Analysing the cases of Graz and Freiburg

Harald RohracherProfessor, Dept. of Thematic Studies – Technology and Social ChangeLinköping University, Sweden

Cities as arenas of low-carbon transition?

Cities & Climate Change

Sustainability transitions: radical reconfigurations of systems of production and consumption Energy, mobility, food systems etc.

Cities increasingly regarded critical to transitions Urbanisation as ‘megatrend’ Source of 70-80% of anthropogenic GHG-

emissions Foremost among victims of climate change Key sites of ‘innovative response’

What is their actual capacity to shape such change processes? Which strategies may be successful?

A socio-technical systems perspective

Individual transport / the car: Just a technology?

Which social, cultural and technical elements stabilise our car-based system of mobility? Is it just habits? Lack of technological

alternatives?

How are cars entrenched in our society? Why is such a system so difficult to change?

Socio-technical configurationin personal transportation

Vehicle / Artefact

New technologies – ICT, Smart cars, materials…

Road infrastructureand traffic system

Fuel infrastructure

New fuels; new propulsiontechnologies

Sunk costs / investments

Maintenance and distribution networks(retail, repair etc.)

Industry structure (car manufacturers,suppliers)

Economic interests

Research

Built environment(settlement structures)

Markets and userpractices (preferences,expectations, mobilitypatterns …)

Regulations and policies(rules, standards;finance, insurance…)

Culture and symbolicmeanings (freedom,individuality, indepencence..)

Social institutions,practices, meaning

(Modified from Geels 2004)

Socio-technical change and stability

Macro-level (landscape)

Meso-level (regimes,

institutions)

Micro-level

(Niches, projects)

Source: Geels and Kemp, 2001

Multi-level perspective: niches, regimes and landscapes

Niches as test-beds / protected spaces for learning

Regimes provide stabilityand resistance to change

Socio-cultural background etc.- very slow changes

Transitions as multi-level process

Focus on transformative change – systemic innovations

Interaction between three levels is important Destabilisation of regime; landscape pressures Formation of niches – social learning, network-

formation, shaping of expectations Helpful for thinking about

Stability / obduracy of existing configurations Variety of social and technical elements that

have to come together to cause a regime shift Need for integrated and long-term policy

strategies

How can cities shape regime change?

Infrastructures / regimes often reach far beyond city limits + limited formal power of cities

‘Soft power’ to shape change processes: Self-governing: own operation of e.g. buildings,

public procurement Limited forms of regulation – mandates and planning Provision of services Enabling: facilitating, coordination & encouraging

action, civil society involvement Horizontal coordination: city networks

Cities as sites of ‘socio-technical experiments’, niches

City of Graz, facts and figures

260.000 inhabitants 128 km2

Geographically situated in basin

Capital city of Styria 45.000 students

‘Eco-City’Graz: historic development

External pressures on existing energy regime Bad air quality due to geographical situation

Network of energy activists established within city administration and politics (policy entrepreneurs) Partially roots in anti-nuclear movement

Early 1990s: From ‘smog city’ to ‘eco city’ Integrated Environmental Programme ‘Eco-City

2000’ Municipal Energy & Climate Programme

Innovative Energy & Climate Policies

Ambitious aims: Cutting CO2-emissions by 50% until 2010 (based on 1987 figures)

Innovative type of programmes Comprehensive and integrative perspective

(policy integration) Participatory planning (stakeholders, wider public) Partial outsourcing to research partners New types of instruments (economic framing; win-

win) Action oriented; concrete targets; monitoring

Integration with social and economic aims Local companies & jobs, social housing etc.

International support

Participation in international city networks International attention and acclaim for its

activities, e.g. Greenpeace International Climate Protection Award in

1993 International Sustainable City Award of the European

Union in 1996

Dubai International Award & Climate Star in 2002 Sustainable Energy Europe Award in 2008 Civitas City of the Year 2008

Creation of urban identity Creation of policy dynamics; self-reinforcing

Thermoprofit

Energy performance contracting for private and public buildings

Includes energy supply, building envelope, building services

New financial arrangements + aggregation of knowledge on energy-efficient refurbishing, models for tenant participation, legal issues, dealing with energy aspects in tendering etc.

Networks of local partner companies (Thermoprofit partners)

Guaranteed quality standards Shift to renewables + significantly increased efficiency

Basic idea of contracting

‘Soft power’ of institutional change

Institutional change Strengthened department for energy and

environment Establishment of more effective intra-

municipal working groups across departments and issues

Establishment of a municipal energy agency which is owned by municipality and municipal utilities, but collaborates internationally and acts (rather) independently

Importance of intermediaries at urban level Facilitation and coordination of systemic

change Knowledge brokers; competence centres

Freiburg

Population: 230.000

Area: 150 km² (40% forest)

Density: 1435 inh./km²

„Green City“

Priorities for an energy transition

Vision: substitution of nuclear electricity, lead in efficiency and renewables, solar industry cluster Germany’s ‘Solar capital’, various international prizes

Policies driven by experts & citizens rather than administration (main admin-focus: PR, green image)

Reduce demand by increasing energy efficiency Pioneering enforcement of high energetic building

standards (by plans, private contracts etc.) District heating, CHP Transport: Change in modal split achieved but anti-car

policy highly contested Regional utility Badenova turned into driver of

change

Ph. Späth, Environmental Policies in Freiburg18

Vauban district – the plan

‘Lessons’ from eco-cities

Despite limited power within multi-level governance structures cities can be successful in achieving a (moderate) restructuring of the energy regime Not so much technology development, but

implementation skills, formation of actor alliances, new business clusters (e.g. energy-efficient building renovation; solar installations)

Urban governance brings together actors across energy system level in new roles – incumbents/utilities, local businesses offering new products/services, concerned citizens…

Cities as facilitators of systemic change

Not only niche-regime dynamics, but other socio-political dynamics important Particular local agendas, jobs, tourism, visibility Interactions between different governance levels Competition between cities / networks of cities

important

Despite severe constraints, cities and regions can be important social context for deviations from dominant energy system Legitimacy for visions of more sustainable regimes Demonstrating the viability of alternative regime

configurations

Cities as facilitators of systemic change

Significant governance capacity at local level… Not only formal powers, but proximity effects,

inclusion of civil society, capacity for coordination, regional identities

Strategic action at city/regional level can have (discursive) repercussions on other scales => diffusion of alternative configurations

Regions / cities as sites for Formation of new visions and discourse coalitions Formation of heterogeneous networks across

different interests and actor types as effect of proximity / trust

Institutional innovations and change

Challenges for urban transitions How to create learning effects across different

initiatives and experiments? Upscaling? Systemic change?

How to create long-lasting institutional change? New instruments, standardisation, agencies,

new structures for policy integration How to broaden the actor basis?

Involvement of civil society? Companies? How to link energy with other socio-political

issues? Vision building? Urban identity? Measuring

progress?

Thank you for your attention!

harald.rohracher@liu.se