Partnerships in Experimental Urban Climate Governance: Insights from Seoul

  • Jeroen van der HeijdenEmail author
  • Seung-Hun Hong


Since the early 2000s, there has been a trend in urban climate governance experimentation in which cities, and particularly city governments, trial novel governance interventions, processes and instruments, with the aim of learning from their development and implementation. The literature is particularly vocal about the relevance of including local actors and organisations in such experiments. High hopes are expressed about partnerships in experimental urban climate governance that bring city governments together with local businesses and citizens. Seeking to understand whether these high hopes materialize in real-world settings, this chapter analyses four experiments in which the Seoul Municipal Government has partnered with local stakeholders to explore innovative governance instruments.


  1. Arnstein, S. A. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Planning Association, 35(4), 216–224.Google Scholar
  2. Birnbaum, S. (2015). Environmental c-governance, legitimacy, and the quest for compliance: When and why is stakeholder participation desirable? Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning.
  3. Bulkeley, H., Castan Broto, V., & Edwards, G. (2015). An urban politics of climate change: Experimentation and the governing of socio-technical transitions. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  4. Cervero, R., & Kang, C. D. (2011). Bus rapid transit impacts on land uses and land values in Seoul, Korea. Transport Policy, 18(1), 102–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cho, J. (2005). Urban planning and urban sprawl in Korea. Urban Policy and Research, 23(2), 203–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  7. Evans, J., Karvonen, A., & Raven, R. (Eds.). (2016). The experimental city. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Greenberg, D., & Schroder, M. (2003). The digest of social experiments (3rd ed.). Washington: Urban Institute Press.Google Scholar
  9. Guk Jeon, J. (1995). Exploring the three varieties of East Asia’s state-guided development model: Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan. Studies in Comparative International Development, 30(3), 70–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ha, S.-K. (2011). Chapter 6: Seoul as a world city: The challenge of balanced development. In S. Hamnett & D. Forbes (Eds.), Planning Asian cities: Risk and resilience. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  11. Holley, C., Gunningham, N., & Shearing, C. (2012). The new environmental governance. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Kwon, M., Jang, H. S., & Feicock, R. (2014). Climate protection and energy sustainability policy in California cities: What have we learned? Journal of Urban Affairs, 36(5), 905–924.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Lee, T., Lee, T., & Lee, Y. (2014). An experiment for urban energy autonomy in Seoul: The one ‘less’ nuclear power plant policy. Energy Policy, 74(November), 311–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Moon, T. H. (2006). Sustainable development in Korea, key issues and government response. International Review of Public Administration, 11(1), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. OECD. (2012a). Compact city policies: Korea; towards sustainable and inclusive growth. Paris: OECD Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. OECD. (2012b). OECD urban policy reviews: Korea. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
  17. Park, K.-K. P., Lee, W., & Lee, S.-H. (2016). Understanding Korean public administration: Lessons learned from practice. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Rii, H. U., & Ahn, J.-S. (2002). Urbanization and its impact on Seoul, Korea. In I. Douglas & S.-L. Huang (Eds.), Urbanization, East Asian and habitat II. Taipei: Chung-hua Institution for Economic Research.Google Scholar
  19. Scott, T. (2015). Does collaboration make any difference? Linking collaborative governance to environmental outcomes. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 34(3), 537–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Seo, J.-K. (2016). Housing policy and urban sustainable development: Evaluating the process of high-rise apartment development in Korea. Urban Policy and Research, 34(4), 330–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. SMG. (2009). Urban planning of Seoul. Seoul: Seoul Metropolitan Government.Google Scholar
  22. SMG. (2012). One less nuclear power plant. Seoul: Seoul Metropolitan Government.Google Scholar
  23. SMG. (2014a). City energy cultivators. Seould: Seoul Metropolitan Government.Google Scholar
  24. SMG. (2014b). One less nuclear power plant – Phase 2. Seoul: Seoul Metropolitan Government.Google Scholar
  25. Sprain, L. (2016). Paradoxes of public participation in climate change governance. The Good Society, 25(1), 62–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sustainia. (2015). Sustaina 100: A guide to 100 sustainable solutions. Sustainia: Copenhagen.Google Scholar
  27. Turnheim, B., Kivimaa, P., & Berkhout, F. (Eds.). (2018). Innovating climate governance: Moving beyond experiments. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Van der Heijden, J. (2016). Opportunities and risks of the ‘new urban governance’ in India: To what extent can it help addressing pressing environmental problems? Journal of Environment and Development, 25(3), 251–275. Scholar
  29. Van der Heijden, J. (2017). Innovations in urban climate governance: Voluntary programs for low carbon buildings and cities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of GovernmentVictoria University of WellingtonWellingtonNew Zealand
  2. 2.Korea Institute of Public AdministrationSeoulSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations