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

Abstract

Networked urban governance is emerging as a major feature of metropolitan strategy and activity. The field of urban studies is yet to deeply engage in the debates on the new forms of cross national networking that are potentially framing and reframing urban governance and strategy. Yet this dimension of urban governance can no longer go unnoticed. In this article we draw together insights from the extant literature into a research agenda on reconfiguring urban governance. We propose a research agenda centred on three themes: the political economy of ‘new-gen’ networks, especially in relation to the role of economic power in determining participation and influence; the knowledge dynamics in city networks in understanding the socio-spatial configurations that are underpinning the decision-making processes and outcomes; and the implications of city networks for traditional institutions that have in the past shaped cities’ strategies, development and government. Our commentary considers and links these emergent themes, noting how these bear serious and urgent consideration for mainstream urban studies.

Localizing the Sustainable Development Goals Through the Lens of Urban Resilience: Lessons and Learnings from 100 Resilient Cities and Cape Town

“…A body of work on the practice of resilience making in 100RC cities is growing, ranging from accounts on the practical implementation of resilience from a city perspective [17,18] to more critical accounts that draw attention to its inconsistencies and contestations related to the increasing private sector involvement in urban development planning and governance [19,20]. This work links up with a growing literature on the ways in which urban governance is being reconfigured in an age of "rising city networks" [21]. In 2015, there were at least 170 active city networks-up from 55 in 1985-that contributed to the transfer and circulation of urban knowledge and policies, especially in the realm of climate change [22,23].…”

Socioeconomic Reinvention and Expanding Engagement with Climate Change Policy in American Rust Belt Cities

“…(At the time of the interviews, two cities included in the analysis were members of transnational climate networks; Ithaca, New York was a member of ICLEI and the Compact of Mayors while Edina, MN was a member of ICLEI.) While there has been considerable attention given in the literature to how relationships between cities in international climate change policy networks influence climate change governance [65][66][67], the interviewees were describing the more typical, everyday ways in which cities constantly scope out what other comparable cities are doing to get a better sense of opportunities across a range of issues to better serve their residents. Attention to cities' more practical perceptions about peer cities that they already actively compare themselves to and learn from (rather than on global policy networks specialized for climate change policy) might be another opportunity to explore and better understand the everyday experience of pursuing climate change policy [7].…”

Whatever happened to urban governance?

“…Perhaps 'networked urban governance' as we have presented it elsewhere (Davidson et al, 2019), or 'global urbanism' (Bok, 2019), are a better rubric for the outwardly oriented ethos of 'urban diplomacy', and, as Phelps and Miao themselves acknowledge, these might be a better descriptor of this variety of entrepreneurialism. This is a wider framing that puts the emphasis on the internationalist character of some urban governance, not just one of its practices, and the shift to a mode of governing that is essentially networked and almost constantly engaged with other spheres of political (as much as private sector) governance.…”