Lessons for New York: comparative urban governance and the challenge of climate change. (2024)

Introduction I. New York City and Weather Disaster: Addressing Climate Change in a Scheme of Vertical Governance II. Engaging Climate Change Through Transnational Urban Networks A. C40 Cities: Developing Metrics and Best Practices Among Large Cities B. Rockefeller Foundation Initiatives: Promoting Multi-Sectoral Collaborations C. Resilient CitiesIII. Horizontal Urban Governance: Transnational Networks as a Comparative Governance Scheme IV. Addressing Possible LimitationsConclusion

INTRODUCTION

Climate change and the weather disasters to which it contributesare major challenges for urban governance. The impact of SuperstormSandy on New York City (the "City"), resulting in loss oflife, substantial property damage, evacuation of critical health carefacilities, flooded infrastructure, and an extended period of poweroutage, required an extensive response from the City. (1) Using New YorkCity's experience with Superstorm Sandy as a launching point, thisArticle addresses the fundamental question of urban governance thatweather disasters present. Recognizing the direct and immediateconnection local government bears to coastal land, infrastructure, andthe people who live and work within its borders, the role of amunicipality in preparing for and responding to weather disasters isclear. However, although the effects of extreme weather typically areexperienced locally, the conditions that contribute to climate changeare global in scope. The enormity and complexity of weather-relateddisaster preparedness limit the capacity of any individual localgovernment to cope with these phenomena.

To consider the governance challenge in the context of weatherdisasters, Part I of this article contextualizes the question byproviding an overview of New York City's principal pre-SuperstormSandy climate change mitigation measures under the administration offormer Mayor Michael Bloomberg. It then examines, in Sandy'saftermath, the City's commitment to a set of initiatives to developcapacity to withstand future weather events. (2) It first considers theCity's set of initiatives in relation to the governance structurein the United States that serves as the source of authority, policyguidance, and fiscal support for confronting the challenges of climatechange. The structure of governance encompasses multiple levels ofgovernment in a hierarchical, vertical relation, operating atsuccessively "higher" territorial and jurisdictional scales inrelation to a city. (3) Thus, in the United States, we routinely thinkof a city's climate-change initiatives within the larger context offederal and state government programs and policies, as well as regionalgovernance schemes wherever they happen to exist, that address theimpact of weather-related harms.

The balance of this Article explores an alternative approach foraddressing climate-change challenges that links urban governmentshorizontally, across national borders. (4) Specifically, Part IIintroduces the interurban networks, which are a set of arrangementsbearing some family resemblances to other networks, both public andprivate, in the sense that they are information-driven and embracecollaborative approaches to problem solving. (5) They operate within anormative framework established by international protocols. (6) ThisPart focuses attention principally on the foundational assumptionsgrounding three networks of cities: the C40 Cities Climate LeadershipGroup, an organization of large cities in partnership with the WorldBank, the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives(ICLEI)--Local Governments for Sustainability, and a number ofphilanthropic organizations; (7) Rockefeller Foundation-initiatedresilience networks; (8) and Resilient Cities, an annual global foruminitiated in 2010 by ICLEI, the World Mayors Council on Climate Change,and the City of Bonn, Germany. (9)

Part III discusses the concomitant possibilities for comparativeurban governance of these transnationally connected cities. This Partdraws on the literature of network governance models that proliferateinformation in the service of flexibility, problem solving, anddevelopment of best practices, that typically involve devolution fromthe national to a local scale, and entail voluntary compliance withnetwork-generated norms. (10) It considers how these networks can offera framework for comparative governance by serving as a continuingreference point on climate change, and a basis for generating sharednorms for developing resilience to climate-change effects.

Specifically, Part III addresses ways in which interurbaninitiatives such as C40 Cities and Resilient Cities make cities moresalient, by recognizing the crucial role that cities play both ascontributors to greenhouse gas emissions, and thus global warming, andas loci of innovation, experimentation, and creativity. (11) It developsthe argument that these collaborative networks exemplify an alternativeapproach to governance in which cities are linked together horizontallyto commit to innovation, promote policy diffusion through the exchangeof ideas, expertise, and resources, and adopt best practices forclimate-change mitigation and adaptation strategies.

Part IV takes up potential limitations upon the discussedconception of comparative governance. The limitations include theenduring pro-growth orientation of cities, which may militate againstcity-led climate-related resilience strategies, referred to as"managed coastal retreat," (12) that entail scaling backwaterfront development. Another consideration is that cities'climate, geography, and economy will vary, and in any given instance acity's experience may not be replicable in other contexts. (13)This Part also takes up the concern that highly influential non-stateactors engaged in international development or philanthropy may eclipsethe role of local governments and reinforce paternalism vis-a-vis lessresourced localities. (14) To address the first concern, this Articlerefers to countervailing considerations of costs and incentives thatcould moderate the force of the urban growth imperative. Responding tothe second concern, the Article notes how networks can be formed in waysthat emphasize commonalities among member cities. It also addressespotential domination by powerful non-state actors with reference to thecentrality of local governments' participation in these networks.

Noting the general benefits that cities can derive from a problemsolving approach responsive to, but not limited by, individualcities' experience and scale, this Article concludes thatcities' participation in transnational urban networks holds somepromise from a comparative governance perspective. To the extent thatthese interurban networks can promote members' voluntaryparticipation in, and adherence to, developing norms and practices foraddressing climate-related risks, they enhance transnational problemsolving on an issue that is simultaneously local and global. Further,they raise the possibility that local-level innovation ofclimate-related measures falling within the scope of local authority canjumpstart the stalled process of developing wider consensus on climatechange that has eluded efforts of governments at the national scale.

I. NEW YORK CITY AND WEATHER DISASTER: ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE INA SCHEME OF VERTICAL GOVERNANCE

This Part will consider the governance implications of the pressingclimate- and weather-related challenges that a major U.S. coastal citysuch as New York faces. The New York case study, despite its localcontext, is used to demonstrate how climate change, as well as theweather disasters to which it contributes, present urban governancechallenges that are global in scope. Recognizing the broad scope of theproblem, this Article considers the benefits of a broader framework anda comparative approach, an approach this article refers to as horizontalurban governance.

