Elsevier

Urban Climate

Volume 33, September 2020, 100666
Urban Climate

The making of a climate emergency response: Examining the attributes of climate emergency plans

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2020.100666Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Climate emergency declarations are amongst the strongest statement from governments in the face of global warming.

  • Our research develops a conceptual understanding of climate emergency mode, articulating ten key attributes.

  • We reveal through the review of our two cases that the climate emergency mode is embedded to varying degrees.

Abstract

Climate emergency declarations are amongst the strongest statement from governments in the face of global warming. At least 1217 local governments have so far declared a climate emergency; however, on a national government level, only seven such declarations have been made, most of which were in 2019. The exponential rise of local governments declaring a climate emergency is significant, and developing an understanding of how these responses are operationalised is critical. Previous studies indicate that local government practitioners conceptualise climate change as a complex emergency but tend to suggest ‘business as usual’ responses, unfit to deal with this complexity. Since these governments around the world have declared climate emergencies, it is unknown if the newly released climate emergency plans still tend to suggest such ‘business as usual’ response approaches or if we are now seeing the making of a more complex response to the complex threat of climate change. In this paper, we review two local governments' climate emergency plans: Auckland (New Zealand) and the City of Darebin (Melbourne, Australia). Our research develops a conceptual understanding of climate emergency mode (10 critical key attributes are articulated) and we reveal through the review of our two cases that this understanding is embedded in policy documents to varying degrees but give little explicit attention to processes of prioritisation or economic mobilisation. This research contributes to an initial understanding of a climate emergency mode in governance systems and provides a way forward from business as normal to a complex emergency response for climate change.

Introduction

Over the last couple of years, we have witnessed a remarkable acceleration of climate policy debates and activism around the globe. Renewed warnings by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in its 2018 report, the UN Environment Programme 's 2019 emissions gap report, worldwide School Strikes for Climate initiated by Greta Thunberg, and the attention-grabbing non-violent action and calls by Extinction Rebellion for ‘truth-telling’ are but a few of the contributors to and expressions of this new ‘climate emergency’ momentum. Local governments have been identified as a ‘strategic front’ for addressing the mounting climate and environmental pressures and associated social justice agendas – an area in which leadership has often been lacking at state and federal government scales (Jon, 2020; McGuirk et al., 2014; Russell, 2019). At least 1217 local governments have so far declared a climate emergency. These declarations are said to be the strongest statement from government in the face of global warming (Smith-Schoenwalder, 2019). In a period of unprecedented global disturbance, local government advocacy and networking based on mutual recognition of planetary environmental crisis, is assuming an ever more urgent purpose of strengthening human solidarity and collective responses (Davidson et al., 2019).

Scientists suggest that climate emergency declarations could signal a shift from ‘business as usual’ climate management to a new emergency mode of climate governance (Sutton, 2017). A climate emergency declaration is a resolution that puts governing bodies on record as supporting emergency actions to reverse global warming. Faming through an emergency response enables an accelerated governance mode that can be enacted only in a situation in which an urgent threat to people, property or society exists (Alexander, 2005). Specifically, this evolution of ‘emergency mode’ to climate governance proposes a radical, urgent mobilisation of economic and social resources at an abnormal level of intensity and scale (Spratt, 2019).

Calls to ‘tell the truth’ about climate change that refer to a climate emergency emphasise the pace, scale and consequence of planetary degradation. The 2019 heat waves in Europe which resulted in the hottest July ever recorded, melting ice sheets in Greenland reaching record breaking levels, and the extraordinary recent wildfire seasons in the US are often referenced as key evidence of the imminent threat (Smith-Schoenwalder, 2019). Even more recently, the unprecedented 2019–20 Australian bushfires have demonstrated our possible future under climate change (Law, 2020). It has been reported that the Australian bushfires have killed 25 people, killed an estimated 1.25 billion animals, destroyed thousands of homes, burnt a minimum of 8.4 million hectares of land and crippled key sectors such as tourism and agriculture (Bell, 2020; Butler, 2020; O'Gorman, 2020). This is all at an estimated economic cost of at least 4.4 billion Australian dollars and an untold psycho-social cost that will likely resonate for years (Butler, 2020; Gibbs et al., 2016).

