases, and contextual conditions

The objective of this article is to explore different motivations behind transformative climate action in cities and identify factors influencing urban climate governance. More specifically, the study responds to the following question: Is urban climate governance an inherent quality, which is motivated by internal aspects within the city, or are actions prompted by external factors, such as policies and recommendations from agents acting beyond the urban context? This is done through a comparative study focusing on five Swedish municipalities, which have been defined as frontrunners on climate policies, and three that have been assessed to be less progressive. The aim was to identify and compare motivations for actions and not to assess the success and progress of different cities.

3.1. Selection of municipalities

Defining the climate policy success of individual municipalities is difficult. Local emissions are influenced by various factors, some which are beyond the remit of municipal influence. Carbon-intensive production of industrial enterprises could be closed down or scaled up, regardless of the policies pursued by the municipality, and the population of the city might increase or decrease. The municipalities included in the study were therefore selected upon their scoring in the environmental policy index Miljöbarometern (‘The Environment Barometer’), which is annually compiled and published by the company Miljöbarometern, the civil society organisation Klimatsekretariatet, and the news magazine Aktuell Hållbarhet. The ranking is based on the results of an assessment of various progress data, such as local greenhouse gas emissions, energy mix, waste, water, and nature management, implemented policy measures on climate, transport, housing, food, education and investment, procurement and financial decisions.¹ Additional analyses are done on the basis of survey results regarding various policy measures.

The scoring on Miljöbarometern cannot be understood as an entirely precise measurement of policy performance. One problematic aspect is that parts of the results are based on assessments made by the municipalities themselves and thus allow a degree of manipulation. To strengthen the reliability of the rating, the municipalities were selected on the basis of their average ranking over the past 10 years (see Table 1). All of the selected cities have a mid-size population and are among 30 largest cities in Sweden, with 80,000 to 130,000 inhabitants, enabling a comparative analysis.² The accomplishment of the selected municipalities has also been recognised by other organisations, such as the innovation programme Viable Cities, which only includes cities that have a potential to reach a net-zero target by 2030, and Klimatkommunerna, which is a network of municipalities with ambitious climate and energy targets. The five top-ranking municipalities of Lund, Helsingborg, Karlstad, Eskilstuna, and Växjö have qualified for these two programmes, while the other three, Solna, Kungsbacka, and Jönköping, are not members.

Table 1. Overview of selected municipalities.

City	Population size	Climate target	Average ranking over 10 years in Miljöbarometern
Helsingborg	150 000	Net-zero by 2035	1
Karlstad	95 000	Fossil free and climate smart by 2030	2
Eskilstuna*	108 000	Climate positive by 2045, 80% reduction to 2030	4
Lund	124 000	Climate neutral to 2030	5
Växjö	96 000	Fossil free by 2030	7
Jönköping	144 000	No general target	47
Kungsbacka	84 000	Climate neutral by 2045	77
Solna	85 000	Climate neutral by 2045	113

*With the initiative Viable cities, the target will be renewed to new-zero by 2030.

3.2. Interview methodology

The conclusions of the study are drawn from semi-structured interviews, together with analysis of documents such as climate plans and strategies. As it was difficult to trace motivations by document analysis, results are primarily based on the interviews. The interviews were conducted with a set of open-ended questions (see appendix 1), allowing for a discussion, while certain questions were repeated in each interview to trigger responses to similar propositions (Adams, 2015). The interviews were undertaken by the author, using Zoom or Teams, and took between 45 and 90 minutes. An analysis of the specific situation in each municipality was conducted prior to each interview, focusing on relevant policy decisions such as the climate strategy and targets.

The analytic framework applied in the study was developed through the literature review, and questions asked in the interviews were formulated upon the motivating factors identified by previous studies. The interviews were transcribed and coded thematically, using structural coding (Saldaña 2013). Quotes and statements were anonymised in the analytical process.

3.3. Selecting interviewees

A total number of 18 interviews were conducted, with eight civil servants and 10 politicians responsible for climate and environmental matters. The focus was to compare experience between municipalities, and for this reason two interviews per municipality were deemed sufficient. The selection method used was that of purposive sampling strategy, striving to select informants in identical positions in the selected municipalities. The ambition was to find one politician and one civil servant in each municipality who had been working with environmental matters for a long period of time and in a high-ranking position. For this reason, the chair or vice-chair of the environmental council (Miljönämnd) was approached in each city. The head of environmental administration of the municipality was moreover approached, or a person with responsibility for environmental or climate strategy issues. Ten of the interviewees were men and eight were women.

4. Results

4.1. Early progressive environmental policy decisions

The historic record of the urban environmental policies differs substantially between the eight cities in this study, as retold by the informants and documented by adopted policies. The progressive cities undertook ambitious environmental measures and adopted climate strategies and targets at a much earlier phase than the others, particularly Helsingborg, Växjö, and Lund (Växjö 2021; Helsingborg 2022; Lund 2022). When asked about the background of these decisions, some of the informants referred to environment-related events in the past. One interviewee referred to a lake restoration project undertaken by limnologists in the 1960s which ‘created a lot of political good-will … and made them interested in moving on …’ (Interview, Växjö politician 2). Climate policy action was in this respect influenced by the wider field of environmental policies at local level, although climate risks and ecological security were only emphasised by a few informants. In Helsingborg, a civil servant claimed that the municipality had ‘a long history of wise environmental decisions’ (Interview, Helsingborg civil servant), referring to the investments in the district’s heating system and the early transformation of waste management. Previous environmental decisions had also enabled the municipalities to build competence and generate experience, which facilitated the development of urban climate governance.

4.2. Political leadership

Informants in all of the cities stated that the ambitions of the local political leadership were crucial in building up the progressive stance of the municipality. Bold moves by individual pioneers and enthusiasts, often the chair of the municipal board, had generated a forward-looking dynamism. Several of the high-ranking cities had in this respect fostered a narrative of historic progressive decisions, and after these early efforts had been recognised in society; thus, the green ambitions became a trademark of the city.

In the late 90s, it was the incumbent chairperson, and he said he was sick of everybody talking about the climate and, he said ‘no, let us decide now. We must be fossil fuel-free before 2030’. And that made Växjö the first municipality in the world to have that goal. We did not know that it would have such an impact. (Interview, politician Växjö 2)

Some of the interviewees also stated that the efforts of a few enthusiastic civil servants had been fundamental at an early stage, and one informant said accordingly that climate action can be ‘initiated by one or a few enthusiasts, and they can probably be found in the political circle, but they can also be among civil servants’ (Interview, Eskilstuna civil servant). A politician from the same municipalities told a similar story.

… a lot happened some 10 or 15 years back due to a centre-right municipal councillor, who had a lot of influence, but at the same time, I would like to say that it is a broad political commitment. Someone started and went ahead and added a lot of energy to it, then it has continued. (Interview, Eskilstuna politician)

The absence of leadership seemed on the other hand to be a factor explaining the lack of action in the low-ranked cities. When asked why these cities had not developed more ambitious policies, one civil servant stated that the municipal board was prioritising ‘business development’ and that ‘they (the politicians) did not understand that these issues were connected … they considered them to be in conflict with each other’ (Interview, Solna civil servant). The relevance of enthusiastic politicians or civil servants was also recognised in low-ranking cities; however, the breakthrough towards more ambitious targets had happened at a later stage, and in these cities, climate strategies were adopted in between 2018 and 2019, while the other five cities had adopted such policies in the 1990s or the early 2000s.