A municipality is the first line of defense in preparing forweather disasters, given the relationship a local government bears toland use, infrastructure, and public health and safety. Drawing on theexample of New York City, this Part examines the City's recentengagement with climate-change risks and its embrace of resiliencestrategies (15) within the context of a vertical, hierarchicallyorganized governance scheme for addressing extreme weather events.Cities occupy a subordinate position within the hierarchical structurein relation to a state and national government; they operate within asingle national frame rather than comparatively and transnationally.

A critical geographic fact that New Yorkers themselves may losesight of is that New York has 520 miles of waterfront. (16) SuperstormSandy, which struck New York City on the evening of October 29, 2012,reached properties, residents, and infrastructure in the City'sfive boroughs beyond the Zone subject to an evacuation order, floodingmany of the city's subways and tunnels. The storm's tollincluded forty-three deaths and the total loss of approximately 300homes; left 800,000 New York residents and businesses without power;caused the evacuation of five hospitals and thirty residentialfacilities that sustained flooding damage and power failures; and placed6800 persons forced to evacuate their homes in seventy-three cityshelters. (17) The storm's impact on fuel terminals, pipelines, andfueling stations led to fuel shortages requiring rationing. (18) Itproduced some 700,000 tons of refuse, extensive damage to boardwalk andwaterfront structures, and the loss of more than two million cubic yardsof sand from city beaches. (19)

Property damage from Sandy included 402 buildings covering 35,000units owned by the New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA); more than80,000 residents of NYCHA-owned high-rise buildings, including theelderly and infirm, were stranded without essential services followingthe flooding of basem*nts in which heating and electrical systems werelocated; (20) heat, hot water, and electric power were fully returned toall NYCHA buildings on November 18, nearly three weeks after the stormstruck. (21) Even a year later, reports persisted that storm-relatedleaks and mold growth in public housing units were not remedied. (22)This sense of continuing vulnerability to the effects of weather-relatedrisk is the kind of evidence that has contributed to thecharacterization of New York as "two cities," differentiatedby the extent to which its residents have access to resources. (23)

In the years before Sandy struck, the mayoral administration ofMichael Bloomberg launched a number of initiatives that focusedattention on climate risk. In 2007, New York had introduced asustainability blueprint, PlaNYC 2030, in which the City planned forpopulation growth and targeted climate change as a significantchallenge. (24) Updated in 2011, PlaNYC committed the City to reducinggreenhouse gas emissions, increasing the resilience of the City'sstructures, communities, and natural systems, improving the City'spreparedness for extreme weather, and taking other steps to limit theharmful effects of climate change. (25)

In 2008, with funding provided by the Rockefeller Foundation, MayorBloomberg assembled the New York City Panel on Climate Change, which isan advisory body of climate science, legal, and risk managementspecialists designed to function similarly to the IntergovernmentalPanel of Climate Change by providing projections and technical analysisof climate-change risks. (26) The following year the panel reported as"extremely likely" a mean annual sea-level rise in New York ofbetween two to five inches by the 2020s and a mean annual rise ofbetween seven to twelve inches by the 2050s. (27) In 2011 the Cityproduced a comprehensive waterfront plan, (28) which included the goalof developing strategies for the City to improve its resilience tochanging climates and rising sea levels. (29) Concomitantly, the Cityidentified specific projects, including strategic planning, dataassessment, piloting physical measures to increase coastal resilience,zoning and building code changes, community-level planning, andemergency preparedness efforts. (30)

The impact of Superstorm Sandy drew attention to the fact that evena well-resourced city that had become proactive in gathering data andplanning for climate change was not fully prepared for the extent andeffect of sea-level surges and inundation on coastal areas and thecity's infrastructure. A road map of "coping strategies"that had in fact been suggested for the city and region in a 2011 studyconducted at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia Universityseems, in retrospect, prescient:

 The uncertainty of the exact increment of risk due to sea level rise and global warming can therefore not serve as an excuse to avoid dealing with the region's storm surge risk. The coping strategies to be explored are likely to include a mixture of modern engineering solutions, regulatory measures, taxation and/or financial or insurance discounting, and--as the ultimate tool--innovative land use combined with buyouts and relocations. Costs and benefits of these various options, including the mounting costs of not facing these issues at all, need to be addressed quantitatively in forthcoming studies. They could not be resolved in this initial phase of assessment. This assessment does however clearly show the magnitudes of problems that will need to be tackled. (31)

In the aftermath of Sandy, the City established a SpecialInitiative on Rebuilding and Resiliency to pursue such strategies, andin June 2013 issued A Stronger, More Resilient, New York, outlining over250 initiatives that seek to improve the City's ability towithstand the effects of storm surges linked to sea-level rise. (32)Also in 2013, the City's Panel on Climate Change updated its 2009sea-level rise projections. (33)

In these post-disaster responses to weather-related risk, the Cityhas acted within the larger context of federal and state governmentprograms and policies instituted at "higher" territorial andjurisdictional scales in relation to the City. (34) These include theNew York State 2100 Commission's preliminary report addressingideas to improve the resilience of New York State's infrastructure,(35) and the Hurricane Sandy Rebuilding Task Force, chaired by formerSecretary of Housing and Urban Development, Shaun Donovan, a nascentregional governance arrangement. (36)

These levels of government have a role to play in shaping theCity's efforts both to mitigate and adapt to the impact ofweather-related harms, by (1) providing financial assistance, technicalexpertise, and crucial data, (2) approving City proposals that arelinked to that assistance, and (3) serving as a source of policyguidance. For example, the City received $1,772,820,000 under thefederal Department of Housing and Urban Development's firstdistribution of Community Development Block Grant-Disaster Relief(CDBGDR) funds. (37) The City was required to (and did) obtain approvalfrom the federal government for its plans to use these funds forhousing, business recovery, infrastructure, and resilience investments.(38) In addition to this allocation of CDBG monies, the City has hadaccess to other federal funding, including grants from the FederalEmergency Management Agency (FEMA), Small Business AdministrationDisaster Loans, and National Flood Insurance Program disbursem*nts.However, with the funding comes the necessity to follow federal programmandates and procedures. (39)

