Financing urban low-carbon transition: The catalytic role of a city-level special fund in shanghai
Introduction
Low-carbon transitions in cities are critical to ensuring a climate-safe future (Bai et al., 2018b; Bazaz et al., 2018; Broto and Bulkeley, 2013; Mi et al., 2019), but how to finance low-carbon transition cost-effectively is a primary challenge faced by local authorities (Colenbrander et al., 2018; Stern, 2007). Against this backdrop, some frontrunner cities are actively practicing a variety of approaches with commonly used policy instruments, as well as experimenting with innovative financial mechanisms (Bodnar et al., 2018; Environment, 2018; Irvine and Bai, 2019).
Some frontrunner cities have demonstrated their willingness and competence in financing urban low-carbon transition (C40 and Arup, 2015; Deng-Beck and van Staden, 2015; Environment, 2018). For example, more than 50% of reported urban climate actions within C40, the carbonn® Climate Registry, and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) were funded by the city budget or their savings (C40 and Arup, 2015; Deng-Beck and van Staden, 2015; OECD, 2018). In terms of investing in energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies, some cities move even faster than their national governments, driven by the energy-consumption growth due to urbanization (REN21, 2017). Yet, on a global scale, cities’ financial competence for mitigation as a whole is inadequate, especially in developing regions (Barnard, 2015; Homsy, 2016; McLean and Borén, 2015). Thus, to mobilize more financial resources, a stronger justification for direct investment into urban low-carbon transition is required (Coalition for Urban Transitions, 2019; Gouldson et al., 2018).
Public funding can be vital for urban low-carbon transition, as it can be used as financial leverage to encourage private sector investment or to reduce the upfront cost for new technology adopters, often in the form of subsidies (Fuller et al., 2009; Roy et al., 2013; Zhan and de Jong, 2018). Subsidization is considered a feasible option for promoting climate action because subsidy providers do not seek a financial return on investment (Price et al., 2008). In this sense, there will be less difficulty for relevant stakeholders to accept and implement. In practice, subsidies and grants are the second most commonly used mechanism among C40 cities (C40 and Arup, 2015). There is a compelling economic case for stakeholders in cities to make an investment at scale into cost-effective low-carbon measures (Gouldson et al., 2015). However, in reality, a higher upfront investment in carbon-efficient measures than in conventional alternatives (Schmidt, 2014) may become a barrier for adoption. In the short term, subsidies by governments can remove this price barrier to encourage the initial uptakes.
In practice, subsidies have been applied in various urban sectors to facilitate the adoption of new technologies, to encourage private sector investment, or to reduce the upfront cost for adopters (Fuller et al., 2009; Roy et al., 2013; Zhan and de Jong, 2018). Examples include improving energy efficiency in buildings (Di Pilla et al., 2016; Hou et al., 2016; Krarti, 2015; Lihtmaa et al., 2018), promoting electric vehicles in the transport sector (Masiero et al., 2016; Thorne and Hughes, 2019), and encouraging rooftop solar photovoltaic (PV) installation in households and businesses (Asano and Aoshima, 2017; Frey and Mojtahedi, 2018; Fuller et al., 2009; Mah et al., 2018; Rodrigues et al., 2017), etc. Moreover, subsidies can be flexibly designed in diverse ways to fit different circumstances and policy needs. There are many examples of this, including rebates, municipal green bonds, revolving green funds, energy efficiency mortgages, and tax abatement (C40 and Arup, 2015; Thorne and Hughes, 2019; Van der Heijden, 2017).
Subsidies as policy instruments are not without limits. The subsidy scheme may attract criticism for its market-distortion effect (Burniaux and Chateau, 2014; Owen, 2004). For example, global fossil-fuel subsidies remain large, amounting to 6.5% of global GDP in 2015 (Coady et al., 2017), which in itself creates obstacles for renewables deployment and energy-efficiency improvement (Assmann et al., 2006; REN21, 2017). In addition, subsidies can be expensive; thus, they are often constrained by the limits of governments’ financial and administrative budgets (de Groot et al., 2001; Houde and Aldy, 2014; Price et al., 2008; Rosenow and Galvin, 2013), and also might be challenged by opportunity costs in terms of how to optimize the allocation of limited public budget.