4.3. Political consensus

An aspect considered to be imperative for policy success was political leadership and willingness for climate action across party lines at local level. Active engagement of individual politicians was important, but for continuous efforts to take place, inter-party consensus was seen as crucial. The progressive cities in this study have over the years been governed by both left-, liberal-, and conservative-leaning parties, often in coalition with the green party. However, the political make-up of the local government was not considered to be as decisive as political consensus. The differences of environmental policies between the ruling parties and the opposition were considered to be marginal and, therefore, disruptive political conflicts were rare.

The most important thing is that you agree on the larger overarching issues, and that you have consensus. Then these issues are not simple, there will be conflicts and it is up to the politicians to solve them. But an overall consensus on where you want to go is crucial. (Interview, Helsingborg politician)

A few of the informants claimed moreover that early policy success had contributed to unity, and that the recognition of the city being ‘at the forefront’ had helped to create ‘a broad political consensus’ (Interview, Växjö politician 2). The consensus-oriented politics had generated conditions for policy stability and created a situation in which politicians abstained from populistic statements. When there is political unity, climate strategies and targets did not alter if the ruling majority in the municipality changed. It was also argued that political consensus on climate policies was upheld by constructive consultative processes between politicians and civil servants, in which strategies and decisions were negotiated, discussed, and anchored before they were presented to the municipal assembly for decision.

The lack of political tensions facilitated the work of civil servants, since they could ‘keep amicable contacts with all parties’, as argued by one civil servant (Interview, Helsingborg civil servant). A few of the interviewees stated moreover that the local political context had several advantages in comparison to national politics, fostering more consensus-orientated approaches. It is easier to reach trade-offs and compromises between parties of different ideological orientation at the local level, a few of the interviewees argued. The mutual exchange between politicians was seen as a benefit and, as stated by one politician, ‘you are not quite as traditional as at the national level, you can talk with each other’ (Interview, Växjö politician 2). Absence of political consensus was not, however, a factor that was accentuated by informants of the low-ranked municipalities, but the lack of progress was ascribed to an unwilling political leadership.

4.4. National policies and international agreements

Several informants in both high- and low-ranking cities confessed that external influence had been vital to encourage action. Local climate policies had been inspired by international agreements or national targets. A few of the high-ranked cities claimed, for instance, that the Rio conference in 1992 and Agenda 21 had played an important role in initiating local action. One politician stated that they had ‘sort of caught an international trend, and realized that this is also relevant at the local level’ (Interview, Lund politician). Interviewees from the low-ranked cities said that they had been encouraged by the increasing climate concern in society, the Paris Agreement, Agenda 2030, and in particularly the adoption of the climate act and target at the national level. There was a clear difference between high- and low-ranking cities in this regard, where the latter placed greater relevance on adopting national policies. Pioneering cities had, on the other hand, been able to make better use of national financial contributions, as they had developed an administrative capacity for applying and distributing subsidies, and thereby further strengthening the policies.

4.5. Collaboration between municipalities

When asked about collaboration with other municipalities, several of the respondents claimed that such activities were of great relevance. One civil servant stated that ‘it is important to collaborate with other municipalities, to see what you can learn from each other, but also to discuss challenges together’ (Interview, Växjö civil servant). A politician described their collaboration in a regional network, stating that this could help to avoid a situation in which every municipality ‘constantly needs to invent the wheel’ (Interview, Kungsbacka politician). Two municipalities referred to the Covenant of Mayors, which is the international collaboration of municipalities administered by the European Commission, as a source of inspiration. One informant said that they had studied the work of other progressive municipalities and had been inspired by them, while another claimed that there was some kind of competition between frontrunners, and that ‘they push each other, and if other municipalities set a target to be climate neutral by 2030, then we would like to be climate neutral as well’ (Interview, Lund politician).

4.6. The capacity of the municipal administration

Several of the interviewees spoke of the significance of governance capacity, referring to aspects related to the municipal administration responsible for environmental affairs. It was considered to be relevant that the administration could act independently, without political interference, and that it was allotted with sufficient resources to employ competent experts, hire consultants, and undertake studies and revisions. Integrating the legal role of environmental supervision and strategic planning was also deemed to be important since that would boost the authority and expertise of the environmental administration. These views were expressed by both politicians and civil servants.

