Print Version
FACING THE ENVIRONMENTAL CHALLENGE
LOCAL AND GLOBAL: THE ROLE OF
LOCAL GOVERNMENT IN A SUSTAINABLE WORLD
Kaarin Taipale
National and local priorities — do they
differ from each other?
Only 10 years
ago, to talk about “the foreign policy of a city” might have
almost amounted to treason. That is solely the responsibility of
nation states, would have been the angry reply. But the world
has moved on, and today many metropolises have deputy mayors in
charge solely of international affairs — Paris and Sao Paolo are
prime examples. In Europe, many cities, not only capitals, and
not only major cities of the European Union, but active cities
and regions, have their own office, or “embassy”, in Brussels.
Cities want to be seen and heard; they also want to be close to
the funding mechanisms of the EU. Municipal international
cooperation is not just “twinning” or, for instance, the
“city-to-city cooperation” that originated in the cold war years
between West European and Soviet cities. Cities form regional
and global networks in order to learn from each other, to work
together, even when they compete with each other. Networking
also multiplies their purchasing power on the international
markets. Diplomacy and foreign policy have become local-level
activities as well. Maybe — despite the competition among cities
— it is only defense that remains within the competence of the
national sphere. That said, even issues such as security,
conflict resolution, and crime prevention, which earlier were
typically considered national affairs, are today also pressing
local issues.
World trade has
traditionally been regarded as a multilateral issue. Yet most
cities were born around local market places; additionally,
employment, commerce, industry, subsidies, taxation, production
patterns, transport, and logistics are also very much local
issues. The provision of public services is a case in point. But
have local governments been invited to the World Trade
Organization negotiations on reducing tariffs and trade
barriers? The answer, regrettably, is no.
Water is a good
example illustrating potential conflicts between local,
national, and multinational interests. A nation state has an
interest in protecting the welfare of a multinational company
that is headquartered within its borders. A city in another
country, however, might, instead of selling its water and energy
utilities to the multinational, prefer to guarantee the
provision of freshwater and sanitation according to its own
criteria, and would eventually even want to use the existing
publicly owned utility to secure employment for its citizens. If
seen as a global trade issue, delivering basic services at the
local level could easily lead to controversies between different
spheres of interest.
Would
multilateral agreements be different if they were negotiated by
local governments worldwide instead of national governments? And
if yes, how? How do the national and the local governments’
points of view on the same matter differ from each other?
Perhaps the roles could be defined thus: the national level
would be legislative and the local level the executive; both
would be representative, yet totally inseparable and
interdependent?
Once, when I
discussed the need for the local level to get its voice heard in
multilateral negotiations, an experienced diplomat — with the
best of intentions — nodded his head and acknowledged that yes,
why not, “in those specific issues that concern you”. I had to
ask which are the issues he thought would have no relevance for
the local level, for I could not think of any myself. Neither
could he.
From grassroots
up — both representation and policy-making
Representation
— democracy — could be described as an upstream process,
bottom-up reaching from villages and communities to local
governments — the first of the layers that cover the globe
completely — to other sub-national levels (states, cantons,
provinces, prefectures, etc.) to sovereign states and various
sub-regional coalitions of the willing (EU, G77, G8, etc.) to
international and multilateral organizations, such as the UN or
the international financing institutions.
However, in a
world of equity and participation, representation is not a
stable pyramid but a multi-dimensional dynamic process. All
parts are linked to each other. ‘Low’ and ‘high’, ‘up’ and
‘down’ are no absolutes but contextual definitions. The local
must be in direct dialogue with the global, as well as with the
regional, national, and sub-sovereign.
During the
Stockholm Water Week in August 2003, the European Commission
arranged a seminar about the European Union’s Water Initiative (EUWI),
which had been published in Johannesburg a year earlier. There
were many references to the local level, local communities,
civil society, international water resources management, and
global governance; however, no one mentioned local governments
and cities! I expressed my concern that if cities were not
directly involved, and if there was no local water governance in
place, there would be no water, either for agriculture, or
industry, or for the wealthy or the poor. The reactions were
varied. The representative of the New Economic Partnership for
African Development (NEPAD) reminded us how he had said that
everyone would be involved in a multi-stakeholder process,
and by so saying the local level was thereby implicitly
included. Someone from the European Commission mentioned that
the EU has decentralized its programs, but water and sanitation
have not been national priorities; he noted that perhaps more
work should be done in that area. The representative of African
Water ministers (AMCOW) said very poignantly that national
governments will have to work with local governments nationally,
and EUWI has to make sure that this happens.
