IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i23p10736-d1538561.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analyzing the Role of Polycentric Governance in Institutional Innovations: Insights from Urban Climate Governance in India

Author

Listed:
  • Anita Yadav

    (Department of Sustainable Engineering, TERI School of Advanced Studies, Plot No. 10 Institutional Area, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi 110 070, India
    Division of Energy Systems, Department of Energy Technology, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Brinellvägen 68, 100 44 Stockholm, Sweden)

  • Naqui Anwer

    (Department of Sustainable Engineering, TERI School of Advanced Studies, Plot No. 10 Institutional Area, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi 110 070, India)

  • Krushna Mahapatra

    (Department of Built Environment and Energy Technology, Linnaeus University, 351 95 Växjö, Sweden)

  • Manish Kumar Shrivastava

    (Earth Science and Climate Change Division, The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI), Darbari Seth Block, India Habitat Centre, Lodhi Road, New Delhi 110 003, India)

  • Dilip Khatiwada

    (Division of Energy Systems, Department of Energy Technology, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Brinellvägen 68, 100 44 Stockholm, Sweden)

Abstract

In the face of climate change, urban governance systems must adapt to uncertainties and emerging pressures. Polycentric governance, characterized by multiple decision-making centers at different scales, enables coordination across levels and provides flexibility, which allows for experimentation and context-specific action, catalyzing institutional innovations in cities. These innovations involve creating new structures and modifying existing ones to help cities better withstand and adapt to the impacts of climate change. There are plenty of studies on this issue in developed country context, but such studies in the context of developing countries are lacking, especially in India. This article aims to explore the influence of polycentric governance on institutional innovations, thereby offering insights on how it contributes to transformative urban governance in India, characterized by (1) stewarding capacity, (2) unlocking capacity, (3) transformative capacity, and (4) orchestrating capacity. The research findings suggest that polycentric governance increases diversity and autonomy in decision-making centers across levels, which can enable more innovation or flexibility, leading to improving governance capacity to respond to changing circumstances, but these developments are still in nascent stage and further research is needed to assess the long-term sustainability of these capacities. The findings not only contribute to governance research and provide insights for policymaking, but also contribute to the broader discourse on urban resilience and sustainable development aligning with SDG 11 (sustainable cities and communities) and SDG 17 (partnerships for the goals) globally, especially in the Global South.