… we have had an independent environmental committee with a strong mandate, with a supervisory role, but also a capacity to lead the strategic environmental work… We have also had a competent environmental director … He moved the environmental issues forward . … (Interview, Helsingborg politician)

Another important aspect was the organisation of climate governance in the municipal administration. In most of the municipalities studied, climate policy-related issues were dealt with holistically, with strategic planning positioned directly under the municipal board. Climate aspects were thus supposedly being considered in all kinds of decisions within the municipality. This strategic positioning of climate governance seemed to have occurred at an earlier stage in progressive municipalities. In one of the low-ranked municipalities, a politician claimed that his party has unsuccessfully required climate policymaking to be centralised under the municipal board, trying to motivate this by saying ‘then I think it would be most efficient’, while now ‘these issues enter (the policymaking process) from the sideline’ (Interview Jönköping politician).

4.7. Adopted strategies and targets

An aspect judged to be crucial for policy success was the adoption of urban climate strategies, action-plans, and targets. Even though these policy documents often do not describe mitigation policies in detail, they have contributed to the coordination and integration of climate policies in all sectors of the municipal administration. Several of the interviewees claimed moreover that the strategies determined the trajectory for the climate policies and contributed to policy stability. Such policy documents would endow the municipal administration with a mandate to operate independently and implement the actions they deemed necessary. The timing of the adoption of urban climate strategies seemed to be a clear dividing line between high- and low-ranking municipalities. One politician argued that although they had a general strategy, it had still not been ‘broken down into a concrete action plan’ and, according to him, this, besides the lack of political prioritisation, was a reason for the lack of progress (Interview, Jönköping politician). Another civil servant stated that without an adopted strategy, the mandate of the administration was largely uncertain and the work fragmented.

What happened before was that individual civil servants would work within their administrative downpipes … it wasn’t coordinated, and you would often not receive any financial support when it came to the implementation. (Interview, Kungsbacka civil servant)

With the adoption of climate strategies, instruments for evaluating and measuring progress would be put in place, and this was also regarded relevant for policy success. Evaluations of the policy implementation could provide civil servants with the needed justification for adopting specific decisions and developing current policies, while they could facilitate the political decision-making process and the communication with the electorate.

I think it is very important to be able to follow up, that is what we politicians think, because then you can say, ‘No, this does not work. You are governing this poorly’. (Interview, Lund politician)

The climate strategies were not the only adopted documents of relevance. The municipalities were also publishing evaluation reports, which, according to one politician, was something ‘they prefer to communicate to the citizens, since it reveals what we are doing or not doing every year’ (Interview, Kungsbacka politician). Several civil servants described moreover a tendency of increasing institutionalisation of urban climate policies. Climate policies were becoming an issue that was essentially planned, executed, and evaluated by civil servants. Some of interviewees stated accordingly that the most important initiatives were based on ideas initiated by civil servants.

I think there is a lot that is coming from the civil servants … . Of course, we have a dialogue with politicians, and it is an open climate, but we would not have been where we are today with passive civil servants. (Interview, Eskilstuna civil servant)

We often get the best proposals from the civil servants. It would not have turned out particularly well if we politicians would need to formulate all the proposals ourselves. They have more time and competence … . (Interview, Karlstad politician)

Informants across the municipalities emphasised, however, that regardless of the engagement of civil servants, the support of politicians was pivotal for the ability of the administration to act. Scientific recommendations were also considered to be vital for motivating action. One of the high-ranked cities had, for instance, established an advisory board with climate experts, several being researchers at the university.

