Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Review Article
  • Published:

Accountability and data-driven urban climate governance

Nature Climate Change volume 10, pages 1085–1090 (2020)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

The use of increasingly large and diverse datasets to guide urban climate action has implications for how, and by whom, local governments are held accountable. This Review focuses on emerging dynamics of accountability in data-driven urban climate change governance. Current understandings of the implications for accountability are examined based on three common rationales for prioritizing data-driven decision-making: standardization, transparency and capacity building. We conclude that the trend toward data-driven urban climate governance can incentivize city governments to prioritize narrowed metrics and external interests, inhibiting the broader transformations required to realize climate change goals. We offer priorities for research at the intersection of data-driven climate governance and the accountability of city governments.

Access through your institution
Buy or subscribe

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Access through your institution

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kluvers, R. & Tippett, J. Mechanisms of accountability in local government: an exploratory study. Int. J. Bus. Manag. 5, 46 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Day, P. & Klein, R. The regulation of nursing homes: a comparative perspective. Milbank Q. 65, 303–347 (1987).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Dubnick, M. J. & Yang, K. in The State of Public Administration: Issues, Challenges, and Opportunities 171–186 (M.E. Sharpe, 1998).

  4. Lerner, J. S. & Tetlock, P. E. Accounting for the effects of accountability. Psychol. Bull. 125, 255 (1999).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Bovens, M. Analysing and assessing accountability: a conceptual framework 1. Eur. Law J. 13, 447–468 (2007).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Patterson, J. et al. Political feasibility of 1.5C societal transformations: the role of social justice. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 31, 1–9 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Hughes, S. & Hoffmann, M. Just urban transitions: toward a research agenda. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Clim. Change 11, e640 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Trounstine, J. Representation and accountability in cities. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 13, 407–423 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Kim, S. & Schachter, H. L. Citizen participation in the budget process and local government accountability: case studies of organizational learning from the United States and South Korea. Public Perform. Manag. Rev. 36, 456–471 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Meijer, A. J. Digitization and political accountability in the USA and the Netherlands: convergence or reproduction of differences? Electron. J. E-Gov. E 5, 213–224 (2007).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Robin, E. & Acuto, M. Global urban policy and the geopolitics of urban data. Polit. Geogr. 66, 76–87 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Acuto, M. Global science for city policy. Science 359, 165–166 (2018).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Kitchin, R., Lauriault, T. P. & McArdle, G. Knowing and governing cities through urban indicators, city benchmarking and real-time dashboards. Reg. Stud. Reg. Sci. 2, 6–28 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Batty, M. Big data and the city. Built Environ. 42, 321–337 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  15. Goldsmith, S. & Crawford, S. The Responsive City: Engaging Communities Through Data-Smart Governance (Jossey-Bass, 2014).

  16. Cox, M., Brown, M. A. & Sun, X. Energy benchmarking of commercial buildings: a low-cost pathway toward urban sustainability. Environ. Res. Lett. 8, 035018 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  17. Bass, G. D. Big data and government accountability: an agenda for the future. ISJLP 11, 13 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  18. Bannister, F. & Connolly, R. Trust and transformational government: a proposed framework for research. Gov. Inf. Q. 28, 137–147 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  19. Zuiderwijk, A. & Janssen, M. Open data policies, their implementation and impact: a framework for comparison. Gov. Inf. Q. 31, 17–29 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  20. Ruijer, E. & Meijer, A. Open government data as an innovation process: lessons from a living lab experiment. Public Perform. Manag. Rev. 43, 613–635 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Merry, S. E. & Conley, J. M. Measuring the world: indicators, human rights, and global governance. Curr. Anthropol. 52(Suppl.), 83–95 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Davis, K. E., Kingsbury, B. & Merry, S. E. in The Quiet Power of Indicators: Measuring Governance, Corruption, and Rule of Law 1–24 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2015).

  23. Kuzemko, C., Mitchell, C., Lockwood, M. & Hoggett, R. Policies, politics and demand side innovations: the untold story of Germany’s energy transition. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 28, 58–67 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  24. Mayernik, M. S. Open data: accountability and transparency. Big Data Soc. 4, 2053951717718853 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  25. Marvin, S., Luque-Ayala, A. & McFarlane, C. Smart Urbanism: Utopian Vision or False Dawn? (Routledge, 2016).

  26. Schmidt, V. A. Democracy and legitimacy in the European Union revisited: input, output and ‘throughput’. Polit. Stud. 61, 2–22 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  27. Corfee-Morlot, J., Kamal-Chaoui, L., Robert, A. & Teasdale, P.-J. Cities, Climate Change and Multilevel Governance (OECD Publishing, 2009).

  28. Page, E. A. The hidden costs of carbon commodification: emissions trading, political legitimacy and procedural justice. Democratization 19, 932–950 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  29. Bader, N. & Bleischwitz, R. Measuring urban greenhouse gas emissions: the challenge of comparability. SAPIENS 2, 3 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  30. Hsu, A., Cheng, Y., Weinfurter, A., Xu, K. & Yick, C. Understanding NAZCA: Challenges and Future of the World’s Largest Voluntary Climate Action Platform (Yale University, 2016); https://datadrivenlab.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Yale_ADEME_Report_.pdf

  31. Höhler, S. & Ziegler, R. Nature’s accountability: stocks and stories. Sci. Cult. 19, 417–430 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  32. Daas, P. J., Puts, M. J., Buelens, B. & van den Hurk, P. A. Big data as a source for official statistics. J. Off. Stat. 31, 249–262 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  33. Kuzemko, C. Climate change benchmarking: constructing a sustainable future? Rev. Int. Stud. 41, 969 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  34. Olivier, J. G. J., Janssens-Maenhout, G., Muntean, M. & Peters, J. A. H. W. Trends in Global CO2 Emissions (PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, 2016).