Vertical and
horizontal — policy and implementation
Implementation
of policies can be seen as a vertical process, where
-
global
targets, such as the Millenium Development Goals (MDGs),
are translated into
-
national policies, targets, and timelines, where
-
national legislation and programs create the framework
for implementation
-
national resources are allocated
-
tasks,
responsibilities, and targets are delegated to
sub-national levels
-
implementation tools are developed together with the
local level.
If
representation is a bottom-up process, then likewise is
monitoring: the local level reports to national and global
levels how it has succeeded in implementing set targets. When
the UN Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) discussed in
2003 the follow-up of the Johannesburg “Earth Summit” Plan of
Implementation (JPol) agreed upon during 2002, I could not
comprehend why the local level was not mandated to report the
number of people to which it had provided access to freshwater,
sanitation, and clean energy. How can we know how much the local
level has contributed to reducing the numbers of people living
in poverty or to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions? How
on earth are the national governments going to do this job if
not with local governments?
Monitoring is
not only about follow-up, but also a horizontal process of
mutual learning: description of benchmarks, success stories,
failures, and mistakes. This is how new policies, strategies,
and tools can be developed, in horizontal cooperation with the
local level worldwide. Advocacy and mutual learning in
particular are processes in which local government associations
have an important role to play in assisting cities that want and
need to work with each other.
Local governments
implementing sustainable development —
Not only what, but how?
Most basic
services, in one way or another, are provided within the local
public domain. But that alone does not guarantee sustainable
development. The critical question to ask is how they are
provided. Will the global common goods — water, energy, air,
soil, food, security (the list is being heavily debated and has
yet to be defined) — be protected at the same time as the
services are secured? You can provide access to freshwater by
transporting it in small plastic bottles from the other side of
the world, or you can secure access to energy while producing
hazardous wastes that pollute groundwater, air, soil, and the
food chain and cause irreparable, long-term damage to human
health. You can try to bring security with armed guards and
closed gates, but that will destroy your community. You can
create mobility solutions, such as chauffeur-driven limousines,
for the few, but at the same time leave the many waiting for
over-crowded open trucks. The point is that a system cannot be
sustainable if production leads to pollution, illness, and
unjustifiable inequality.
The role of
local government is to safeguard the public interest and the
sustainability of production and consumption of basic services.
But something is seriously wrong if in the process of opening up
global markets this basic responsibility of governments at all
levels is diminished because it is seen as a barrier to
“liberalization of trade”, when in fact it must be an integral
part of any new regime of international trade. Once again, water
is a good example. Some human rights lawyers argue that water is
a human right, not a commodity or a service. Naturally, water
should be managed professionally, in an economically sustainable
manner, with a fair cost recovery system, but all of those are
matters of governance, not of trade.
The customer is
king. Public procurement in OECD countries constitutes up to 15%
of the GDP. If governments at all levels choose goods and
services that are produced in a sustainable manner, they can
make a huge difference.
Public
transport is one of the key services that most local authorities
have to consider. Once again, it is not a utility that can be
managed independently, by traffic planners alone. It is a
function of factors such as land use planning, image of the
public transport system, and quality of the service, i.e.
reliability, comfort, efficiency, pricing, network, energy
efficiency, and so on. Does the system support equal access and
help reduce greenhouse gas emissions, air pollution, and noise?
Does it support the local economy and employment? Does it help
create a livable urban space?
Many cities
have shifted from ‘rational’ management to strategic leadership.
New management tools are needed. Triple Bottom Line (TBL)
reporting and ecoBUDGET are among such new instruments that have
recently been developed for non-profit organizations and
municipalities.