Similarly, when the City issued A Stronger, More Resilient NewYork, it enumerated the federal and state agencies with which it wouldbe required to cooperate to receive funding, technical and logisticalsupport, and authority to achieve certain reforms. (40) For example, theCity needs assistance and funding from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineersto implement various beach renourishment and floodgate repair projects,(41) review by FEMA of flood-related building standards, FEMA'sallowance of mitigation credits for flood insurance policyholders whoundertake resilience improvements and other changes in residentialinsurance policy features, and FEMA's authorization of a moreflexible building classification in the National Flood InsuranceProgram. (42) To secure changes in price gouging laws and lawsregulating gasoline supply contracts, the City must call on New YorkState to adopt legislation, (43) reflecting limits on its home ruleauthority. (44)

The City is also subject to planning and funding within a regionalcontext. In August 2013 the Hurricane Sandy Rebuilding Task Force,chaired by then HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan, issued its report,Hurricane Sandy Rebuilding Strategy: Stronger Communities, A ResilientRegion (45) promoting regional coordination to infrastructuredevelopment (46) and strategies for enhancing the ability of state andlocal governments to develop long-term approaches to recovery andresilience following the storm. (47)

In sum, notwithstanding its initiatives in climate-change planningand goal setting, as a municipality in a federal system New York doesnot operate completely autonomously in responding to weather disaster orin developing climate-change resilience strategies. Rather, the formallegal structure of local governments in the United States, vis-a-visstates and the federal government, positions a city as subordinate togovernments that subsume it territorially, jurisdictionally, andpolitically; cities responding to disasters engage federal and stateagencies for aid without any presumption of leverage or entitlement.(48) Referring to this structure, Richard Schragger has observed that"cities and their leaders are three levels down the political foodchain and must normally ask the states for whatever powers they have orwish to exercise." (49)

Schragger argues that the constraints on cities inhere in theformal separation of federal, state, and local government authority,which can limit a local government's ability to shape policy. (50)These constraints also implicate the "vertical competition"among federal, state, and local officials for recognition and loyaltyamong local constituents, where the interests among these governmentalrepresentatives are not necessarily congruent. (51) Certainly, asRichard Briffault has observed, the actual scope of local authority isvariable and difficult to assess, "reflecting an ever-shifting mixof state delegation and oversight, the vagaries of judicialinterpretation, fluctuations in the local capacity to initiate measures,the strains of interlocal conflict and the changing economic, social andtechnological dimensions of the problems local governments are calledupon to address." (52) Thus, the picture is complicated, and evenrecognizing the authority that cities generally wield with respect toland use, (53) the issues and impacts resulting from climatechange-induced weather disaster typically have externalities that maycause them to be understood as multijurisdictional.

However, other governance possibilities exist and, in fact, at thesame time that New York City has acted, and at times has beenconstrained, within a vertical governance scheme, it has also played anactive role in the C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group, (54) analternative modality to address climate-change challenges highlightingthe role of cities as generators of policies and practices that canspread and gain adherents among other cities. (55) The next sectionexamines in greater detail the attributes of C40 Cities and relatedinterurban networks, which position urban governments horizontallyrather than vertically, linking cities in networks across nationalborders. (56)

II. ENGAGING CLIMATE CHANGE THROUGH TRANSNATIONAL URBAN NETWORKS

Scholars of alternative governance models emphasize thatcontemporary conditions of "complexity, diversity, andparticularity" are not well served by a centralized, "one sizefits all" approach to problem solving; rather, these conditionscall for a process that can adapt to changing circ*mstances and callupon multiple participants from the public and private sectors. (57) Itis under these conditions that the concept of the network has emerged asa "metaphor" to convey the idea of a system of"distributed governance" functioning under a variety ofarrangements. (58) Networks are "polycentric" and typically"regulate" through the use of "soft" law, (59)setting goals and targets, aggregating data related to outcomes, andsharing information. (60) They operate at all levels of government aswell as in the private sector. (61)

Networks in the transgovernmental context have been described as"fast, flexible, and decentralized," benefiting from theabsence of a formal bureaucratic structure, (62) even as others raiseconcerns of a "technocratic conspiracy." (63) Internationallaw scholar Anne-Marie Slaughter has identified categories oftransgovernmental networks that have arisen among national-levelofficials. (64) By contrast, the resilience networks under considerationhere comprise local government officials pursuing strategies to mitigateor adapt to climate change, although they operate within a frameworkestablished by international protocols, including the IntergovernmentalPanel on Climate Change and the United Nations Framework Convention onClimate Change. (65) The recent appointment of former New York CityMayor Michael Bloomberg as U.N. Special Envoy for Climate Change andCities (66) suggests networked cities' increasingly visible role inglobal strategies to combat climate change. Bloomberg, who also servesas President of the Board of Directors of the C40 Cities for ClimateChange network, was named to this new post specifically to assist theU.N. Secretary-General in engaging cities to muster the politicalwherewithal needed to undertake climate-change measures and to offerideas and strategies to the U.N Climate Summit in New York on September23, 2014. (67)

The salience of cities operating in a global context as loci fordeveloping increased resilience to climate change is further highlightedby the recent formation of the Medellin Collaboration on UrbanResilience at the conclusion of the Seventh World Urban Forum. (68) TheForum, in turn, was organized by the UN Habitat for a Better UrbanFuture, the Programme for Human Settlements, which takes a globalapproach to sustainable urbanism. (69) The collaboration comprises theUN-Habitat, the United Nations Office for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR),the World Bank Group, the Rockefeller Foundation, C40 Cities, ICLEI, 100Resilient Cities, the Inter-American Development Bank, and the GlobalFacility for Disaster Risk Reduction and Recovery. All of these groupsare transnational in scope and have as their focus the city as ajurisdictional, population settlement, or economic unit. (70) With itsemphasis on resilience, the collaboration seeks to assist cities toaddress the effects of climate change and respond to disaster risks. Itdoes so chiefly by coordinating and reconciling cities' approachesto improving resilience; increasing cities' access to financingthat could help protect against vulnerability; promoting sharing of bestpractices among cities; and encouraging coordinated action with urbannetworks. (71) A number of these priorities are part of thecollaborations that are a focus of analysis in this Part.

