The great net-zero balancing act: ambition, durability, credibility and justice in local climate emergency responses

Following the first local government declaration of a climate emergency by Darebin Council in December 2016, over 2,000 local authorities in 38 countries have declared climate emergencies, with many also developing and implementing strategies to achieve net zero emissions. Wide variation nevertheless exists in the scope and pace of emissions reduction envisaged and in the approaches used to pursue transitions to a low-carbon future that might be at least partly explained by the common challenge facing local governments in balancing ambition, durability, credibility and justice within local net-zero plans. The aspiration imperative variously incorporates values-driven desires to contribute to the broader endeavour of climate protection and resilience, pressures from activist groups, concerned citizens and other stakeholders, and counteracting perceived gaps in national and international climate policies. The durability imperative (enacted through plan design, statutory provisions and norm-shifting) derives from recognition of the need to insulate net-zero plans from dilution or repeal by future local governments and waning momentum in the face of implementation difficulties. Credibility, meanwhile, relates to developing initiatives that increase the prospects of achieving ambitions and includes partnerships with businesses, third-sector organisations and other local governments, and local-central government interfaces to encourage national policies (e.g. planning and infrastructure) that support – or at least do not undermine – local initiatives. Finally, justice imperatives centre on ensuring low-carbon plans are inclusive and do not create or reproduce inequalities and hardships that might undermine the popular support and mandates that gave fuel to local government net-zero strategies. This ambition-durability-credibility-justice framework provides a lens for interrogating a range of questions about the politics of local climate emergency declarations. Through what processes and in what ways have local authorities sought to reconcile these priorities, particularly where imperatives misalign? What trade-offs have arisen, for example, between setting ambitious targets and ensuring net-zero plans achieve sufficient lock-in, through design or consensus building, to produce meaningful long-term impacts? How are trade-offs being managed and what are their implications for the politics of local net-zero initiatives and their change potential? This paper explores these issues using analysis of net-zero plans published by UK metropolitan, county, and unitary councils and 15 interviews with councillors and officials involved in the development of plans. The analysis reveals pronounced tensions between ambition and durability that many local governments have tried to ease by stressing scientific evidence to build support for actions on more contentious issues, incorporating flexibility to ensure plans remained adaptable to new information and changing, a strong emphasis on public and stakeholder consultation on targets and priorities, and stressing the co-benefits of climate action to bolster the acceptability of actions to different stakeholder groups. Some of the balancing acts performed to enhance durability and a sense of just transitions nevertheless have important repercussions for the ambition and credibility of plans, where striving for acceptance has compromised the aspirations that initially gave rise to the climate emergency idea.