Urban transformations
in Almada, Portugal
When you cross
the river Tejo, coming from Lisbon over the old Bridge of the 25th
of April, renamed after the date of the Carnation Revolution,
you arrive in the City of Almada. Looking left, you see a huge
red crane on which is written the name Lisnave. It used to be
the symbol of one of the biggest shipyards in the world, but it
was closed down at the beginning of 2001. Certainly the city was
not consulted when the financial conditions were created that
forced the shipyard to quit Almada, Portugal, and Europe, leaving
thousands of families without work and the city with a vacant
but heavily polluted piece of land in a prime location.
Almada, a
municipality of over 100,000 inhabitants, is an extraordinary
mix of urban landscapes: miles of beaches facing the Atlantic,
an old center with narrow winding streets, farmland with cows, a
naval base, warehouses without roofs, areas of multistory social
housing from the 1970s with almost no public spaces, urbane
squares from the 1950s, with cafes shaded by trees, and an
impressive refurbished retail shopping center with a plaza for
public events, a park, and a library.
The Mayor
of Almada, Ms. Maria Emilia Neto de Sousa, and the Director of
the Environmental Planning Department, Ms. Catarina Freitas,
were the driving forces in organizing an international
competition to decide the future of 115 hectares of brownfield
sites comprising the former shipyard, a landfill area, and its
surroundings with layers of built history dating from different
periods. The major procedural innovation of this competition is
the combining of environmental analysis with development
planning.
However, beyond
that, the competition was also a signal of who was in charge of
the redevelopment: the City of Almada. The landowner, in this
case the national government, had already drafted a high-rise
luxury housing plan for the site without consulting the city,
and without any analysis of the soil. By its action, the city
reminded the national government that it had the sole power to determine
land uses, and that it had no intention of giving that power
away.
Local government
leaders like declarations, too
Since the Local
Government Session (LGS) at the UN World Summit on Sustainable
Development in Johannesburg during August-September 2002, local
governments have organized major regional meetings in order to
analyze the Johannesburg outcomes and to discuss the next steps.
These post-Johannesburg meetings have already taken place in
Latin America, Europe, and Asia-Pacific. The Africities Summit
took place in Cameroon in December 2003. It is obvious that
Local Government worldwide is now much more conscious of its
global role and responsibilities than before Johannesburg. This
means that both strengthening local government through capacity-building, national legislation, and national policies —
decentralization — and planning local implementation strategies
and tools are discussed. The paradigm of sustainable development
is a priority in cities, be they in Chile, Uganda, Italy, China,
Japan, or Australia.
Declarations
similar to the final documents of ministerial meetings have been
prepared in the mayoral meetings in Johannesburg, Nunoa, Kolding,
Sydney, and Yaounde. The language of these declarations is often
more clumsy than truly inspirational, but the process of
drafting the texts assists greatly in creating a common
understanding of the issues, strategies, and goals.
Latin America mayors
met 'post-Johannesburg' in Nunoa, Chile
In the meeting
in Nunoa, among the 100-plus mayors from over 20 countries were
mayors from northwestern cities of Latin American, who had
never traveled outside of their own countries before. I was
reminded of how Finnish municipal civil servants would, already
in the 19th century, journey to continental Europe to
do benchmarking, long before the term was coined. They traveled
to find out how the most advanced engineers ran water utilities,
for example, and took their newly acquired knowledge home. Even
today, the Finnish people still enjoy the fruits of those study trips
— building infrastructure is a truly long-term investment not
only of money and material resources, but of know-how. How silly
not to try to learn from your colleagues in other countries!
The Mayor of
Nunoa, Pedro Sabat, had been in the Local Government Session at
the UN World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg
during 2002 and he was proud to announce the first
post-Johannesburg regional meeting of local government leaders,
who then signed the Nunoa Charter. A strong message about
the urgency of decentralization was directed at the national
governments of the continent. It was obvious that the meeting
succeeded in awakening a totally new awareness of local
government in Latin America.
Africities
About 2000
African mayors and local leaders met in Yaounde, Cameroon in
December 2003 to discuss access to basic services (water,
sanitation, energy, solid waste, education, culture, and
health), financing, gender equity, partnerships and
participation, urban security, governance, and decentralization.
These discussions were at first among themselves and their development
partners, but on the closing day also with African local
government ministers.