Specifically, this Part will consider the foundational assumptionsunderpinning: (1) the C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group, the WorldBank, ICLEI--Local Governments for Sustainability, and a number ofphilanthropic organizations; (72) (2) resilience initiatives supportedby the Rockefeller Foundation; (73) and (3) Resilient Cities, an annualglobal forum initiated in 2010 by ICLEI, the World Mayors Council onClimate Change, and the City of Bonn, Germany. (74)

A. C40 Cities: Developing Metrics and Best Practices Among LargeCities

Founded in 2005 by the former Mayor of London, the C40 CitiesClimate Leadership Group is a network of the world's largest citiesthat seeks to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to take other actionsto decrease climate-related risk. (75) That cities are gaining greaterprominence in the campaigns to reduce climate risk is based on theirsubstantial consumption of energy and production of greenhouse gasemissions, the expansion of urbanized areas globally, and the highpercentage of cities located in coastal areas subject to flooding as aresult of sea-level rise. (76) Working in conjunction with its partners(77) and funder organizations, (78) the Climate Leadership Grouporganizes networks of cities based on shared interests into seven broad"initiative areas": adaptation and water; energy; finance andeconomic development; measurement and planning; solid waste management;sustainable communities; and transportation. (79) An illustrativeadaptation and water initiative links to a network of delta cities toenable these cities to share learning on climate adaptation. (80) Thesustainable urban development network led by the city of Melbourne isundertaking an initiative that encompasses three strategicprojects--intervention and policy mapping, benchmarking and goalsetting, and collaborative resourcing--all of which are designed to leadtoward the establishment of green cities. (81) This group in particularsignaled its intent to work with the private sector to produce largeinfrastructure projects. (82) C40 Cities also provides direct assistanceto cities, such as dedicated staffing and other resources. (83) Theprojects supported by C40 Cities are informed by the consortium'sanimating belief that, in the absence of clear indications thatintergovernmental initiatives at higher scales have been effective,cities can drive efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improveresilience against the effects of climate change. (84) With particularrelevance to governance considerations, the assumption behind C40 Citiesis that mayors have clear accountability to those who live and work inthe cities they lead and that city-level governments are better able torespond flexibly to changing needs and circ*mstances to effectuateclimate-change mitigation and adaptation. (85) To substantiate thatinsight, C40 Cities collected survey data in 2011 and again in 2013 todocument mayoral powers and trends in climate actions at the city level.As former New York City Mayor and current President of the C40 Board ofDirectors Michael Bloomberg wrote in the Foreword to the 2013 surveyreport, cities have the "power, the expertise, the political willand the resourcefulness to continue to take meaningful climate action,and are more than ever before, at the forefront of the issue of climatechange as leaders, innovators and practitioners." (86) Survey dataindicate that cities have the capacity to lead by setting broad policypriorities and shifts that set the stage for climate actions acrossother sectors, including transportation, energy, waste, and finance.(87)

The network operates in large part through supporting theproduction and dissemination of information by and for the benefit ofits members, and thus substantiates the emphasis in the scholarship ofnetworks on the role of information as an instrument of governance. (88)C40 Cities' research and communications infrastructure fordisseminating new knowledge and strategies is illustrative. (89) Thenetwork conducts ongoing research, and recently embarked on a project tostudy ways in which actions taken by cities can help achieve the globalcommitment to limit global warming to two degrees Celsius abovepre-industrial measurements. (90) The group also produces case studiesdocumenting the efforts of individual cities. (91) C40 Cities sponsorsworkshops on specific topics including bus rapid transit, green growth,solid waste management (92) and other programming to facilitate peerexchanges in which similarly situated cities can share information andtheir experience with energy efficiency practices and over theBuildings, Water, and Community-scale Development sectors in the climatechange arena. ARUP & C40 Cities, supra note 84, at 18.

greenhouse gas emissions. (93) The network points to 2013 surveydata documenting increases in cycle share programs, rising use of LEDstreet lighting, and increasing adoption of bus rapid transit programsthat accommodate large numbers of passengers (spreading from SouthAmerican cities increasingly to more developed northern cities) asevidence that its programs have been effective in promoting circulationof data and best practices across cities. (94)

Based on responses to survey questions, C40 Cities and itspublication partners recently released "In Focus" reports onten individual cities, nine of which are C40 members, which highlightedtheir accomplishments in increasing energy efficiency and addressingclimate change. (95) New York City's documented efforts to respondto Superstorm Sandy's devastation and to plan for future extremeweather episodes are featured in one of the ten reports. (96) Includedin the report are data on high-level physical risks the City faces as aresult of increases in the rate of sea-level rise, storm surges, hotdays, and average annual rainfall, coupled with the vulnerabilityoccasioned by older infrastructure. (97)

Since its inception, C40 Cities has held biennial mayors'summits, most recently in the city of Johannesburg, South Africa, wherethe gathering became the occasion for interchange with the internationalcommunity's climate-change programs. In Johannesburg, a substantialgroup of C40 mayors asked that the United Nations' Open WorkingGroup on Sustainable Development goals include a specific goal for urbanareas. The Executive Secretary for the United Nations FrameworkConvention on Climate Change attended the summit and solicited theinvolvement of cities in the development of national levelclimate-change programs. (98) C40 mayors rotate on the SteeringCommittee, its governance arm; (99) overall leadership is provided by anelected Chair, a position that is held for a three-year period. (100)The C40 Cities Board of Directors reviews and guides the day-to-daymanagement of the organization. (101)

B. Rockefeller Foundation Initiatives: Promoting Multi-SectoralCollaborations

In the broader effort to increase knowledge and capacity aboutclimate change, the Rockefeller Foundation has been a leading proponentof developing resilient systems and the need for multisectoralcollaboration. In its white paper titled Building Climate ChangeResilience, the Foundation developed a definition of climate changeresilience that emphasizes its global relevance for developed citiessuch as New York as well as more transitional urban areas. (102) In itsrecently inaugurated 100 Resilient Cities Centennial Challenge, theFoundation is funding a $35 million initiative to support membercities' efforts to develop resilience plans. (103) To be eligible acity must have a population in excess of 50,000 and an establishedgovernance structure. (104)