Climate emergency advocates routinely invoke a WWII-scale mobilisation analogy in their call for an ‘all-hands-on-deck’ response to climate events (Smith-Schoenwalder, 2019; Silk, 2016; Gilding, 2016; Randers and Gilding, 2010). Wary of the potentially totalitarian connotations of an ‘emergency mode’ and acknowledging that the WWII analogy should be used with caution (Rode, 2019), advocates eschew negative connotations that call on historic abuses of ‘state of emergency’ declarations. The use of the WWII analogy is instrumentally deployed as a reminder that accelerated, society-wide responses to address an existential threat have been enacted before and can be enacted again. However, unlike WWII, acts of terrorism or catastrophic disasters, the climate emergency has lacked the types of events that trigger reactive mobilisation responses at an appropriate scale. Acknowledging this, climate emergency advocates argue that using the term ‘emergency’, when coupled with education and social organising, can trigger the urgent response needed at the appropriate scale (Klein Salamon, 2019; Rode, 2019).

The exponential rise of local governments declaring a climate emergency is significant and developing an understanding of how their responses are operationalised is critical. Previous studies indicated that local government practitioners conceptualise climate change as a complex emergency but tend to suggest conventional, ‘business as usual’ responses (Aldunce et al., 2016; Fünfgeld and McEvoy, 2014; Juhola et al., 2011). Since the release of these studies, governments around the world have made declarations of climate emergency. A climate emergency mode is a move away from routine approaches, instead encouraging action that goes well beyond business as usual by demanding a radical, urgent mobilisation of economic and social resources at an abnormal level of intensity and scale so to appropriately address the climate crisis and ensure a safe climate (Spratt, 2019). To date, it is unknown if the newly released climate emergency plans by local governments continue to suggest routine responses or whether – following the emergency declarations – we will see the making of a more complex response fitting the complex problem of climate change.

In this paper, we critically analyse how the climate emergency mode is being operationalised by local governments beyond declarations of intent. We investigate whether signals of change towards a new type of climate governance are being embedded within newly developed climate emergency plans. To do this, we have created a conceptual framework for understanding climate emergency mode that builds upon the work of Handmer and Dovers (2013) and Aldunce et al. (2016). The paper is divided into four main sections. We begin by detailing an understanding of different types of emergencies and emergency approaches, building the foundations of our conceptual framework. This framework outlines 10 key attributes which form a climate emergency mode. We then provide a state of play of the local governments' responses following their climate emergency declarations. In the third section of the paper, we investigate if and how the new frame of emergency is being embedded in two new plans of action, namely, those of the City of Darebin (Melbourne, Australia) and the City of Auckland (New Zealand). The paper concludes with a discussion providing initial insights into the rise of climate emergency mode in governance systems that may provide a way forward from business as usual to a complex emergency response for climate change.

Section snippets

Different types of emergencies and emergency approaches

An emergency, in a disaster management or hazard risk reduction context, can be defined as an ‘event, imminent or actual, that threatens people, property or the environment and which requires a co-ordinated and rapid response’ (Australian Institute for Disaster Resilience, 2019). Emergencies and emergency approaches fall into three key categories – ‘routine’, ‘non-routine’ or ‘complex’ – distinguished by the emergency's scale, the amount of uncertainty inherent in the emergency and the policy

Climate change understood as complex emergency - but what is the emergency response?