Suggested Citation

  • Anita Yadav & Naqui Anwer & Krushna Mahapatra & Manish Kumar Shrivastava & Dilip Khatiwada, 2024. "Analyzing the Role of Polycentric Governance in Institutional Innovations: Insights from Urban Climate Governance in India," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-21, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:23:p:10736-:d:1538561
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/23/10736/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/23/10736/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James Evans & Andrew Karvonen, 2014. "‘Give Me a Laboratory and I Will Lower Your Carbon Footprint!’ — Urban Laboratories and the Governance of Low-Carbon Futures," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(2), pages 413-430, March.
    2. Daniel H. Cole, 2015. "Advantages of a polycentric approach to climate change policy," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 5(2), pages 114-118, February.
    3. Elinor Ostrom, 2014. "Do institutions for collective action evolve?," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 3-30, April.
    4. Hameeda A. AlMalki & Christopher M. Durugbo, 2023. "Systematic review of institutional innovation literature: towards a multi-level management model," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 73(2), pages 731-785, June.
    5. Rijia Ding & Chongbao Ren & Suli Hao & Qi Lan & Mingbo Tan, 2022. "Polycentric Collaborative Governance, Sustainable Development and the Ecological Resilience of Elevator Safety: Evidence from a Structural Equation Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-37, June.
    6. Jordan K. Lofthouse & Roberta Q. Herzberg, 2023. "The Continuing Case for a Polycentric Approach for Coping with Climate Change," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-24, February.
    7. Claire E. Brolan, 2023. "Looking Back—Australia’s Sustainable Development and Climate Change Policy Agendas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-14, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ilia Murtazashvili & Veeshan Rayamajhee & Keith Taylor, 2023. "The Tragedy of the Nurdles: Governing Global Externalities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-15, April.
    2. Claude Ménard, 2017. "Facing Crises: Economy, Democvracy, and Political Transaction Costs," Post-Print hal-04000979, HAL.
    3. Federico Cuomo & Stefania Ravazzi & Federico Savini & Luca Bertolini, 2020. "Transformative Urban Living Labs: Towards a Circular Economy in Amsterdam and Turin," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-19, September.
    4. Leslie Quitzow & Friederike Rohde, 2022. "Imagining the smart city through smart grids? Urban energy futures between technological experimentation and the imagined low-carbon city," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 59(2), pages 341-359, February.
    5. Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Martiskainen, Mari, 2020. "Hot transformations: Governing rapid and deep household heating transitions in China, Denmark, Finland and the United Kingdom," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    6. Fouladvand, Javanshir & Aranguren Rojas, Maria & Hoppe, Thomas & Ghorbani, Amineh, 2022. "Simulating thermal energy community formation: Institutional enablers outplaying technological choice," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 306(PA).
    7. Anthony McLean & Harriet Bulkeley & Mike Crang, 2016. "Negotiating the urban smart grid: Socio-technical experimentation in the city of Austin," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 53(15), pages 3246-3263, November.
    8. Jayme Walenta, 2020. "Climate risk assessments and science‐based targets: A review of emerging private sector climate action tools," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(2), March.
    9. Quitzow, Leslie & Rohde, Friederike, 2022. "Imagining the smart city through smart grids? Urban energy futures between technological experimentation and the imagined low-carbon city," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 59(2), pages 341-359.
    10. Landon Yoder & Alora Cain & Ananya Rao & Nathaniel Geiger & Ben Kravitz & Mack Mercer & Deidra Miniard & Sangeet Nepal & Thomas Nunn & Mary Sluder & Grace Weiler & Shahzeen Z. Attari, 2024. "Muddling through Climate Change: A Qualitative Exploration of India and U.S. Climate Experts’ Perspectives on Solutions, Pathways, and Barriers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(13), pages 1-20, June.
    11. Richard B. Stewart & Michael Oppenheimer & Bryce Rudyk, 2017. "Building blocks: a strategy for near-term action within the new global climate framework," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 144(1), pages 1-13, September.
    12. Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Van de Graaf, Thijs, 2018. "Building or stumbling blocks? Assessing the performance of polycentric energy and climate governance networks," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 317-324.
    13. Grimley, Matthew & Chan, Gabriel, 2023. "“Cooperative is an oxymoron!”: A polycentric energy transition perspective on distributed energy deployment in the Upper Midwestern United States," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    14. Ménard, Claude & Kurdin, Alexander & Shastitko, Andrey, 2020. "Out by the door, in through the window: Politics and natural gas regulation in Russia," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    15. Olivier E. Malay, 2020. "Improving government and business coordination through the use of consistent SDGs indicators. A comparative analysis of national (Belgian) and business (pharma and retail) sustainability indicators," LIDAM Discussion Papers IRES 2020031, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES), revised 27 Oct 2020.
    16. Klaus Eisenack, 2024. "Why Local Governments Set Climate Targets: Effects of City Size and Political Costs," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 87(11), pages 2935-2965, November.
    17. Aidan H While & Simon Marvin & Mateja Kovacic, 2021. "Urban robotic experimentation: San Francisco, Tokyo and Dubai," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 58(4), pages 769-786, March.
    18. Larry Eubanks & Glenn L. Furton, 2024. "The institutional structure of pollution: large-scale externalities and the common law," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 201(3), pages 429-450, December.
    19. Chad Stephen Boda, 2018. "Community as a Key Word: A Heuristic for Action-Oriented Sustainability Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-19, August.
    20. Adis Dzebo, 2019. "Effective governance of transnational adaptation initiatives," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 447-466, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:23:p:10736-:d:1538561. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.