4.8. Economic incentives and encouragement from the local business community

An important motivating factor, emphasised by several of the informants, was the engagement of the local business community. Several of them claimed that the ability to connect environmental policy measures to local economic development was an important factor to foster political support for action. One politician claimed that ‘when you can see that environmental policies and economic development is connected, the board and committees would govern in that direction, and be willing to invest’ (Interview, Kungsbacka politician). Some of the informants said that they had witnessed a shift in this perspective, from a situation when the municipalities were pushing the industry to transform, to a reverse situation, when business was pushing the politicians. One civil servant stated, ‘The companies that have high ambitions pave the way for us to make the change together’ (Interview, Solna civil servant). Several companies had adopted ambitious climate targets, and since their engagement in the local economy was considered to be important, the municipality supported them and was influenced by them.

Traditionally, the municipality and the public sector have been ahead. It was the municipality that rolled out the first environmentally friendly cars and so on, but now the map is probably being redrawn … the business community is impatient … . (Interview, Eskilstuna politician)

As far as the business community is concerned, there is concrete work … and I really feel pressure that here you have to deliver …. we have an organization and structures that do not exist in the same way when we approach the public. (Interview, Solna politician)

Some of the informants argued that the dominance of small- and medium-size businesses in the municipality was relevant for policy progress, while interviewees from Helsingborg and Eskilstuna, which are cities with fairly heavy industry, claimed that the policy decisions of the larger industrial corporations had contributed to the fulfilment of urban climate plans. These companies would require reductions in their entire value chain, which could affect subcontractors or service providers operating in the municipality. Two of the interviewees argued moreover that the engagement of local business enterprises in climate policies was become increasingly relevant due to the growing popularity of populist parties. They feared that the climate ambitions of the ruling parties at both national and local level in Sweden were undercut and, in this respect, the pressure from the business community was a motivating factor, preventing progressive municipalities from abandoning their high ambitions.

4.9. Citizen participation and community engagement

While several of the interviewees acknowledged the value of citizen participation, few of them claimed that community engagement and pressure from the electorate had any decisive influence on the policymaking process. When asked if citizens had pushed the city to take on an ambitious stance, one civil servant from a high-ranked city bluntly stated ‘not at all, or very little. It is mainly pushed forward by the civil servants and the politicians’ (Interview, Växjö civil servant). Similar statements were made by several other informants. One civil servant from a low-ranked municipality claimed that the meagre climate ambitions could generally be explained by a tendency of the elected politicians to listen too much to the citizens.

… science, business and we, the civil servants, all agree about what we should do, and the reform pace needed within the area of sustainability. But our citizens are not there, and that is why politicians don´t dare to act … . (Interview, Kungsbacka, Civil servant)

Although the activities of community groups and environmental organisations were seen as valuable, several interviewees argued that people in general regard climate change as an issue that should first of all be tackled at national and global levels. One politician claimed in this regard that citizens who were concerned about global warming were often unable to articulate any concrete demands for how the municipality should act to cut emissions, stating, ‘I think it is difficult for them to see how the municipality could do anything’ (Interview, Politician Jönköping). One exception was the municipality of Lund, where local inhabitants were active and pushing the municipality to pursue an ambitious climate agenda, which, according to the interviewees, could be explained by the fact that it is a university city with ‘a lot of young people, who are constantly renewed’ (Interview, Lund politician).

All of the municipalities had moreover undertaken some kind of deliberative democratic initiative to involve citizens, although these were mostly limited to open meetings and citizens’ dialogues. These activities did not, however, primarily concern environmental and climate policies, and were mostly undertaken by the section of the administration responsible for urban planning. Some of interviewees stated nevertheless that these interactions were valuable, while others claimed that they had no major impact on the climate policymaking process. ‘I would say they (consultations) haven’t had much of an influence on policies …, it is not here that initiatives for further action are raised’ (Interview, Helsingborg civil servant).

