New Tools for Local Governments’ Fight Against Climate Change
Climate crisis is not only a subject for global summits, national policies, or scientific reports. We can feel it every day in the cities, neighborhoods, and buildings we reside. Floodings, decrease in air quality, drought and extreme heats have direct impacts on the urban life. And exactly for this reason, the solution must be initiated from the local level. Because the real transformation can only come from the streets, municipalities, and neighborhood forums.
So, which new tools are being used by the local governments against this great crisis? Let’s explore these tools, from digital technologies and nature-based solutions to participatory models and green financing.
Classic methods are no longer adequate to put up an effective fight against climate crisis on a local level. Contemporary municipalities should function not merely as entities for waste collection and park development, but also as organizations that manage data, secure funding, and collaborate with citizens in decision-making. Here are the new tools that make this transformation possible:
To read our blog post titled What is Green Transformation? click here.
To read our blog post titled Sustainable Life with Smart City Technologies click here.
1. Digital Decision Support Systems and Carbon Accounting
In order to understand what is effective in combating the climate crisis, we must first ascertain our current situation. Therefore, many municipalities develop digital decision support systems to measure carbon emissions. Geographical Information Systems (GIS) collect data in areas such as carbon emissions, energy utilization and heat islands with the help of digital climate panels and sensors.
For example, İzmir Metropolitan Municipality used European Union supported Sustainable Energy and Climate Action Plan (SECAP) to make a local carbon inventory.
2. Nature-Based Solutions - NbS
Solutions for climate crisis inspired by nature are on the rise in recent years. Solutions such as rain gardens, permeable ground applications, city gardens and micro forests both capture carbon and increase the quality of urban life.
Copenhagen built rain gardens on the streets to build resistance against heavy rainfalls. These systems absorb water through natural ways without putting load on the infrastructure.
3. Participatory Climate Governance and Local Climate Councils
Climate justice is not only a technical matter, but also a democratic issue. Participation of the citizens, especially vulnerable groups, in decision-making processes is a critical issue. Participation needs to be inclusive. However, many participation tools are still limited to middle-class individuals with higher education levels. And this can cause representation crises in climate decisions.
4. Green Financing and Access to International Funds
Climate action requires a substantial number of resources. For this reason, municipalities try to access international climate funds, green bonds, and carbon loans. However, access to these resources is still unfair: Municipalities with language barriers which cannot prepare technical files or do not know the systems of the funds remain outside of the process. Funds are mostly received by metropolitan municipalities. The inequality for local governments with limited capacities is growing. In addition, being dependent on external funds can also hinder long-term planning.
5. Smart Transportation and Energy Systems
Practices such as electric buses, micro mobility solutions, and energy efficient buildings reduce emissions and increase the quality of life. London, for example, significantly reduced its urban vehicle carbon emissions through ultra-low emission zones. These projects, however, typically require a significant amount of infrastructure investment. Moreover, the transportation habits of citizens should also change. And this requires time, culture, and social awareness.
The effective utilization of new tools necessitates not only technology and financial resources but also organizational capabilities and corporate capacity. There are some fundamental steps to take for the local governments to become more equipped against climate crisis.
• Inter-municipalities Information and Experience Sharing: Each municipality experiences both time and resource losses when attempting to combat the climate crisis independently. Network-based solutions and shared platforms, on the other hand, are much more effective in disseminating information. C40 Cities is a great global example in these terms. And initiatives such as Sustainable City Development Network should be supported in Türkiye
• Academy and Civil Society Cooperation: It is not feasible for municipalities to possess all the necessary expertise within their own core. Cooperations to be established with universities, civil society organizations and technical experts enable climate policies to be more realistic and feasible. Istanbul Planning Agency is one of the pioneers of this model in Türkiye.
• Capacity Building and Training Programs: Increasing climate literacy among municipality personnel is critical in managing multidimensional issues such as climate change. Climate departments may become more effective through training to be provided both internally and externally. However, this necessitates not only technical capabilities but also the development of administrative capacities.
• Open Data Utilization and Impact Measurement: Measuring the impacts of the projects, sharing data in a transparent manner are keys to earning the trust of the citizens. They are also a way to set an example for other municipalities. However, many municipalities still do not have an open data infrastructure. This limits accountability and complicates sustainability for the projects.
Local governments are taking increasingly more responsibility in the fight against climate crisis. This responsibility, however, grows proportional to expectations, not resources. Municipalities have as many limitations in this area as they have potential. Disregarding all of these factors may result in practices that do not have a genuine impact on the field.
• Inadequate Budget and Centralism: Many local governments have limited resources even though they want to realize climate-friendly projects. Therefore, the feasibility of the projects are mostly dependent on external funds and grants. However, local governments mostly lack the technical preparations and information required for accessing international funds and climate financing mechanisms. Moreover, the resources are generally directed to visible investments (asphalt, pavement, building, etc.) and more abstract and long-term investments such as fighting against climate change remaining in the background. And this makes it challenging to make long-term plans.
• Rapidly Changing Priorities: Climate policies require political stability and long-term vision. Many mayors, however, may refrain from making decisions that do not yield votes within a five-year period, despite their potential long-term effects. Moreover, support mechanisms may be hindered when there is a political disagreement between central and local governments.
The most important steps towards solutions to climate crises are being taken right where we live. From municipality buildings, neighborhood gardens to bus stops and data centers, this transformation brings hope not only for the climate, but also for more fair, resistant and habitable cities.
Transforming this hope into a reality necessitates not only technological advancement but also social commitment, inclusivity alongside financial resources, and sustainability in conjunction with strategic planning. Because the fight against climate change will not only shape the cities of today, but also the cities of our children.