Holistic view of what we need to mitigate climate change and build climate resilience in our cities and regions in a democratic way – what we term climate democracy. The Climate Democracy Model consists of practical, interconnected tools for a city or region to assess and analyse its progress towards climate resilience through democratic means, focusing on diversity of actors and knowledge, participatory culture, resourcing and competencies for climate democracy.
Name of Method
Brief description
Holistic view of what we need to mitigate climate change and build climate resilience in our cities and regions in a democratic way – what we term climate democracy. The Climate Democracy Model consists of practical, interconnected tools for a city or region to assess and analyse its progress towards climate resilience through democratic means, focusing on diversity of actors and knowledge, participatory culture, resourcing and competencies for climate democracy.
Type/Level of Method
Challenges
Financial limitations: expands thinking about what financing is for – for social and economic transition that doesn’t leave anyone worse off, for cross-sectoral, cross-border, multi-level capability building for democratic climate action with civil servants and diverse city actors. Also makes clear what needs to change in financing for climate democracy i.e. portfolio divestment that screens out investment in fossil fuel heavy initiatives and shifts resources away from false, technocratic solutions such as carbon capture technologies.
Specific climate-related challenges: focuses on place-based intervention on climate-neutral smart cities, circular economy, mobility, energy transition, and nature-based solutions. Pitched at the city level to help them assess their current position and move towards climate resilience in ways that reinforce democracy.
Short term thinking: links short-term thinking and resourcing with lack of durability for climate resilience. Promotes shift to long-termism including funding beyond election cycles.
Existing governance structures: highlights importance of increasing diversity of actors and knowledge and participatory culture for ground-up experimentation in new tools, ecosystems and levels of governance to withstand the impacts of climate change.
Historical legacies and institutional distrust: highlights important of competencies and supportive environments that breaking down silos between government and community actors and make transparent decision making processes, and share power and knowledge, helping overcome citizen mistrust of government.
Inadequate public participation: gets cities to see how participation is more than just involving citizens in decision making processes – it’s about decision making processes being more participatory. Highlights how shifting the ways we engage with each other and the environment counts significantly towards greater climate resilience.
Problem, Purpose and Needs
The Climate Democracy Model is a response to gaps we see in pan-European efforts to ensure action for climate resilience is taken in ways that reinforce democracy. Expert-led, technical ‘solutions’ towards climate action that lack deep democratic support will inevitably fail to build popular consent, and open the way for those who for whatever reason oppose necessary action. Durable change requires democratic approaches that work on the human and local scale. Community voices and knowledge, connected by collaboration that comes from the bottom up not the top down, must be the foundation of the action that governments and civil society take. The Climate Democracy Model shows the link between these things, providing frameworks and tools to help cities and regions assess and celebrate progress towards climate democracy.
Relevance to Climate Neutrality
Challenges
Thematic Areas
Impact Goals
Issue Complexity
Issue Polarisation
Enabling Condition
Essential Considerations for Commissioning Authorities
The Climate Democracy Model is open for use by governments to assess and analyse their city or region’s progress towards climate resilience based on factors of democracy. It is crucial that the city government is on board with the method and they should be engaged throughout as a stakeholder, rather than commissioner. They should be supported to understand the process, but not should not be able to steer it. It is also critical that commissioning authorities understand this method provides ‘open source’ tools for subjective, qualitative, reflexive assessment of a city or region’s climate resilience through democratic means, and is non-partisan and an independent process from government.
Engagement Journey
Governance Models and Approaches
Enabling Conditions
Democratic Purpose
Spectrum of participation
Communication Channels
Actors and Stakeholder Relationships
The Climate Democracy Model is for use by anyone working in cities or regions on climate action or policy, but it will be particularly helpful for:
- Civil society organisations working on climate change, resilience and democratic innovation;
- Public servants designing or delivering climate innovation programmes;
- Funders of climate innovation programmes;
- Researchers and students examining ‘climate democracy’ and/or working in climate or democracy fields;
- Citizens and grassroots groups progressing change from the ground-up.
Climate Democracy Model use to date observed:
- Mandates setting among project consortium partners partners (i.e. civil society, funders, city government, citizens): determining conditions for climate democracy in the city location and/or within the programme structure early, deciding where should programme efforts and resources be focused, and what budget, resources and timing are needed. Deciding best methodological fit, and actors and competencies needed.
- System understanding among project consortium partners focused on city government stakeholders to help them assess their current position and move towards climate resilience in ways that reinforce democracy. Introduction of relevant parts of the Climate Democracy Model to explore this thinking through workshops facilitated by civil society actors, that build city and community actor capacity and capability in climate democracy.