More importantly, the price barrier is not the only obstacle to enable low-carbon actions in cities. Studies (Colenbrander et al., 2017; Gouldson et al., 2015) indicate that building local capacity, enhancing provision of information, and developing favorable institutional and policy environments are essential to enable the long-term low-carbon transition. This is because even if there is a possibility of allocating an extra budget for subsidizing urban mitigation actions, cities might face difficulties in their institutional capacity to design and implement the subsidy scheme in order to achieve desirable outcomes. In some cities, for example, there might be a lack of coordination power across key urban elements to stimulate and facilitate the transformative change, which may be caused by path dependency and lock-in in institutional behavior (Bai et al., 2016). The nature of urban low-carbon transition as an inter-sectoral, multi-level, and multi-actor process (Runhaar et al., 2018; Webb et al., 2018) calls for a re-assemblage of institutions at a city level to tackle the inherent temporal, spatial, and institutional mismatches in urban low-carbon governance (Bai, 2007; Bulkeley and Luque-Ayala, 2017; Dowling et al., 2014). In this regard, the design and implementation of subsidies in low-carbon transition require institutional collaboration, and thus also have the potential to change the status quo. However, there are few insights in the existing literature on the interlinks between city-level subsidies and institutional collaboration. Most existing literature focuses on the cost-effectiveness of subsidy policies and the direct carbon-reduction result, without taking into account the more comprehensive, flow-on effects of such policy measure (Dowling et al., 2014; Kalkuhl et al., 2013; Sarkar and Singh, 2010).
Moreover, from the urban sustainability transition perspective, cities’ low-carbon transition requires changes in many urban sectors in a systematic matter (Bai et al., 2016), which require many trial and error. Low-carbon innovations can be tested through urban sustainability experiments (Bai et al., 2010; Berkhout et al., 2010). Policy interventions and financial support play an enabling role in initiating and adopting these low-carbon experiments (Peng and Bai, 2018), but it remains unclear how city-level financial mechanisms can stimulate and nurture such experiments.
To fill the gaps, this paper examines the direct and indirect impacts of a city-level direct-funding scheme, taking Shanghai’s special fund aiming at energy conservation and emissions reduction as a case study. We focus on the design, implementation, effectiveness, and direct and flow-on impacts of a city-level funding scheme to achieve their low-carbon policy targets. The following section presents a literature review on the role of direct-funding instruments in urban climate mitigation. Section 3 presents the methodology for case analysis. Section 4 analyzes the fund design, size, distribution, and implementation. Section 5 evaluates the outcomes of the special fund, in terms of direct carbon reduction, spillover effects on institutions, and on enabling sustainability experiments for the transition. In Section 6, we discuss the implications and limitations of the direct-funding scheme illustrated by the Shanghai case, grounded in the relevant literature. Section 7 presents our conclusions.
Section snippets
Literature review: the role of direct-funding instruments in urban climate mitigation
To enable the transition towards sustainability, subsidization is a widely used policy instrument for enabling energy efficiency and deployment of renewables (Assmann et al., 2006; The World Bank, 2010; Owen, 2006), with the benefit of emissions control (Dowling et al., 2014; Fischer and Newell, 2008; Kalkuhl et al., 2013; Menanteau et al., 2003; Sarkar and Singh, 2010; Tanaka, 2011). Subsidies for energy efficiency improvement are one of the most widespread fiscal incentives applied in
Research methodology
We investigated the Shanghai special fund for energy conservation and emission reduction in a comprehensive way, including the design elements (e.g., policy goals and principles, and the scope and distribution), three implementation stages, and the direct and indirect outcomes. Data were collected through two-month fieldwork in Shanghai, including interviewing government officials and collecting policy documents, which was supplemented by deskwork, including online search. Detailed information