A few of the interviewees expressed, on the other hand, a rather sceptical attitude towards deliberative processes, stating that it was difficult to attract any people to open meetings and dialogues, and that citizens preferred to discuss ‘crime and safety’ and issues that are seen to be ‘more acute’ and ‘… much closer to the citizens. Climate is still far away, unfortunately’ (Interview, Eskilstuna civil servant). Another civil servant stated that they ‘… have rather little contact with the citizens …’ and concluded ‘… that it is not citizens who push for anything here’ (Interview, Solna, civil servant). Other informants said that the dialogues arranged by the municipalities mostly attract NIMBYs and ‘those who get upset if you build something just next to them …’ (Interview, Växjö politician 2). Such negative views were prevalent among informants in both high- and low-ranking municipalities. Most of them claimed, nevertheless, that people were concerned about climate change, and one politician from a high-ranked city argued accordingly that local politicians had nothing to gain from obstructing the ambitious policies pursued.

Swedish people care about these issues, the voters, so it is not so strategically smart to be against, and if someone else pulls, it is easy to just get aboard, especially when you see that this is successful, when we get an award and the work of the city is recognized.(Interview, Helsingborg politician)

5. Discussion

This study does not give any clear answers as to why ambitious urban climate leadership emerges in certain cities but not in others. One explanation can be found in the specific local political or economic circumstances, such as the influence of concerned residents and progressive local business firms supporting local climate action. Historic progressive decisions on local environmental issues helped progressive cities to build up motivation and capacity for action and brought them into a frontrunning position. The rising climate concern in society is also seen as an important motivating factor and, in this sense, public attitude is a crucial motivator for action. The attitudes of local residents are perhaps not primarily shaped by conditions in the particular urban context but by the wider discussion in society. On the other hand, the pressure of the local constituencies for climate action has had marginal relevance for the turnout for local elections, while the engagement and direct involvement of urban residents have not, according to most of the interviewees, had any significant impact on local climate policies. Even though some of the municipalities had applied participatory approaches and deliberative democratic initiatives, several of the informants expressed sceptical views of the capacity of citizens’ engagement and emphasised rather elitist aspects of the local democracy. This conclusion contradicts the general assumption of polycentric and participatory governance, as well as a wide body of research arguing for the importance of citizens’ engagement (Few et al. 2007; Sherman and Ford 2014; Uittenbroek et al. 2019; Chu et al. 2022).

The views expressed in the study could perhaps be seen as a reflection of a democratic ideal upheld by certain politicians and civil servants, preferring representative democracy and expert-driven approaches. Uittenbroek et al. (2022), in their study of local governments in the Netherlands, have also demonstrated that local experts express distrust of citizens, while previous studies of Nordic cities have shown that there is a reluctance to take on participatory approaches and co-creative strategies (Brink and Wamsler 2018; Hofstad et al. 2021; Glaas et al. 2022; Hansen and Agger 2023). This can partly be explained by poor distribution of responsibilities, low prioritisation, and a lack of resources and collaboration within the municipal administration.

The most important driver for efficient local climate policies, according to several of the interviewees, was the institutional capacities of the municipalities, such as an independent local administration with adequate resources and competences to adopt strategies, action plans, and targets, as well as instruments for progress evaluations. Such instruments could ensure long-term policy stability and enable systematic emission reductions. The importance of urban institutional capacity and adoption strategies and goals, operationalizable for action and monitoring and measuring, has also been highlighted in previous studies (Feiock et al. 2017; Susskind and Kim 2022), and in research on Nordic urban climate governance (Hofstad et al. 2021; Tønnesen et al. 2022; Rosvall et al. 2023). These findings indicate that ambitious local climate action does not necessarily emerge from the grassroots engagement of urban citizens but from elected politicians, civil servants, and experts. It is possible that the increasing institutionalisation and de-politicisation of climate policymaking, as envisaged by Paterson et al. (2022), has turned local climate action into a bureaucratic exercise, making policymakers less interested in involving citizens. The technocratic nature of local climate policymaking might also make it more difficult for citizens to articulate concrete demands for action and might demotivate grassroots engagement. It is nevertheless uncertain whether this tendency of institutionalisation is negative from a democracy perspective, since it can also make the policy process more coherent and facilitate monitoring of implemented policies and communication of progress, helping the electorate to hold decision-makers accountable.