  35. Wachsmuth, D., Cohen, D. A. & Angelo, H. Expand the frontiers of urban sustainability. Nature 536, 391–393 (2016).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Madsen, A. K. Data in the smart city: how incongruent frames challenge the transition from ideal to practice. Big Data Soc. 5, 2053951718802321 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  37. Giest, S. Big data analytics for mitigating carbon emissions in smart cities: opportunities and challenges. Eur. Plan. Stud. 25, 941–957 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  38. Broome, A. & Quirk, J. Governing the world at a distance: the practice of global benchmarking. Rev. Int. Stud. 41, 819 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  39. Chan, S. & Pattberg, P. Private rule-making and the politics of accountability: analyzing global forest governance. Glob. Environ. Polit. 8, 103–121 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  40. Gordon, D. J. Politics of accountability in networked urban climate governance. Glob. Environ. Polit. 16, 82–100 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  41. Martens, P. & Ting Chang, C. (eds) The Social and Behavioural Aspects of Climate Change: Linking Vulnerability, Adaptation, and Mitigation (Greenleaf Publishing, Ltd., 2010).

  42. Oikonomou, V., Flamos, A. & Grafakos, S. Is blending of energy and climate policy instruments always desirable? Energy Policy 38, 4186–4195 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  43. Kramarz, T. & Park, S. Accountability in global environmental governance: a meaningful tool for action? Glob. Environ. Polit. 16, 1–21 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  44. van Kersbergen, K. & van Waarden, F. ‘Governance’ as a bridge between disciplines: cross-disciplinary inspiration regarding shifts in governance and problems of governability, accountability and legitimacy. Eur. J. Polit. Res. 43, 143–171 (2004).

    Google Scholar 

  45. Shelton, T. The urban geographical imagination in the age of big data. Big Data Soc. 4, 2053951716665129 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  46. Widerberg, O. & Pattberg, P. Accountability challenges in the transnational regime complex for climate change. Rev. Policy Res. 34, 68–87 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  47. Howlett, M. Policy analytical capacity and evidence-based policy-making: lessons from Canada. Can. Public Adm. 52, 153–175 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  48. Nutley, S. M., Walter, I. & Davies, H. T. O. Using Evidence: How Research Can Inform Public Services (The Policy Press, 2007).

  49. Pawson, R. Evidence-based Policy: A Realist Perspective (SAGE, 2006).

  50. Sanderson, I. Evaluation, policy learning and evidence-based policy making. Public Adm. 80, 1–22 (2002).

    Google Scholar 

  51. Romero-Lankao, P., Hughes, S., Rosas-Huerta, A., Borquez, R. & Gnatz, D. Urban institutional response capacity for climate change: an examination of construction and pathways in Mexico City and Santiago. Environ. Plan. C Gov. Policy 31, 785–805 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  52. Tomer, A. & Shivaram, R. Modernizing Government’s Approach to Transportation and Land Use Data: Challenges and Opportunities (Brookings, 2017); https://www.brookings.edu/research/modernizing-approach-to-data/

  53. Hughes, S. Repowering Cities: Governing Climate Change Mitigation in New York City, Los Angeles, and Toronto (Cornell Univ. Press, 2019).

  54. Kitchin, R. The real-time city? Big data and smart urbanism. GeoJournal 79, 1–14 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  55. Jones, C. M. & Kammen, D. M. Quantifying carbon footprint reduction opportunities for US households and communities. Environ. Sci. Technol. 45, 4088–4095 (2011).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Jones, C. M. & Kammen, D. M. Spatial distribution of U.S. household carbon footprints reveals suburbanization undermines greenhouse gas benefits of urban population density. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48, 895–902 (2014).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Fuller, S. Configuring climate responsibility in the city: carbon footprints and climate justice in Hong Kong. Area 49, 519–525 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  58. Rice, J. L. An urban political ecology of climate change governance. Geogr. Compass 8, 381–394 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  59. Hansen, H. K. & Porter, T. What do big data do in global governance? Glob. Gov. Rev. Multilateralism Int. Organ. 23, 31–42 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  60. Stirling, A. in The Politics of Green Transformations (eds Scoones, I. et al.) 54–67 (Routledge, 2015).

  61. Ebi, K. L., Boyer, C., Bowen, K. J., Frumkin, H. & Hess, J. Monitoring and evaluation indicators for climate change-related health impacts, risks, adaptation, and resilience. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 15, 1943 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  62. Hughes, S. Principles, drivers, and policy tools for just climate change adaptation in legacy cities. Environ. Sci. Policy 111, 35–41 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School for Environment and Sustainability, University of Michigan-Ann Arbor, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

    Sara Hughes

  2. Public Administration Institute, Leiden University, Leiden, the Netherlands

    Sarah Giest

  3. Department of Physical and Environmental Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

    Laura Tozer

Authors
  1. Sara Hughes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sarah Giest
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  3. Laura Tozer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

S.H., S.G. and L.T. contributed to the project planning, analysis, writing and editing of this manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sara Hughes.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Peer review information Nature Climate Change thanks David Gordon and Stephan Grimmelikhuijsen for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hughes, S., Giest, S. & Tozer, L. Accountability and data-driven urban climate governance. Nat. Clim. Chang. 10, 1085–1090 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-020-00953-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-020-00953-z

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing