Power and capacity in local climate governance: comparing English and German municipalities

This paper, which is based on fieldwork research in the comparable 'twin towns' of Newcastle and Gelsenkirchen, compares how the municipalities in these cities have worked with other actors to increase their capacity in climate policy-making. Drawing in particular on theories of resource dependency in intergovernmental relations (Rhodes 1981) and urban governance (Stone 1989), it introduces a new model for mapping vertical and horizontal power relationships at the subnational level. By applying this model to the empirical cases, it identifies how central-local relations in England are looser than those in Germany, and how this results in weaker municipal institutions. This has meant that Newcastle Council has had to rely more on local stakeholders to achieve its objectives when compared to Gelsenkirchen, and has also reduced its ability to exert hierarchical authority over other bodies. Such findings have significant implications for proponents of 'localism', since they suggest that greater independence for municipal governments could strengthen societal actors at the expense of the local state. This might result in policies reflecting the private (rather than the public) interest, thereby increasing concerns about democratic accountability. They also suggest that critics of the opaque and bureaucratic nature of 'joint-decision' systems should consider what the potential alternative might entail: a weaker state that has less capacity for co-ordinated action and is more reliant on private actors in policy-making process

Who shapes local climate policy? Unpicking governance arrangements in English and German cities

A new framework for analysing subnational policy-making is applied to climate governance in the 'twin towns' of Newcastle upon Tyne and Gelsenkirchen. Low levels of resource interdependence between central and local government in England mean that Newcastle Council has to rely heavily on other horizontal actors to achieve its climate objectives. In contrast, Gelsenkirchen Council receives substantial support from higher tiers of government, which gives it greater control over policymaking within the locality. Greater independence between tiers of government can make it more difficult for subnational bodies to adopt the kind of ambitious policies that may be necessary to combat wicked and/or significant policy challenges such as climate change. Instead, interdependent 'joint-decision' systems, which facilitate mutual support across tiers of government, may be better equipped to ensure that subnational public bodies have the capacity to act appropriately

Climate change mitigation in English and German municipalities: dynamic governance versus persistent government?

This paper illustrates the contrasting governance approaches of comparable ‘postindustrial’ municipalities in England and Germany – the twin towns of Newcastle upon Tyne and Gelsenkirchen. Drawing on Hooghe and Marks’ (2003) characterisations of “Type I” and “Type II” multilevel governance systems, it uses data from over a dozen indepth interviews with practitioners in each city to highlight how the council in Gelsenkirchen has been able to take a much more hierarchical approach to climate change mitigation than its counterpart in Newcastle. This is partly due to Germany’s long tradition of local autonomy (Norton, 1994), which has helped Gelsenkirchen to develop its strategic capacity with support from the regional, state and federal governments. Although English municipalities have enjoyed greater de jure autonomy since the UK Government granted them a general power of competence in 2011, the study found that they are unable to punch at the same weight as their German counterparts in local governance arrangements. Using the characterisations of Treib et al. (2007), the paper therefore places Newcastle towards the ‘governance’ end of the spectrum, whereas Gelsenkirchen lies closer to a more traditional ‘government’ model. It also argues that the concept of distinct “policy styles” for specific countries (Richardson, 1982), which previous studies have investigated almost exclusively at the national level, is also relevant for municipalities

Cities and climate change: how historical legacies shape policy-making in English and German municipalities

This article draws on secondary historical sources and primary interviews to highlight how the legacy of local government's creation in England and Germany has significant implications for policy-making in the present day. By employing an institutionalist perspective to analyse how one municipality in each country tries to promote renewable energy and retrofit private housing, it demonstrates how historical factors have resulted in the German council having more capacity to act hierarchically in local governance arrangements than its English counterpart. These findings have notable implications for how governments at all levels seek to tackle major challenges such as climate change

A new framework for understanding subnational policy-making and local choice

This article presents a new and innovative framework to help analyse policy-making and depoliticisation within subnational governance arrangements. By focusing on the capacity (not the autonomy) of subnational governments to achieve their political objectives, and incorporating external actors along both the vertical and horizontal dimensions, it provides a dynamic tool to understand the extent to which municipal governments influence local policy-making processes. Furthermore, it stresses that greater 'localism' (or independence) between vertical tiers of government is likely to weaken subnational bodies and result in them becoming more interdependent with (or even dependent on) horizontal non-state actors within the locality. This would weaken their position in local governance arrangements and exacerbate the depoliticised nature of decision-making

Book review: Local government in England: centralisation, autonomy and control, by Colin Copus, Mark Roberts and Rachel Wall, London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017

Book revie

Civic pride and political expediency: the enduring founding principles for local government in Germany and England

This paper highlights how the contrasting founding principles of local government in Germany and England has affected the capacity of municipalities in both countries since 1800. Drawing on detailed interviews with practitioners in the ‘twin towns’ of Newcastle and Gelsenkirchen, as well as academic literature discussing the history of local governance in the two countries, it takes a historical institutionalist perspective (March and Olsen 1989; Pierson 2000) to show how the reasons why modern local authorities were created have shaped their future activities and capacity. For example, the British Government established municipalities in England for reasons of political expediency (primarily to deal with the public health crisis caused by the Industrial Revolution), whereas their German counterparts were set up to provide a means of civic representation and foster local pride. The result is that English local authorities have generally acted as functional agents that deliver services on behalf of central government, whilst German councils are more readily viewed as the democratic embodiment of local communities. This perception, combined with the legal and resource parameters within which they operate, has meant that English local authorities have significantly less institutional capacity than their German counterparts – and therefore they usually require external support to address a particular public policy issue effectively. In contrast, German municipalities are much more able to exert hierarchical authority and shape their communities directly

Hierarchy and compromise in English and German municipal development projects

This paper draws on over 30 fieldwork interviews to compare the governance of urban development projects in the “twin towns” of Newcastle (England) and Gelsenkirchen (Germany). It finds that Gelsenkirchen has been able to adopt a more hierarchical approach to stipulating the sustainability criteria of new developments, whereas Newcastle has had to work more closely with other partners and seek greater compromises in building design. These different approaches map on to the characteristic “policy styles” associated with England and Germany (Richardson, 1982) and are shaped by the different institutional contexts within which local government operates in each context (Type II and Type I multi-level governance respectively (Hooghe and Marks, 2003)). Various different organisations have had some responsibility for Science Central, the development project in Newcastle, which means the council has to work horizontally to have the capacity to implement its policy objectives. In contrast, Gelsenkirchen has kept the management of its Ebertstraβe redevelopment in-house and thereby been able to exercise hierarchical authority over the project to ensure it contains ambitious sustainability features

Economics of farm water supplies

The economics of farm water supplies can be studied in two ways. One is to compare the costs of alternative ways of supplying a specified quantity of water to a farm. Another is to calcu;ate how mucha farmer can afford or will pay for a water supply. I propose to look at these questions from the point of vieew of an eastern wheatbelt farmer, assuming that he must pay the full costs of any water supply provided for his property