Several of the interviewees from progressive cities pointed moreover to pioneering moves by elected local leaders and civil servants. The importance of individual policy entrepreneurs has been highlighted in the literature (Krause 2011; Hjerpe et al. 2015; Kalafatis and Lemos 2017; Wurzel et al. 2019; Haupt and Kern 2022), and this study demonstrates that such individuals tend to be driven by their own personal persuasion, acting in contradiction to the political attitudes expressed in general society and the political establishment. They can be inspired by external factors, such as scientific recommendations, policies undertaken by other municipalities, national and subnational policies, or international agreements. Urban policy entrepreneurs are, in this sense, relevant for both vertical and horizontal policy diffusion. The study finds, however, that with the adoption of national climate acts and targets, the haphazard activities of individual pioneers are becoming less relevant. With this institutionalisation of climate policies, municipalities are acting less independent on aspects related to climate policymaking, while national and subnational policies have become more important for driving cities forward.

The study concludes nevertheless that the support of, and consensus among, local urban leadership is relevant for the local climate policymaking and implementation, which is a finding also drawn by other studies (Vedeld et al. 2021). The development of national and subnational policies, such as national climate targets, legislation, EU directives, and regulations, has indeed become increasingly important for urban climate governance. However, effective adoption of these policies at the local level still requires the engagement of urban political leaders. Urban climate policy ambitions and progress will therefore differ between different cities, and while inherent political and socioeconomic circumstances will contribute to the progressive position of certain cities, others will be reliant on vertical and horizontal policy infusion, such as policies shaped by other cities, national governments, or subnational institutions. It is also likely that the progressive stance of individual frontrunning cities has contributed to the development of national and subnational policies, by adopting ambitious targets and policies and by testing innovative and successful climate policy options. This study concludes accordingly that the local climate transformation is a fragmented process and, in line with the polycentric theory of Elinor Ostrom and her arguments for a multilevel system of governing (Ostrom, 2009), self-organised actors at different levels of governance will undertake mitigation actions at an uneven and erratic pace, inspiring and being inspired by each other, and finding motivations within and beyond the urban context.

6. Conclusions and policy recommendations

This paper has explored the motivations behind the climate policymaking of cities defined as frontrunners, and a few municipalities that are ranked as less successful. It has tried to identify and understand aspects relevant to explain urban climate leadership and explore if the motivations for action are found within or beyond the urban context. In certain aspects, the findings of this study confirm conclusions drawn in previous studies regarding factors motivating urban climate policymaking. Important drivers for adoption of climate action can be found within the city, particularly individual policy entrepreneurs, but the support of local residents, civil society, and the business community are also relevant (see Table 2). However, external influence and pressure have become increasingly important for motivating urban governance; these include, first and foremost, national and subnational climate targets and regulations but also the wider climate concern in society. Networks of cities, setting common emission reduction targets and sharing experience and knowledge, are also relevant to push action forward.

Table 2. Aspects motivating urban climate acting identified.

Motivating factor	Findings
Local political or socioeconomic circumstances	Local political and socioeconomic factors can motivate progressive environmental policy decisions.
Political leadership	Urban climate policies are reliant on actions by local political leaders and enthusiastic civil servants.
Political consensus	Consensus among local political establishment on climate policies can generate long-term policy stringency and positive policy outcome.
National subnational policies	Ambitious national and subnational policies and international agreements encourage urban climate actions.
Co-learning and collaboration	Municipalities can inspire and learn from each other, and collaboration between cities can thus be valuable.
The capacity of the municipal administration	A resourceful and independent administration strategically positioned within the municipality can generate climate policy progress.
Adopted strategies and targets	By adopting strategies, action-plans and targets, urban climate policies can be implemented more systematically and stringently.
Economic incentives and encouragement from the local business community	Successful municipalities recognise the economic co-benefits of climate policies and are interacting with business communities with ambitious climate targets.
Community engagement	Citizen engagement can have some influence on climate policies.