To date, sixty-seven cities have been chosen in two cohorts toparticipate in the network and will receive technical and financialsupport to develop resilience plans, which the initiative defines as"the capacity of individuals, communities, institutions, businessesand systems within a city to survive, adapt, and grow no matter whatkinds of chronic stresses and acute shocks they experience." (105)Support includes financing for cities to employ a Chief ResilienceOfficer and to disseminate research and best practices. (106) Theincorporation of "stresses" in the definition of resiliencecontemplates that conditions that impair a city's day-to-dayfunctioning--such as high unemployment, inadequate publictransportation, food and water insecurity, and pervasive violence--alsothreaten resilience and must be addressed. (107) The initiativeidentifies resilience's key attributes: constant learning, rapidrebound, "safe" failure, flexibility, and spare capacity.(108)

Citing the rationale for setting this challenge, FoundationPresident Judith Rodin has underscored a critical need for a sharedproblem solving approach:

 But in today's hyper-connected world, our challenges are distinguished by their frequency, scale, and ability to ripple over borders and across continents. Once-in-a-lifetime storms now threaten the Eastern Seaboard of the United States every few years. Disasters in urban areas can impact millions of people and shut down entire economic systems and supply chains. And whether they are public health threats, contagions in our financial markets, or volatile weather events, our challenges are indeed shared challenges, and vulnerability in one area often shakes the stability of another. (109)

In spearheading this project, the Foundation replicated a processof urban exchange and linking that it has fostered in the Asian CitiesClimate Change Resilience Network (ACCCRN).

Inaugurated in 2008, ACCCRN links ten medium-sized cities in India,Vietnam, Thailand, and Indonesia in an effort to help them buildresilience to the effects of climate change, (110) and to generateuseful knowledge that these cities can apply and share in designingresilience strategies. (111) The network draws its funding from the

Rockefeller Foundation and technical, strategic, and logisticalinput from city and regional collaborators, including community-basedorganizations, local government actors, the business sector, anddisaster relief agencies. (112) Its advisory board draws representativesfrom academia, research institutes, civil society, municipal government,and international agencies. (113)

Similar to C40 Cities, member cities organize internationalworkshops, fora, and conferences to promote knowledge on urbanresilience and adaptation. (114) Despite a specific aim to supportresilience approaches that benefit poor and developing populations, theresources that ACCCRN develop relate to challenges affecting coastalcities generally, such as public safety, housing design, building andinfrastructure protection, and public health. (115) ACCCRN'sparticipation in international fora highlights the insights that itsapplied research has generated. For example, at the Association ofSoutheast Asian Nations Community 2015 Forum, ACCRRN identified threecritical components for defending mid-sized cities from the triad ofclimate change, explosive urban growth, and vulnerability: access toadequate funding; building capacity in local governments acting inconjunction with other partners; and fostering cross-sectoralcollaboration that includes government, the private sector, and funders,and that promotes coordination and sharing of information. (116)

C. Resilient Cities

The Rockefeller Foundation is also a partner supporting ResilientCities, which brings together local government leaders and climateadaptation specialists to discuss adaptation issues in an urban contextaround the globe on such topics as urban risk, resilient urbanlogistics, financing the resilient city, urban agriculture, smartinfrastructure, and others. (117) This forum is a focal point of thework of the World Mayors Council on Climate Change and the BonnDeclaration of Mayors. (118) Convening annually in Bonn, Germany, theforum hosts workshops, panel discussions, and plenary sessions thattypically showcase demonstrations and experience sharing from specificcities. Consistent with the approach of the other networks discussed inthis section, the 2014 Forum promoted dissemination of city-generatedknowledge and experience. (119) Sessions featured GIS-based (120) dataanalysis from Wuppertal, Germany, and Rotterdam, Netherlands, and greeninfrastructure developments in the United States and Japan; case studiesfrom Bangladesh and South Africa on use of locally-determined funding;and an ecosystem-based adaptation with examples from London, Singapore,and Copenhagen. Although its own governance structure seems looser thanthat of C40 Cities or ACCCRN, the Resilience Cities Congress annuallyholds the Mayors Adaptation Forum, considered the leadership componentof the program that brings together heads of local government withtechnical support and collaborators. (121) Each year the Forumculminates in the Bonn Declaration of Mayors, a hortatory documenthighlighting developments and prospective action to promote resilienceand sustainable development. (122)

Resilient Cities identifies supporting partners, sponsors(funders), media partners, and, in addition, thirty-eight endorsingpartners comprising nine United Nations organizations, two Germanfederal ministries, other German and European organizations, developmentinstitutes, scientific and research-oriented bodies, a planningassociation, and environmental and conservation agencies. (123) Two ofthe endorsing partners are themselves associated with urban and regionalgovernance: the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of theCouncil of Europe, a political body dedicated to enhancing local andregional democracy and governance in Europe, (124) and the Network forRegional Governments for Sustainable Development (nrg4SD), aninternational group of subnational governments that highlights the roleof these governments in fostering sustainable development and promotesthe formulation of subnational-level territorial policies. (125)

That the inhabitants, institutions, and infrastructure of localgovernments face the most direct threats from extreme weather eventsunderscores that local actors are highly knowledgeable about the localconditions, resources, and vulnerabilities that must be considered indeveloping appropriate responses. The networks and organized foradiscussed in this Part support cities in producing information--whichthey use to create, disseminate, and encourage a shared commitmentto--norms, metrics, and practices outside of the vertical governancestructures in which local governments typically occupy a subordinateposition. Part III will examine in more detail the theory and governanceimplications of these networks, which offer the possibility of analternative approach for addressing transnational climate-relatedproblems. This approach is based on a decentered (126) and, morespecifically, a polycentric (127) modality in place of conventional,centralized command-and-control mechanisms. In these networks,legitimacy and efficacy must be gauged with reference to more flexibleprocesses that involve comparison and sharing among multiple approachesand participants, (128) and that ultimately seek to build consensus.(129)

III. HORIZONTAL URBAN GOVERNANCE: TRANSNATIONAL NETWORKS AS ACOMPARATIVE GOVERNANCE SCHEME

The burgeoning scholarship of governance often obscures theconcept's plural meanings--encompassing both government bodies andmore informal arrangements, private as well as public forms ofmanagement. (130) If governance is understood at a base level as"organized efforts to manage the course of events in a socialsystem," (131) certainly the emergence of polycentric institutionalarrangements of state and non-state actors engaged in collaborativeproblem solving, typically through mobilizing (collecting, reporting,and disseminating) information, actualizes the governance-by-networkmetaphor. (132)