We (the
Mayors and local leaders attending Africities 3) also stressed
that far from weakening the State, decentralization has proved
to be a determining factor in stimulating local development, and
enabling citizens to increase their participation in management
and decision-making processes in cities. (Mayor’s Declaration)
Mayors from around
the US call on the federal government to join in the fight to reduce global warming
On October 21,
2003, 155 mayors from across the US, including members from both
the US Conference of Mayors and the National League of Cities,
issued the bipartisan “Mayors’ Statement on Global Warming”. In
the statement, the mayors call on the federal government to join
their cities’ efforts to reduce the threat of global warming.
The statement
came one week before the US Senate took an historic first vote
on global warming legislation. This bipartisan legislation,
offered by Senators John McCain and Joseph Lieberman, would have
taken the first steps in setting up a system to begin to reduce
global warming caused by fossil fuel pollution.
“All levels of
government in this country and around the world must work
together to build a sustainable future,” said Mayor James Garner
of Hempstead, New York, president of the US Conference of
Mayors. “This must be a bipartisan urban, suburban, and national
effort.”
The mayors who
signed the statement represent more than 46 million people in
local communities ranging in size from 700 people in LaConner,
Washington, to more than 4 million people in the metropolitan region
of Houston, Texas. They are united by their cities’ commitment
to act quickly to reverse the harmful effects of global warming
and air pollution on their constituents.
“Portland has
been a leader in the fight against global warming for over a
decade,” said Mayor Vera Katz of Portland, Oregon. “We care
about the health of the planet, and we recognize the opportunity
to create new industries, jobs, and a better quality of life by
building a sustainable economy.”
“In San Antonio
we’ve added hybrid vehicles and bicycles to our fleet, and we’re
working with other cities in our region to analyze and reduce
energy use,” said Mayor Ed Garza of San Antonio, Texas.
“I’m proud that
my city has stabilized greenhouse gas emissions on the way to
our 20% carbon reduction goal,” said Mayor R.T. Rybak of
Minneapolis, Minnesota.
“To secure an
independent energy future, we must generate electrical power
from emission-free renewable energy resources, such as solar
power,” said Mayor Dick Murphy of San Diego, California. “It is
one of my top 10 goals for San Diego. It is good for our
national security, our economic security, and most importantly,
our environmental security.”
The mayors
cited energy security and accountability as vital reasons for
issuing the statement. Easing dependence on foreign oil by
increasing the use of alternative fuels such as wind, improves
local air quality and public health while also reducing global
warming.
In the US, 148
local governments participate in the Cities for Climate
Protection Campaign, a program of ICLEI—Local Governments for
Sustainability.
Sustainable
procurement of public services and products
When purchasing
products and services, public authorities use taxpayers’ money
“at all levels”, be they local, national, regional, or global.
Sustainable public procurement is a great illustration of how
cities can set an example, do research, and join forces to act
together towards common global goals.
Just by
switching to green electricity, EU public administrations can
reduce greenhouse gas emissions amounting to 18% of the EU Kyoto
obligations, if the market responds to the increased
demand for renewable electricity by increasing capacity. This is
one of the results of the European research project, RELIEF,
coordinated by ICLEI’s Sustainable Procurement team, and
supported by the European Commission. The project, which brings
together seven research institutes and six local governments
from across Europe, was set up in 2001. It was designed to
provide a scientific basis for the development of the concept of
green purchasing. The findings prove that sustainable
procurement is not just a symbolic activity, with marginal
practical effects, but can have a significant impact. For
example, switching to organic food in public purchasing for
canteens and catering would compensate for the nitrification impact
on European soils and waters of more than 2.2 million
inhabitants. Moreover, the increase in demand for green products
would help to improve the competitiveness of suppliers on the
private market, and the example set by public authorities can
also assist in changing consumer behavior. Again, an
illustration of this comes from the fields of information
technology equipment following the announcement by the US
government in 1993 that only EnergyStar certified computers
would be bought. Today, all computers sold around the world meet
these requirements. According to the calculations made by the
RELIEF project, this has already resulted in greenhouse gas
reductions equivalent to around 1 million inhabitants. If the
next generation of energy-efficient computers were to be
supported in a similar way, another 982,000 person equivalents
could be avoided in Europe alone. (A “person equivalent” is
calculated by dividing total emissions of a substance from a
given geographic area, for example Europe, by that area’s
population. This gives the average “emission” per person, which
can then be compared with the reductions generated by green
purchasing.)