- Strategic learning: use of the Climate Democracy Model over time across a city’s climate journey to reflect on what’s changing across the programme as a result of interventions and actions taken, identifying ‘emerging shifts’ and ‘future possibilities’ towards climate democracy.
Participant Numbers
Actors and Stakeholders
Participant Recruitment
Interaction between participants
Format
Social Innovation Development Stage
Scope
Time commitment
Three of the four Climate Democracy Model tools (Canopy for Climate Democracy, Actor Types & Interactions, and Landscape Analysis) are specifically designed to be run in a workshop format, facilitated by civil society organisations with city government actors. These workshops take approximately 1.5-2 hours to run with <10 people. They have not been trialled with larger groups yet, but we would estimate allowed at least half a day of splitting tool usage across 25-50 people in a larger workshop format.
The Competencies for Climate Democracy tool is a read-only document for use in conversations on resourcing and skill profiling for climate democracy work, with no specific time commitment.
Resources and Investments
Typical duration
Resources and Investments
In-house
Step by Step
The Climate Democracy Model consists of practical, interconnected tools for a city or region to assess and analyse its progress towards climate resilience through democratic means, for use continuously for multiple levels – Big picture, Detail-oriented, and Full spectrum – across a city’s climate journey, or as part of a policy design cycle. All levels of tool usage help pinpoint levers for change for city governments and stakeholders to act upon.
BIG PICTURE
Canopy for Climate Democracy tool provides a way of assessing and seeing the big picture of a city or region’s climate resilience based on four segments for climate democracy: diversity of actors and knowledge, participatory culture, resourcing, and competencies for climate democracy.
DETAIL-ORIENTED
Actor Types & Interactions tool helps to identify different types of actors present in action for climate resilience, reveal who is missing, and build inclusive and diverse engagement strategies.
Competencies for Climate Democracy tool provides reflection on competencies present in work programmes for climate action, and helps build job and team profiles and recruitment strategies.
FULL-SPECTRUM
Landscape Analysis tool expands thinking about a project or issue, helping teams progressively identify areas for change and build compelling stories about the impacts of making these changes. It helps determine where teams could or should be focusing their efforts, and provides a way of continuously realigning priorities.
Evaluation
The OECD’s Evaluation Guidelines for Deliberative Processes could be adapted for the Climate Democracy Model.
Connecting Methods
Co-Creation: the Climate Democracy Model emphasises diversity of actors and knowledge and centering of marginalised voices commonly excluded from design processes and decision making.
Collective Intelligence: the Climate Democracy Model seeks to engage wider publics in democratic climate action by making use of their collective intelligence toa address complex societal issues, building individual and collective agency for system change
Participatory Budgeting: The Climate Democracy Model seeks democratic distribution and use of resourcing, advocating for methods whereby participants engage in deliberation regarding how public resources ought to be allocated and distributed.
Stakeholder Map or Ecosystem Map: because the Climate Democracy Model is strictly non-partisan, it needs to have the active involvement and commitment of a diverse range of stakeholders. Stakeholder or ecosystem mapping supports this aim.
World Café: The Climate Democracy Model emphasises importance of setting the environment for diverse actors to have conversations regarding relevant societal issues, in this case on matters relating to community and climate resilience.
Flexibility and Adaptability
The Climate Democracy Model is a compass, not a map. It doesn’t hold the answers, it shows a direction, and wants to provoke conversations for change. It is ambitious yet pragmatic, showing how we can move towards a climate resilient world, democratically. The core features that shouldn’t be compromised this method provides ‘open source’ tools for subjective, qualitative, reflexive assessment of a city or region’s climate resilience through democratic means, and is non-partisan and an independent process from government.
Existing Guidelines and Best Practice
References and Further Resources
Charles F. Sabel. 2021. “A Call for Humble Governments: How to Overcome Political Gridlock in Liberal Democracies.” https://demoshelsinki.fi/julkaisut/a-call-for-humble-governments/.
Bahadur, Aditya, and Thomas Tanner. 2014. “Transformational Resilience Thinking: Putting People, Power and Politics at the Heart of Urban Climate Resilience.” Environment and Urbanization 26 (1): 200–214. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956247814522154.
Bell, Simon, and Stephen Morse. 2013. “How People Use Rich Pictures to Help Them Think and Act.” Systemic Practice and Action Research 26 (4): 331–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-012-9236-x.
Bullard, Robert D. 1995. “Unequal Protection: Environmental Justice and Communities of Color.” Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society 15 (4): 203–203. https://doi.org/10.1177/027046769501500454.
Conte, Kathleen P., and Seanna Davidson. 2020. “Using a ‘Rich Picture’ to Facilitate Systems Thinking in Research Coproduction.” Health Research Policy and Systems 18 (1): 14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-019-0514-2.
