To Act Or Not to Act Tiina Kikerpuu
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
To Act ornot To Act Municipal Authority over Green House Gas mitigation Tiina Kikerpuu Degree project insustainable development, 2010 Examensarbete ihållbar utveckling 30 hp tillmasterexamen, 2010 Biology Education Centre, Uppsala University, and Division ofIndustrial Ecology, KTH Supervisors: Nils Brandt and Kristin Fahlberg To Act or not to Act? Municipal Authority over Green House Gas mitigation Author: Tiina Kikerpuu Uppsala University Master Programme in Sustainable Development Supervisors: Nils Brandt, Kristin Fahlberg Division of Industrial Ecology Royal Institute of technology - KTH Abstract The purpose of this study is twofold. Firstly, it is a feasibility study intended to contribute to further research on the municipal authority to mitigate green house gas emissions. This will be done by studying the municipal authority on green house gas mitigation measures in three Swedish municipalities. To fulfil the purpose the following questions are set to be answered. What is the municipal authority over green house gas mitigation measures in these three municipalities? - What is the formal ability of municipalities in Sweden to act on GHG mitigation? - What measures do these three municipalities use to mitigate GHG emissions? - How do the municipalities consider their climate authority? The study focused on measures within three sectors; traffic and transport; energy, and information and out-reaches. Transport and energy make up the main sources of GHG emissions in the municipalities, and information was a common measure. 4 categories of authority were developed; Legal authority, Economic authority, Climate competence and Collaborations, this to get a picture of what influenced climate authority. The idea for this came from previous research that involved aspects similar to the categories. The result showed that municipal climate authority is quite relative, the categories are relevant, but political will and ambitions on tackling climate change are decisive. In the transport sector the municipal authority was restricted due to the authority of other actors. The authority in the energy sector was limited because national legislation had precedence. The municipal climate authority is considered strong within its own organisation, the municipal role as wide and involving many responsibilities. The role was described as wider than the municipal authority. Most of the climate measures are directed towards the municipality’s own organisation, the premises of the municipality and the services it provides. Outside the municipal organisation and services, but within its geographic unit, in the specific measures developed in this study, the climate au thority was weaker and mainly exercised through collaborations. The municipalities are not using their climate authority in full. By implementing measures like climate considerations in public procurement, their authority could be improved. 2 Acknowledgments I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Nils Brandt, Associate professor and Kristin Fahlberg, PhD at the division for industrial ecology at The Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) in Stockholm, for letting me on this project and for their constructive critique and enthusiasm in their supervision. I would also like to thank Brita Svensson, programme coordinator at Uppsala University, for her patience and organisation of this thesis course. Finally I would like to thank my friends and family for their support. Tiina Kikerpuu Stockholm, May, 2010 3 Abbreviations, Acronyms & Clarifications CDM- Clean Development Mechanisms EU – European Union GHG – Green House Gas (In the data for the Swedish municipalities - CO2, CH4_ekv, HFC_ekv, N2O_ekv, PFC_ekv och SF6_ekv) When studying the measures for GHG emission mitigation use of the terms ―climate change measures‖, ―climate measures‖ will sometimes be used interchangeable. The general work of the municipalities to mitigate GHG emissions will be called ―climate work‖, and ―climate authority‖ is the authority to mitigate GHG emissions. KLIMP- Climate investment programme. The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency supports municipalities and invests in local actions to mitigate GHG effect. KSL –Stockholm County Association of Local Authorities KTH - The Royal institute of Technology LIP – Local investment programme of the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency promoting ecological sustainability. NGO – Non Governmental Organisation SKL –The Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions (SALAR) SL – Stockholm Public Transport, Storstockholms Lokaltrafik 4 Content 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 7 1.1. Purpose and Research Questions ..................................................................................... 9 1.2. Disposition ....................................................................................................................... 9 2. Background .......................................................................................................................... 11 2.1. Swedish municipalities .................................................................................................. 11 2.2. The Municipal Role ....................................................................................................... 12 2.3. Local Autonomy and Self-Governance ......................................................................... 13 2.4. Municipal climate governance ....................................................................................... 14 2.5. Municipal authority and its framework ......................................................................... 16 3. Methodology ........................................................................................................................ 18 3.1. Qualitative research ....................................................................................................... 18 3.1.1. Selection of cases - municipalities .......................................................................... 18 3.1.2. Literature and material ............................................................................................ 19 3.1. 3. Categories of Authority .......................................................................................... 19 3.1.4. Semi-structures interviews ...................................................................................... 21 3.1.5. Developing interview schedule ............................................................................... 22 4. The formal structure of municipal climate authority in Sweden .......................................... 24 4.1. Legislation ..................................................................................................................... 24 4.2. The Environmental Objectives ...................................................................................... 25 4.3. Sweden’s Climate Policy ............................................................................................... 27 4.3.1. National objectives and measures ........................................................................... 27 4.3.2. National climate policy at local level ...................................................................... 28 6. Local climate measures ........................................................................................................ 30 6.1. Climate change mitigation measures in Uppsala ........................................................... 30 6.2. Climate change mitigation measures in Upplands-Väsby ............................................. 34 6.3. Climate change mitigation measures in Solna ............................................................... 37 5 6.4. Conclusion – climate mitigation measures .................................................................... 41 7. Analysis of the Interviews .................................................................................................... 43 7.1. The municipal climate work .......................................................................................... 43 7.2. General outlook on climate authority ............................................................................ 49 7.3. The categorical authority ............................................................................................... 53 7.3.1. Economic authority ................................................................................................. 53 7.3.2. Climate Competence ............................................................................................... 55 7.3.3. Legal authority ........................................................................................................ 56 7.3.4. Climate authority through collaboration ................................................................. 57 7.3.5. Conclusion - Categorical authority ......................................................................... 59 7.4. The assessment questions .............................................................................................. 60 7.4.1. Conclusion - the assessment questions ................................................................... 70 8. Review .................................................................................................................................. 73 9. Concluding discussion .........................................................................................................