The sceptical attitude several informants expressed about the potential of citizens’ participation deserves further attention. This study has shown that there are normative, administrative, and technocratic barriers for the inclusion of citizens in the policymaking process, but the negative experience could also be associated with the conventional methods applied, such as open meetings and citizens’ dialogue. Few of the studied municipalities had explored any innovative methods for democratic deliberation, such as citizens’ assemblies, despite research showing that such approaches can help prevent political disputes and ensure societal consensus (OECD 2020; Pickering et al. 2022). Cities could thus be advised to consider such methods, particularly as they need to tackle sensitive policy areas, such as transportation and consumption patterns. Several of the interviewees gave witness to the particular challenges of mitigating such emissions, while some expressed concerns about populistic backlashes. To maintain policy stringency and cope with disruptive populistic tendencies, cities need to cherish and build up alliances with agents of change within and beyond the urban context, such as progressive business leaders, civil society, and networks for urban climate actions, but they also need to ensure that urban residents are involved and engaged in the transition process.

A key finding of the study is the relevance of the institutional capacities for urban policymaking. Technical and procedural aspects, such as goal setting, assessment, evaluation, and coordination, are vital for the development of transformative policies at local level. Supporting cities to develop such governance capacities should thus be a priority for national governments. This tendency of institutionalisation of urban climate governance should be further studied in detail. From a theoretical perspective, this is a development that may change the dynamics of polycentric governance, making urban policymaking more reliant on the actions of national governments and subnational institutions. This study has nevertheless demonstrated that the process of vertical and horizontal policy diffusion is complex and, regardless of an increasing institutionalisation of urban climate governance, frontrunning cities and ambitious urban leaders are still important in pushing the transition to a low carbon society.

Highlights

• Political consensus and willingness of local political leaders are key for motivating urban climate action.

• With institutionalisation of urban climate governance, i.e. the adoption of strategies and action plans, the relevance of individual policy entrepreneurs is becoming less important.

• National and subnational policies have become important to push urban policymaking forward, affecting the role of the city as an independent frontrunner in the climate transition.

• An independent and competent municipal administration is considered to be the most important factor for long-term policy success.

• The engagement of citizens and deliberative democratic approaches have been of marginal relevance for progressive urban leadership.

Acknowledgments

This research has been financed by a grant from Mistra [DIA 2019/28] and from Formas via the national research programme on climate (2021-00416). The author of the article appreciates the valuable comments on draft of this paper provided in a workshop at the Nordic Environmental Social Science Conference, Gothenburg University 2022, by colleagues at Climate Leadership at Uppsala University, and particularly by Associated professor Mikael Karlsson.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Stiftelsen för Miljöstrategisk Forskning [DIA 2019/28]; Svenska Forskningsrådet Formas [2021-00416)].

Notes on contributors

Daniel Lindvall

Daniel Lindvall is Senior Researcher at the Climate Change Leadership Initiative at the Department of Earth Sciences in Uppsala University. He has a PhD in sociology and his research mostly focuses on interrelation between democracy and climate governance, climate policy acceptance and the relevance of fairness in the climate and energy transition. He has 10 years of experience in Swedish government offices and has also worked in a few international organisations.

Notes

1. The data is gathered by Swedish Statistic, the Water Authorities, Kolada (The Council for Municipal Analysis), Djurens rätt (Animal Welfare Organisation) and the Swedish Waste Management Association.

2. The other top-ranked larger cities are Stockholm and Malmö.