As a cross-disciplinary concept, (133) the network can be analyzedthrough the lens of geography in addition to its sociological, politicaltheory, and legal regulatory dimensions. In the context of urbanlocational policies in Western Europe, sociologist Neil Brenner hasanalyzed cooperative interurban networks to illustrate the ostensibleadvantages and limitations of "rescaling outward." (134)Although Brenner's analysis has a distinct context and purpose,identifying features in interurban networks that reinforce competitionand uneven development under capitalism, (135) the horizontal,city-to-city orientation that such networks entail is useful for thisdiscussion. The network concept offers an alternative way to understandurban governance spatially and provides a basis for comparison acrossurban approaches. In the language of geography, these networksconstitute "horizontal interlinkages among geographically dispersednodal points"; the "nodal connectivity" of networksreplaces the "territorial enclosure" of political units whosejurisdiction is defined by bounded territory. (136) These networks areenvisioned as "leapfrogging" over space, (137) disrupting theidea that a city is limited by its political territoriality.

Brenner refers to these networks in the Western European context as"new state spaces," but in a number of respects they appear aslatter-day variants of a centuries-old practice from an era before thedevelopment of the nation state: their historical antecedents aretraceable to the medieval period, when merchants and then cities inNorthern Europe formed networks known as the Hanseatic League, amercantile and security-promoting alliance. (138) Recent scholarlyanalysis of the League using network theory emphasizes characteristicsof networks--"a horizontal, little formalized and constantlychanging structure ... [that] develops around one or more hubs ornodes" (139)--that are distinguishable from both hierarchicalorganizations and a market structure. (140) Reflecting this distinctivestructure, the networks of Hanse merchants and cities wereheterarchical--interlinked with nodes of varying densities--and at botha local and transnational level. (141)

Further, as the Hanseatic trading networks expanded and gainedinfluence, the networks generated norms and rules that ensured stabilityand a reliable basis for cooperation by setting criteria of merchantablequality and measurement, permitting debt claims, and recognizingindividual liability. (142) The network structure anchored in thetrading offices that enforced these rules also served importantcoordinating and information-exchange functions. (143)

Network theory and the historical example of the Hanseatic networksprovide a conceptual model and a point of comparison for transnationalnetworks formed to promote sustainable urbanism and initiatives toaddress climate change. In the context of climate-change mitigation andadaptation strategies, various United Nations institutions, inparticular UN-Habitat for a Better Urban Future (144) and the newlyestablished Special Envoy for Climate Change and Cities, (145) look tonetworked cities as crucial actors in amassing relevant knowledge,generating standards for action, and serving as reference points forsimilarly situated cities.

Executive Director of UN-Habitat Joan Clos made this point at theclose of a three-day conference hosted by the United Nations Economicand Social Council, on May 27-29, 2014. Specifically, Clos cited theleading role that mayors have played in efforts to address climatechange as he announced support for a compact that various networks,comprising thousands of cities, would sign to pledge support foradopting climate-change resilience strategies. (146) At the sameconference, United Nations Special Envoy for Cities and Climate ChangeMichael Bloomberg opined that mayors' executive powers positionedthem to move forward on climate-change efforts, and that they "didnot have to wait for Government actions." (147) Presumably theSpecial Envoy referred to state, regional, or national governmentregulatory action under a vertical governance model, although inactuality the extent of mayoral powers across cities, and the form ofpolicymaking authority that can be exercised on behalf of cities underthat model, vary. (148)

Reflecting the direct stake that cities have in addressing climaterisk, the networks invoked with approval under these United Nationsauspices operate horizontally in contrast to vertical governance schemesto promote "policy diffusion." This governance concept refersgenerally to the horizontal dispersion and adoption by other governmentunits of an idea or policy, typically through processes that includegaining exposure to policy innovation, monitoring its progress, andjustifying adoption of a similar policy on the basis of its demonstratedsuccess and appropriateness. (149) An example of policy diffusion in theinterurban climate-change context, as mentioned above, is the recentspread of bus rapid transit programs, a policy originating in SouthAmerica and then adopted in more developed northern cities. (150)

Judith Resnik's work on translocal organizations of governmentactors (151) suggests productive analogies to the horizontal interurbanrelationships discussed here. Resnik's analysis notes the potentialfor the organizations she describes, for example the U.S. Conference ofMayors, to "create norms for office holders and shape policypreferences," to "model behavior as [translocal actors]cooperate and pool resources," and to serve as "conduits forborder crossings--state to state, state to federal, andinternational." (152) The transnational climate-change networkssimilarly operate by creating norms, shaping policy, modeling behavior,and facilitating broader dissemination and adoption of policy related toadapting to climate risks. (153)

Interurban initiatives such as C40 Cities and Resilient Citiesrecognize the central role that cities play both as contributors togreenhouse gas emissions, and thus global warming, and as loci ofinnovation, experimentation, and creativity. (154) These transnational,interurban networks facilitate coordination and communication amongcities and help them assemble critical financial and technical support,essential in light of the fiscally dependent conditions in which citiesin vertical governance structures operate. (155) Further, the networkshelp develop cities' capacity to disseminate knowledge andmethodologies, ideas, policy innovation, expertise, and resources, andshape policy and problem solving on critical climate-resilience issues.Although not a condition of network membership, a desirable outcome forthe networks is to bring about collective action among participatingcities to adopt or commit to shared norms and practices. (156)

In short, resembling the interconnected Hanseatic League tradingnetworks and the overlapping network of cities that supported them,(157) the transnational interurban networks discussed in Part II seek todevelop norms, standards, and best practices, such as measuring andreporting climate-change effects that, in turn, serve as a continuingpoint of reference and comparison for other cities participating in thenetworks. To the extent that member cities consent to be bound by thesedeveloping climate-change resilience standards (and assuming they arenot precluded from doing so by domestic law), the networks offer aframework for problem solving-oriented governance (158) that ishorizontal rather than vertical, heterarchical/nodal rather thanhierarchical, and comparative in operation.