Environmental demands
on purchasing in Gothenburg, Sweden
In Sweden, the
sum spent on procurement within the public sector amounts to 400
billion kroner a year (US $81 billion). In the Nordic countries, a great deal of
the procurement is handled by local authorities, who are in an
excellent position to encourage suppliers to offer more
environmentally compatible goods and services.
The City of
Gothenburg is one of the most industrialized municipalities in
Sweden with about 450,000 inhabitants, and 750,000 in the
region. The city’s local politicians understand the potential of
centrally controlled procurement using environmental
criteria. The development of procurement procedures began in
1989 with a thorough survey of legislation and regulations
relevant for public procurement. In 1990, the City Council made
a unanimous decision to oblige the city committees, boards, and
companies to include an environmental assessment every time a
decision was made to purchase something. The former Procurement
Authority was assigned the task of developing a model for
environmentally aware purchasing. This model, based on political
decisions, established working methods and an information
strategy, and has now been put into practice. All suppliers who
submit bids to the City of Gothenburg must provide an
environmental declaration and each procurement is subject to an
environmental assessment. Special project teams consisting of
purchasers, users, suppliers, and other stakeholders develop environmentally
optimized well-functioning goods and services. National
Guidelines for sustainable procurement have also been
established.
The benefits for the environment mean benefits for the
administration. Coordination of transport logistics reduced the number of
deliveries and so lowered prices. Environmentally friendly
limited-assortment led to less demand for storage, which also
lowered prices. The number of suppliers was reduced, so the
order processing became more effective. This meant that the
number of invoices in turn was reduced, leading to less
administrative work and lower prices. The model also included
collaboration with suppliers during the contract period, while
joint committees set up projects together with suppliers to
develop their products or find solutions that opened up new routes
to a healthier environment. These projects were often incorporated
in the agreements and have included the reuse of packaging and
products, as well as the arranging of transport of different
product groups from different suppliers to be delivered in the
same consignment. In this way, Gothenburg also has provided small and
medium-sized companies with opportunities to be suppliers to the city.
Strategic urban
sustainability management in Vaxjo, Sweden
The
Municipality of Vaxjo in Sweden has significant experience in
the Local Agenda 21 process and is also deeply engaged in
climate protection and water protection. To take the
environmental work one step further, the municipality decided to
implement an environmental management system, namely ecoBUDGET,
which is specifically developed for political organizations.
The system
includes environmental work both within the municipal
organization and the municipality as a geographical area. The
principal aim of ecoBUDGET is to manage natural
resources with the same efficiency as financial resources.
ecoBUDGET is a system which in conformity with other
environmental management systems strives for continuous
improvements.
With ecoBUDGET,
the traditional financial accounting system is complemented with
an environmental accounting system, in which physical quantities
are measured instead of money. A year with ecoBUDGET has
three phases: to prepare an environmental budget, to implement
planned measures to achieve the budget, and thirdly, to balance
the environmental annual accounts.
At the end of
the budget year a budget balance is drawn up. The budget balance
shows the actual environmental pressure compared to the planned
pressure in the budget. The budget balance is complemented by a
set of indicators representing the status and development in the
environmental resources selected. It is called the statement of
environmental assets. Finally, the environmental benefit
analysis is added to the budget balance, in which the use of
environmental resources is connected to human needs. The
more human needs are fulfilled per environmental use the
better. These measures connect the environmental, financial, and
social aspects of sustainable development.
Financing water and
sanitation for all requires good local governance
One of the UN
Millennium Development Goals — securing access to
freshwater for 1.2 billion people — means that huge amounts of
money will be needed for infrastructure, provision of services,
and capacity building (Goal 7, Target 10: “Halve, by 2015, the
proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking
water and basic sanitation.”). “Privatizing water” is no longer
the magic solution, particularly in view of the substantial
losses incurred by the few remaining water multinationals as a
result of international currency exchange problems and misjudged investments.