Case study: the design and implementation of the Shanghai special fund
4.1 The fund design, size, and distribution.
The Shanghai special fund for energy conservation and emission reduction was enacted in 2008, providing financial support to urban sustainability projects and capacity building activities (Peng and Bai, 2015 (Peng and Bai, 2018),). This financial mechanism plays multiple roles in Shanghai’s low-carbon transition. Specifically, this policy scheme widely covers 12 policy domains, as shown in Fig. 1, which may enable the city’s transitions in a
Direct policy results
Two types of direct policy results can be identified, including carbon reduction outcomes and a series of capacity building initiatives. Based on government-released data, we estimate carbon reduction in eight policy domains from 2011 to 2015, where 85% of the total fund is spent, as shown in Table 1. The carbon reduction of this scheme is equivalent to 1.6% of Shanghai’s energy-based carbon emissions1 during the same period. The share of 1.6% may only represent a fraction of an aggregated
Discussion: the catalytic role of the special fund in urban sustainability transition
Shanghai’s experience shows that, to some degree, the city-level direct-funding mechanism can play a role in reducing emissions by subsidizing mitigation actions. This finding echoes the prevailing discussion in the literature, in terms of the emission reduction effect of the subsidy instrument (Dowling et al., 2014; Fischer and Newell, 2008; Kalkuhl et al., 2013; Menanteau et al., 2003; Sarkar and Singh, 2010; Tanaka, 2011).
Shanghai’s case also indicates that direct funding can play an
Conclusion
The impacts of direct-funding instruments on social, economic, and institutional dimensions for urban sustainability are not well established in the literature. This paper examines the influence of subsidy instruments on urban sustainability transition from a systems perspective, taking Shanghai as a case study. We examine Shanghai’s special fund for energy conservation and emission reduction, looking at the policy design and implementation, and its direct and flow-on effects on the city’s
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgement
Yuan Peng’s study is supported by the Australian Government Research Training Program (AGRTP) Stipend Scholarship. We thank the anonymous reviewers for their constructive and insightful comments, and Wentao Ye and Dr. Xuezhi Zeng for their help with making the figures in this paper.
References (114)
- et al.
Something borrowed, everything new: innovation and institutionalization in urban climate governance
Current opinion in environmental sustainability
(2011) - et al.
Urban sustainability experiments in Asia: patterns and pathways
Environ. Sci. Pol.
(2010) - et al.
Defining and advancing a systems approach for sustainable cities
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability
(2016) - et al.
Sustainability experiments in Asia: innovations shaping alternative development pathways?
Environ. Sci. Pol.
(2010) - et al.
Do electric vehicles need subsidies? Ownership costs for conventional, hybrid, and electric vehicles in 14 US cities
Energy Pol.
(2018) Transforming barriers into enablers of action on climate change: insights from three municipal case studies in British Columbia, Canada
Global Environ. Change
(2010)- et al.
Greenhouse gases mitigation potential and economic efficiency of phasing-out fossil fuel subsidies
International economics
(2014) - et al.
Comparison of feed-in tariff, quota and auction mechanisms to support wind power development
Renew. Energy
(2008) - et al.
How large are global fossil fuel subsidies?
World Dev.
(2017) - et al.
Optimizing the distribution of Italian building energy retrofit incentives with Linear Programming
Energy Build.
(2016)
Retrofitting cities: local governance in Sydney, Australia
Cities
Environmental and technology policies for climate mitigation
J. Environ. Econ. Manag.
The impact of solar subsidies on California’s non-residential sector
Energy Pol.
Exploring the economic case for climate action in cities
Global Environ. Change
Comparative study of commercial building energy-efficiency retrofit policies in four pilot cities in China
Energy Pol.
Renewable energy subsidies: second-best policy or fatal aberration for mitigation?
Resour. Energy Econ.
