IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/tcpoxx/v17y2017i4p485-500.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multi-level governance and climate change mitigation in New Zealand: lost opportunities

Author

Listed:
  • Julia Harker
  • Prue Taylor
  • Stephen Knight-Lenihan

Abstract

The inherently global nature of climate change has led to a focus on international negotiations and the development of national commitments as dominant mitigation tools. However, there is a growing awareness that ultimate success depends upon involving subnational government, particularly cities, which are uniquely placed to address climate change in terms of both policy development and implementation of mitigation actions. In recent years the theory of multi-level governance has been used to analyse governments' roles as effective climate actors. This article uses this theory to examine legal and policy developments in New Zealand that have a direct influence on the ability of local government to contribute to climate change mitigation. New Zealand's former leadership in this area has been progressively eroded since 2004. As a result, local government is left with limited direct capacity to contribute to mitigation. Given the failure of New Zealand's national mitigation policies, the disempowerment of local government is an additional impediment to achieving emission reductions. While New Zealand may not be unique in its current lack of support for local government (and their communities), what is novel is the co-ordinated and deliberate trend away from multi-level governance.Policy relevanceThere is a growing awareness of the interdependence between international climate change obligations, national commitments and the role of sub-national government, cities in particular. States are being encouraged to empower subnational government to take a complementary role in climate change mitigation policy and action. This article demonstrates that the paradoxical trend in New Zealand is part of a co-ordinated policy approach favouring increased centralization and economic development over a commitment to sustainability. This deliberate disempowerment of local government leaves its most populous city with an aspirational action plan it will find difficult to deliver on. It also compounds New Zealand's current failure to undertake strong climate change mitigation action.

Suggested Citation

  • Julia Harker & Prue Taylor & Stephen Knight-Lenihan, 2017. "Multi-level governance and climate change mitigation in New Zealand: lost opportunities," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(4), pages 485-500, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:tcpoxx:v:17:y:2017:i:4:p:485-500
    DOI: 10.1080/14693062.2015.1122567
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/14693062.2015.1122567
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/14693062.2015.1122567?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Pascaris, Alexis S., 2021. "Examining existing policy to inform a comprehensive legal framework for agrivoltaics in the U.S," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    2. Gilles Desthieux & Florent Joerin, 2022. "Urban planning in Swiss cities has been slow to think about climate change: why and what to do?," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 12(4), pages 692-713, December.
    3. Nicholas A Cradock-Henry & Joanna Fountain & Franca Buelow, 2018. "Transformations for Resilient Rural Futures: The Case of Kaikōura, Aotearoa-New Zealand," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-19, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:tcpoxx:v:17:y:2017:i:4:p:485-500. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/tcpo20 .

    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.