Cook, Annie, Daniela Amann, and Hanne Bastiaensen. 2021. “Guide to Deliberation: Participatory Budgeting.” https://www.demsoc.org/blog/guide-to-deliberation-participatory-budgeting.
Costanza-Chock, Sasha, ,. 2020. Design Justice : Community-Led Practices to Build the Worlds We Need.
Democratic Society. 2021a. “Climate Resilience Needs Community Roots.” March 11, 2021. https://www.demsoc.org/blog/climate-resilience-needs-community-roots.
———. 2021b. “The Orléans Métropole - Putting down Roots.” March 11, 2021. https://www.demsoc.org/blog/the-orleans-metropole-putting-down-roots.
———. n.d. “Democratic Climate Model.” https://oecd-opsi.org/innovations/democratic-climate-model/.
DFID. 2011. “Technical Competencies for Climate and Environment Advisers.” https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/214122/technical-competencies-climate-environment-advisers.pdf.
EIT Climate-KIC, and Democratic Society. 2021a. “Healthy, Clean Cities Deep Demonstrations Amsterdam. Work Package 4: Cross-Cutting Work Area A, Government as an Enabler for Communities Development (Unpublished).” Amsterdam: Democratic Society and EIT Climate-KIC.
———. 2021b. “Healthy, Clean Cities Deep Demonstrations Vienna. Deliverable 3: Lead Experiment Green Finance and Participation (Unpublished).” Vienna: Democratic Society and EIT Climate-KIC.
European Commission. Directorate General for Research and Innovation. 2018. Mission-Oriented Research & Innovation in the European Union :A Problem Solving Approach to Fuel Innovation Led Growth. LU: Publications Office. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/36546.
FCDO. 2020. “FCDO Climate and Environment Technical Competency Framework September 2020.” https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/928595/FCDO-Climate-Environment-TCF-Sept2020.pdf.
Fraser, Tatiana. n.d. “Towards a New, Holistic Framework of Systems Change: Adapting Geels’ Transition Theory.” https://medium.com/refuge-for-systems-leaders/towards-a-new-holistic-framework-of-systems-change-adapting-geels-transition-theory-8d589fb6de0a.
Geus, Tessa de, Julia M. Wittmayer, and Fenna Vogelzang. 2022. “Biting the Bullet: Addressing the Democratic Legitimacy of Transition Management.” Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 42 (March): 201–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2021.12.008.
Gubrium, Jaber F., , Holstein, James A.,, Marvasti, Amir B.,, McKinney, Karyn D.,,. 2012. “The SAGE Handbook of Interview Research : The Complexity of the Craft.” Thousand Oaks, Calif.: SAGE. /z-wcorg/. 2012. https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&AN=986779.
Kahane, Adam. 2021. Facilitating Breakthrough. Oakland, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.
Khatibi, Farzaneh Shaikh, Aysin Dedekorkut-Howes, Michael Howes, and Elnaz Torabi. 2021. “Can Public Awareness, Knowledge and Engagement Improve Climate Change Adaptation Policies?” Discover Sustainability 2 (1): 18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-021-00024-z.
Land Trust Alliance. n.d. “Divestment and Socially Responsible Investment.” n.d. https://climatechange.lta.org/divest-sri/.
Lee, Panthea, and Chelsey Lepage. n.d. “Designing Collaborations for Courageous Change.” https://www.reboot.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Masterclass-Session-1_-_Designing-Collaborations-for-Urgent-Courageous-Change_-Presentation-.pdf.
LSE. n.d. “Financing a Just Transition.” https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/financing-a-just-transition/.
Meadows, Donella. n.d. “Leverage Points: Places to Intervene in a System.” The Donella Meadows Project: Academy for Systems Change. n.d. https://donellameadows.org/archives/leverage-points-places-to-intervene-in-a-system/.
Mulgan, Geoff. 2019. Social Innovation: How Societies Find the Power to Change. Bristol: Policy Press.
Weidinger, Rachel. 2020. “Polyvocal Narrative Strategy: Turning Many Voices into Durable Change.” November 19, 2020. https://narrativeinitiative.org/blog/polyvocal-narrative-strategy-turning-many-voices-into-durable-change/.
Williams, Michael, and Tami Moser. 2019. “The Art of Coding and Thematic Exploration in Qualitative Research.” International Management Review 15: 45.
Yoder, Kate. 2020. “Want People to Care about Climate Change? Skip the Jargon.” Grist. February 26, 2020. https://grist.org/climate/want-people-to-care-about-climate-change-skip-the-jargon/.
Коментари ()