Finance for achieving low-carbon development in Asia: the past, present, and prospects for the future
J. Clean. Prod.
Policy packaging or policy patching? The development of complex energy efficiency policy mixes
Energy Research & Social Science
Evaluation of large scale building energy efficiency retrofit program in Kuwait
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
Intersection of the global climate agenda with regional development: unequal distribution of energy efficiency-based renovation subsidies for apartment buildings
Energy Pol.
Features, trajectories and driving forces for energy-related GHG emissions from Chinese mega cites: the case of Beijing, Tianjin, Shanghai and Chongqing
Energy
Barriers and policy enablers for solar photovoltaics (PV) in cities: perspectives of potential adopters in Hong Kong
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
Electric vehicles in China: BYD strategies and government subsidies
RAI Revista de Administração e Inovação
Prices versus quantities: choosing policies for promoting the development of renewable energy
Energy Pol.
Cities: the core of climate change mitigation
J. Clean. Prod.
Combining tariffs, investment subsidies and soft loans in a renewable electricity deployment policy
Energy Pol.
Are renewable energy subsidies effective? Evidence from Europe
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
Renewable energy: externality costs as market barriers
Energy Pol.
Experimenting towards a low-carbon city: policy evolution and nested structure of innovation
J. Clean. Prod.
Scaling urban sustainability experiments: contextualization as an innovation
J. Clean. Prod.
Economic analysis of photovoltaic systems for the residential market under China’s new regulation
Energy Pol.
Conceptual and empirical advances in analysing policy mixes for energy transitions
Energy Research & Social Science
Evaluating the evaluations: evidence from energy efficiency programmes in Germany and the UK
Energy Build.
Fiscal instruments: crucial role in financing low carbon transition in energy systems
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability
Financing energy efficiency in developing countries—lessons learned and remaining challenges
Energy Pol.
Three frames for innovation policy: R&D, systems of innovation and transformative change
Res. Pol.
Implementing climate change adaptation and mitigation interventions at the local government levels in Tanzania: where do we start?
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability
Review of policies and measures for energy efficiency in industry sector
Energy Pol.
Give cities a seat at the top table
Nature News
The relative importance of price and driving range on electric vehicle adoption: Los Angeles case study
Transportation
Financing a Sustainable and Inclusive Urban Transition in China
Powering Climate Action: Cities as Global Changemakers
Effects of Local Government Subsidy on Rooftop Solar PV in Japan, 2017 IEEE 6th
Renewable Energy: a Global Review of Technologies, Policies and Markets
Integrating global environmental concerns into urban management: the scale and readiness arguments
J. Ind. Ecol.
Urban environments and environmentalisms
Six research priorities for cities and climate change
Nature
World Development Report 2010: Development and Climate Change
Climate finance for cities: how can international climate funds best support low-carbon and climate resilient urban development?
Summary for Urban Policymakers – what the IPCC Special Report on 1.5C Means for Cities
Cited by (18)
Visions for climate neutrality and opportunities for co-learning in European cities
2024, Renewable and Sustainable Energy ReviewsAdministrative incentives and enterprise green innovation: Based on empirical evidence from China
2024, Finance Research LettersBetter cities better lives: How low-carbon city pilots can lower residents’ carbon emissions
2024, Journal of Environmental ManagementChallenges to the low carbon energy transition: A systematic literature review and research agenda
2023, Energy Strategy ReviewsGlobal urban low-carbon transitions: Multiscale relationship between urban land and carbon emissions
2023, Environmental Impact Assessment ReviewWhat EV users say about policy efficacy: Evidence from Shanghai
2023, Transport PolicyCitation Excerpt :Comparatively, we found that one-off subsidy policy instruments such as free plate and purchase rebate received higher satisfaction rates than others. The Shanghai government established coordination mechanisms between government units for this policy implementation (Peng and Bai, 2020). In addition, the rating results of the other three policies and the revealed opinions of EV users suggest the policy needs to address the practical challenges in the adoption process, such as the lack of maintenance of public charging facilities and unsupportive conditions for having private chargers.