IV. ADDRESSING POSSIBLE LIMITATIONS

Before concluding, this Part surfaces and responds to potentiallimitations upon this governance approach. These include the impact of apro-growth orientation prevalent in cities on the adoption ofclimate-resilient strategies and the possibility that variableconditions among horizontally-linked cities may not be replicable inother contexts or serviceable to a horizontal governance model. Further,this Part addresses concerns that well-resourced non-state participantswill dwarf the role of local government actors and, perhaps, reinforcedynamics of dependency among cities in less developed regions.

Scholars and commentators of urban government and policy have longassociated cities with a pro-growth ideology that elevates business anddeveloper preferences and initiatives over those motivated by efforts toovercome resource inequality or that otherwise limit the conditionsunder which growth that is subject to a minimum of restraints can occur.(159) The tension between pro-growth and alternative preferences isparticularly pronounced as cities turn to resilience strategies toaddress climate change. For coastal cities such as New York, waterfrontdevelopment is typically tied to economic well-being and is widelyregarded as desirable. (160) However, given projections of continuingsea-level rise and increased risk of surges, unrestrained waterfrontdevelopment can pose significant costs and risks. (161)

Developing the waterfront requires construction or extension ofinfrastructure and, in turn, necessitates structural (hard) armoringstrategies (162) to protect against storm surges and otherweather-related damage. Resorting to such measures is costly, requiringinvestment in maintenance or replacement of these armoring structures.(163) These weather-related costs supply an economic rationale forreassessing the growth orientation of coastal cities. As a furthereconomic consideration, cities seeking to balance growth and strategiesof climate resilience could offer or increase financial incentives topromote "green" rather than waterfront development. Themutually reinforcing effect of large numbers of cities linked in anetwork committed to policies promoting sustainability and resiliencecould potentially moderate the force of the growth imperative.

To address the concern that variations in the cities' climate,geography, and economy may preclude useful comparisons, networks can beformed in ways that emphasize commonalities among member cities. Forexample, organizing cities in terms of size, geographic characteristics,extent of development and economic wherewithal, or in terms of morespecific policy concerns or subissues (164) within the broader ambit ofclimate change, can achieve more nuanced linkages among similarlysituated cities. Examples include C40 Cities, the members of which arelinked by their megacity status, (165) and the ACCCRN, in which membercities are linked by geography, medium size, and the objective tosupport resilience measures for developing populations. (166)

The potential problem that influential non-state actors willdominate these networks (167) points to a concern that networks lacklegal accountability. (168) Particularly in light of the prominent rolethat well-resourced foundations and philanthropies already play inpromoting these interurban linkages, (169) one might question whethernetwork cities are in fact driving and diffusing innovation. Further,that network methods replicate practices and rhetoric favored by theprivate sector, including aggregating information, reliance on feedback,and use of yardsticks and targets, (170) further demonstrates the waysin which governance has modulated the traditional role and practices ofgovernment. (171) These considerations are not easily dismissed.However, the central role of consortia of local governments in thesenetworks, including the C40 Cities mayors, ICLEI, the World MayorsCouncil on Climate Change, and the Congress of Local and RegionalAuthorities of the Council of Europe, suggests that participation in thenetworks will likely strengthen local governments' capacity, voice,and access to information on climate-related issues.

An additional point to recognize is that networked cities'authority to adopt norms horizontally/heterarchically is subject to therequirements of the hierarchical governance structure under which eachcity also operates. These include the extent of a city's home rulepower, noted in Part I, which is tied to the nature of the policy orpractice involved. Certainly in New York, to the extent that localclimate-change initiatives are considered regulation of land use, suchlocal action should in the first instance fall within the ambit of homerule authority; (172) the possibility that a preemption challenge wouldsucceed, however, is less predictable. Even under circ*mstances in whicha network-member city's climate-change initiative were deemedpreempted by state or federal law, the city's proactive testing ofpolicies and practices would have value: such local action contributesto the body of knowledge and experience available to other cities in thenetwork. In addition, it provides a blueprint for, and exerts upwardpressure upon, higher levels of government in a vertical governancescheme to move forward on useful climate-change initiatives.

CONCLUSION

A turn to transnational urban networks to generate and diffuseclimate-related norms and practices is an approach warranting furtherconsideration. Although the concerns identified in Part IV meritattention, the interurban network model does hold the potential toexpand participating cities' resources and knowledge opportunities.It increases cities' capacity to address an issue that issimultaneously local and global, that calls for intergovernmental andmulti-sectoral collaboration, and that has generally confounded effortsto achieve a workable consensus at the national scale.

A problem-solving and policy-making approach that is attentive toan individual city's experience and scale while drawing on theshared experience of multiple network-linked cities increases thepotential benefits of the individual city's membership. As it movesforward with climate-resilience initiatives, a city such as New Yorkthat participates in transnational interurban networks can both drawfrom and contribute to the knowledge and experience generated by othercities in its cohort. This accumulated knowledge and practice can formthe basis for an alternative modality of loose or soft governance, aframework of norms, standards, and metrics to which cities can agree tobe bound.

The use of urban networks is not a new idea or scalar arrangement,but it alters the tendency to overemphasize vertical governance schemesand the scale of national government. Climate-oriented urban networksmay have more initial success than other levels of government inpromoting the diffusion of guiding norms, policies, and problem-solvingpractices because they foreground cities' preeminent knowledge oflocal conditions and harness their practical incentives to developresilient approaches. By proliferating information and promotingcomparison at the urban level, transnational urban networks mayreinvigorate efforts to build and scale up a broader intergovernmentalclimate-change adaptation and resilience consensus.

(1.) See The City of New York, Community Development BlockGrant-Disaster Recovery: Partial Action Plan A 1 (2013) [hereinafterN.Y.C. CDBG-DR Partial Action Plan A], available athttp://www.nyc.gov/html/cdbg/ downloads/pdf/cdbg-dr_full.pdf.

(2.) See N.Y.C. Special Initiative on Rebuilding & Resiliency,A Stronger, More Resilient New York 7 (2013), available athttp://www.nyc.gov/html/sirr/html/ report/report.shtml; Annie Karni,Bloomberg Lays Out Post-Sandy Strategy, Crain's N.Y. Bus. (Dec. 6,2012), http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20121206/REAL_ESTATE/121209942.