Perhaps comparable to climate change adaptation versus mitigation practices – that is, actions addressing the impacts versus those addressing its causes – there are three dominant conventional, value-informed frames employed by local government practitioners that shape climate change responses (Fünfgeld and McEvoy, 2014). These frames are activated particularly when the purpose of climate change action has not been well articulated and include: ‘avoiding disasters’, ‘community resilience’ and

The emerging climate emergency mode approach

In the time since publication of studies by Aldunce et al. (2016) and Fünfgeld and McEvoy (2014), governments around the world have declared a climate emergency. Climate emergency mode moves from the routine approaches by encouraging action that goes well beyond business as usual. It demands a radical, urgent mobilisation of economic and social resources at an abnormal level of intensity and scale in an effort to appropriately address the climate crisis and ensure a safe climate (Spratt, 2019).

The rise of climate emergency plans

By the end of November 2019, approximately 1200 local governments have declared a climate emergency. But according to CEDAMIA (Climate Emergency Declaration and Mobilisation In Action),1 only 15 have purported to have released an associated climate emergency response in the form of either a draft plan or final plan as of the 30 November 2019 (Table 1). While the objectives of the responses are similar, their state of development, scope,

Research approach

Darebin and Auckland Council present ‘unique’ cases of two well-resourced ‘early adopters’ attempting to enable and enact an appropriate response to the climate emergency. Rather than focusing our in-depth study only on one of these cases, we argue that an assessment and synthesis of findings from both of these local government plans provides a more holistic picture, with stronger and more reliable evidence than a single-case study would generate (Yin, 2009). Initially, we scored all existing

Multi-case study of Auckland, New Zealand, and the City of Darebin, Melbourne, Australia

In this section, we review the cases of Auckland's Climate Action Framework and the City of Darebin's Climate Emergency Plan against the 10 key attributes within the climate emergency response attributes framework.

Summary and discussion

In summary, both Auckland's and Darebin's plans include the following themes: urgency of action; restoring a safe climate; adapting to a changing climate; plan for informed action; social mobilisation; coordination, partnerships and advocacy for action; and equity and social justice.

The attribute of urgency is present in both plans by means of actions, demonstrating recognition of the need for more radical decarbonisation. However, neither plan incorporates an explicit understanding or

Conclusion

This study investigated how the new frame of climate emergency has been embedded within early local government adopters of climate emergency plans. The insights gained have contributed to an initial understanding of a climate emergency mode in governance systems that provides a way forward from business as usual to a complex emergency response for climate change. Throughout this paper, we have highlighted that a climate emergency mode has implications for the theory and practice of policy and

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

References (46)

  • P. Berke et al.

    Searching for the good plan: a meta-analysis of plan quality studies

    J. Plan. Lit.

    (2009)
  • A. Bowen et al.

    Climate-change policy in the United Kingdom

  • H. Bulkeley et al.

    An Urban Politics of Climate Change: Experimentation and the Governing of Socio-Technical Transitions

    (2015)
  • B. Butler

    Economic impact of Australia’s bushfires set to exceed $4.4bn cost of black Saturday

  • City of Darebin

    Darebin Climate Change and Peak Oil Adaptation Plan

  • City of Darebin

    Darebin Community Climate Change Action Plan 2009–2015

  • City of Darebin

    Darebin Climate Emergency Plan 2017–2022. City of Darebin

  • R. Cretney

    “An opportunity to hope and dream”: disaster politics and the emergence of possibility through community-led recovery

    Antipode

    (2019)
  • K. Davidson et al.

    Reconfiguring urban governance in an age of rising city networks: a research agenda

    Urban Stud.

    (2019)
  • G. Duncan

    Auckland council: is it too big to last?

    Policy Q.

    (2016)
  • H. Fünfgeld et al.

    Frame divergence in climate change adaptation policy: insights from Australian local government planning

    Environ. Planning C: Government Policy

    (2014)
  • L. Gibbs et al.

    Beyond Bushfires: Community Resilience and Recovery Final Report

    (2016)
  • P. Gilding

    War: What Is it Good for? WWII Economic Mobilisation an Analogy for Climate action. Breakthrough

  • Cited by (35)

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text