Retrofitting cities: Local governance in Sydney, Australia

Abstract

Transforming cities to a lower carbon future is one of the key challenges of contemporary urban governance. Retrofitting the city -or modifying existing urban infrastructures, buildings and daily life to suit different energy sources and different expectations of energy consumption -is essential to this transformation. In urban studies, little focus has yet been applied to the shape and character of urban governance frameworks and mechanisms required to successfully retrofit cities. In this paper we address this lacuna by exploring the logics, practices and dynamics of retrofitting governance in the Australian city. Using a governmentality perspective, the paper identifies the involvements of different scales of government in retrofitting policies and mechanisms and connections between them. Based on a unique survey of carbon reduction initiatives involving government, business and community actors across Australia's capital cities, we outline the types of retrofitting solutions being proposed and enacted. Using a focus on local initiatives from Sydney, Australia's largest city, the paper documents four key techniques through which retrofitting is being governed -selfgoverning, holistic, facilitative and educative. The findings suggest that governance gaps remain in attending to the daily life of technologies and the materiality of daily life. AbstractTransforming cities to a lower carbon future is one of the key challenges of contemporary urban governance. Retrofitting the city -or modifying existing urban infrastructures, buildings and daily life to suit different energy sources and different expectations of energy consumption -is essential to this transformation. In urban studies, little focus has yet been applied to the shape and character of urban governance frameworks and mechanisms required to successfully retrofit cities. In this paper we address this lacuna by exploring the logics, practices and dynamics of retrofitting governance in the Australian city. Using a governmentality perspective, the paper identifies the involvements of different scales of government in retrofitting policies and mechanisms and connections between them. Based on a unique survey of carbon reduction initiatives involving government, business and community actors across Australia's capital cities, we outline the types of retrofitting solutions being proposed and enacted. Using a focus on local initiatives from Sydney, Australia's largest city, the paper documents four key techniques through which retrofitting is being governed -self-governing, holistic, facilitative and educative. The findings suggest that governance gaps remain in attending to the daily life of technologies and the materiality of daily life.2

Thin Films for Advanced Glazing Applications

“…These numbers will continue to grow as more areas of the world become developed and more buildings are constructed [62][63][64]. A variety of approaches, such as installing more efficient heating (e.g., heat pump rather than electric hot water systems) [65] and renewable power systems (e.g., solar energy as a power source) [66], have been applied to reduce building energy demand. Moreover, the usage of energy efficient glazing is another important approach because untreated glass is a poor heat insulator whereby windows become a major heat transfer path between the inside and outside of buildings, resulting in unwanted heat transfer [63,64].…”

Green housing: Toward a new energy efficiency paradox?

“…In search of further improvements, urban policies and governance practices are considered precious tools in order to foster the diffusion of energy-efficient solutions (Dowling, McGuirk, & Bulkeley, 2014). In Italy, regional governments and provincial authorities are entitled to lawmaking with regard to both buildings performance and town planning.…”

Boundary Bridging Arrangements: A Boundary Work Approach to Local Energy Transitions

“…Local energy transitions involve a heterogeneous variety of actors such as politicians, entrepreneurs, researchers, public administrators, citizen activists, and consumers [6,14,[26][27][28][29][30]. As these actors differ in their overall objectives, incorporate unlike values, interpret their environment in a dissimilar manner, communicate in distinct professional jargons, and organize their activities along different structures, they may face problems in collaboration and coordination (cf.…”