These companies cannot go to the banks any more to borrow money.
Instead, they are now telling cities that before they can help,
the cities first have to secure their own funding. This became
very clear in the Financing session of the Water and Cities Day
in Osaka during the World Water Forum in early 2003.
Should all
cities now get direct access to international money markets? In
most cases this would mean that cities would bypass national
governments which, being responsible for the national debt
burden, don’t want cities to borrow on their own and add to that
debt.
Having Moody’s
or Standard & Poor’s give a credit rating is far too costly and
complicated for most cities, which are not constantly
looking for loans anyway. In some cases, the right to collect
taxes or fees serves as a guarantee for loans from international
financial markets instead of collateral, or instead of a state
government guarantee. Cities with reliable performance may
also issue bonds. Alternatively, in order to reduce money
transfer costs, smaller municipalities can join forces in groups
when entering financial markets.
All of this
spells good local governance. But in order to get
funding, local governments must get their act together first:
they must increase transparency by opening up their books, and they
must have their governance structures and procedures in place.
They also need management capacities to bring their service
delivery up to a level where it brings in revenue as well.
International
city-to-city cooperation
Over the past
years, professional agencies for international municipal
assistance and cooperation have been developed by local
government associations in Canada, Denmark, the Netherlands,
Norway, Sweden, and the UK. In Finland, the association does not
have a specific agency but the North-South Local Authority
Cooperation Program launched by the Association of Finnish Local
and Regional Authorities promotes international municipal
cooperation. This enables exchange of knowledge, skills, and
expertise, along with concrete development activities to improve
basic services. It also builds direct networks between municipal
civil servants, elected officials, different departments,
schools, and libraries.
In this Finnish
program, cooperation is initiated by the municipalities
themselves. The program is funded by the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs of Finland. The total amount of funding is 1.17 million
euros for a period of two years (2002-2004). Each municipal
partnership is allowed a maximum of 84,000 euros annually. The
twinned municipalities — some of them really small rural towns
— of the (Finnish) program are: Hauho, Hartola, and Janakkala
with Iramba District, Tanzania; Lahti with Bojanala Platinum
District, South Africa; Salo with Mbabane, Swaziland; Tampere
with Mwanza, Tanzania; Vaasa with Morogoro, Tanzania; and Vantaa
with Windhoek, Namibia. The coordinator of the program is from
the Association of Finnish Local and Regional Authorities.
Conclusion
Globalization
has physical limits. The International Style in the early 20th
century, as the ideology of architectural functionalism, or
modernism, was
called in North America, became one of the first victims of the
misguided idea that construction methods and buildings could be
the same all over the world. Climate, culture, methods of
maintenance, social and behavioral patterns, availability of
materials, infrastructure, quality of labor, standards of
governance — all are contextually determined and thus not
universal. As the CEO of Royal Dutch Shell said in Johannesburg
at the UN World Summit on Sustainable Development, Shell may be
a multinational energy company but at the same time it is a
network of a huge number of local companies that have to take
local conditions carefully into account. The local voice has to
get heard in the headquarters. We have to develop different
mechanisms, processes, and structures in order to negotiate new
deals.
There seems to
be an invisible link connecting a tradition of good local
governance and a high standard of living secured by a welfare
state, equal opportunities among men and women, a high standard
of education and health care, and a transparent society. If
there really is an established link, those countries that have
positive experiences in local self-government — constitutional
and regulatory legal frameworks, decision-making processes,
access to information, information technology systems, roles for the public
domain, implementation of sustainability agendas, to list some
examples — can regard this know-how as one of their most
valuable export goods, one which they should be sharing with the
rest of the world.
Kaarin Taipale is a Senior
Adviser and Immediate Past Chair of ICLEI-Local Governments for
Sustainability, and a member of the Board of Directors of Global
Urban Development, serving as Co-Chair of the GUD Program Committee on
Global Urban Development. She is also former Chief Executive of the Municipal
Building Department in Helsinki, Finland, and former Editor of
the Finnish Architectural Review. Ms. Taipale’s article
is excerpted from her book, Local and Global, published
in 2004 by the City of Helsinki, and is reprinted with the
permission of the author.
Return to top |