(3.) See Neil Brenner, New State Spaces: Urban Governance and theRescaling of Statehood 8-11 (2004).

(4.) See infra notes 34, 56, 134, 147-48, and accompanying textaddressing features of interurban cooperative networks, whichsociologist Neil Brenner refers to as "new state spaces," inthe distinct context of urban locational policies driving capitalism inWestern Europe. These Western European networks nonetheless suggestmodels with respect to governance and scale that are useful in analyzingthe potential of transnational networks for developing resilientstrategies to address climate change.

(5.) See, e.g., Scott Burris et al., Changes in Governance: ACross-Disciplinary Review of Current Scholarship, 41 Akron L. Rev. 1,22, 30-31 (2008), cited in Paul Harpur, New Governance and the Role ofPublic and Private Monitoring of Labor Conditions: Sweatshops and ChinaSocial Compliance for Textile and Apparel Industry/CSC9000T, 38 RutgersL. Rec. 49, 50 n.7 (2011); Richard B. Stewart, Administrative Law in theTwenty-First Century, 78 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 437, 448-49 (2003); see alsoLouise G. Trubek, New Governance and Soft Law in Health Care Reform, 3Ind. Health L. Rev. 139, 148-50 (2006).

(6.) See generally International Framework for AddressingAdaptation, ACCCRN, http://www.acccrn.org/uccr/international-framework-addressing adaptation (last visited Aug. 4, 2014).

(7.) See Our Partners & Funders, C40 Cities,http://www.c40.org/partners (last visited Aug. 4, 2014).

(8.) See About the ACCCRN Network, ACCCRN,http://www.acccrn.org/aboutacccrn (last visited Aug. 4, 2014).

(9.) See About the Global Forum, Resilient Cities,http://resilient-cities.iclei.org/resilient-cities-hub-site/about-the-global-forum/ (last visited Aug. 4, 2014).

(10.) See, e.g.. Burris et al., supra note 5, at 30, 38-39; seealso Trubek, supra note 5, at 148-50; Orly Lobel, The Renew Deal: TheFall of Regulation and the Rise of Governance in Contemporary LegalThought, 89 Minn. L. Rev. 342, 388, 396, 425-26 (2004), cited in Harpur,supra note 5, at 50 n.4.

(11.) See What is Urban Climate Change Resilience?, ACCCRN,http://www.acccrn.org/uccr/what-urban-climate-change-resilience (lastvisited Aug. 4, 2014).

(12.) See generally Anne Siders, Columbia Ctr. for Climate ChangeLaw, Managed Coastal Retreat: A Legal Handbook on Shifting DevelopmentAway from Vulnerable Areas (2013), available athttps://web.law.columbia.edu/sites/default/files/microsites/climate-change/files/Publications/Fellows/Managed CoastalRetreat_FINAL_Oct%2030.pdf (analyzing managed retreatmeasures).

(13.) See CDP, Protecting Our Capital: How Climate ChangeAdaptation in Cities Creates a Resilient Place for Business 17 (2014),available at https://www.cdp.net/CDPResults/CDP-global-cities-report-2014.pdf.

(14.) See Burris et al., supra note 5, at 19-21.

(15.) See N.Y.C. Special Initiative on Rebuilding & Resiliency,supra note 2.

(16.) See N.Y.C. CDBG-DR Partial Action Plan A, supra note 1, at 3.

(17.) Linda I. Gibbs & Caswell F. Holloway, NYC Hurricane SandyAfter Action Report 8, 16, 18 (2013).

(18.) See id. at 21.

(19.) Id. at 18-23.

(20.) See Furman Ctr. for Real Estate and Urban Policy,Sandy's Effects on Housing in New York City 4-5 (2013).

(21.) See Gibbs & Holloway, supra note 17, at 20.

(22.) See Mireya Navarro, Public Housing Residents Relying onAgency Still Recovering from Storm, N.Y. Times, Oct. 29, 2013,http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/30/nyregion/public-housing-residents-relying-on-agency-still-recovering-from-storm.html.

(23.) E.g., Ed Pilkington. De Blasio Vows Action on Inequality toTackle New York's 'Tale of Two Cities', Guardian, Jan. 2,2014, http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/01/bill-de-blasio-mayor-inauguration-new-york; SamRoberts, Poverty Rate Is Up in New York City, and Income Gap Is Wide,Census Data Show, N.Y. Times, Sept. 19, 2013,http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/19/nyregion/poverty-rate-incity-rises-to-21-2.html.

(24.) See Sustainability, PlaNYC,http://www.nyc.gov/html/planyc2030/html/ theplan/the-plan.shtml (lastvisited Aug. 4, 2014).

(25.) See PlaNYC, Climate Change: A Greener, Greater New York 151(2011), available athttp://s-media.nyc.gov/agencies/planyc2030/pdf/planyc_2011_planyc_full_report.pdf.

(26.) See N.Y.C. Panel on Climate Change, Climate Risk Information3-4 (2009) [hereinafter Climate Risk Information 2009], available athttp://www.nyc.gov/html/om/pdf/2009/NPCC_CRI.pdf. In 2012, the Cityadopted legislation constituting the NPCC as a continuing entity withresponsibilities linked, in part, to the release of the AssessmentReports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. See N.Y.C.Panel on Climate Change, Climate Risk Information 2013: Observations,Climate Change Projections, and Maps 7 (2013) [hereinafter Climate RiskInformation 2013], available athttp://www.nyc.gov/html/planyc2030/downloads/pdf/npcc_climate_risk_information_2013_report.pdf.

(27.) See Climate Risk Information 2009, supra note 26, at 3. InJune 2013, however, the Panel on Climate Change released a reportrevising and increasing its earlier projections of sea level rise. SeeClimate Risk Information 2013, supra note 26.

(28.) See N.Y.C. Dep't of City Planning, Vision 2020: New YorkCity Comprehensive Waterfront Plan (2011), available athttp://www.nyc.gov/html/ dcp/pdf/cwp/vision2020_nyc_cwp.pdf.

(29.) Id at 105-13.

(30.) Id. at 112-13.

(31.) Klaus H. Jacob et al., Climate Change and a Global City: AnAssessment of the Metropolitan East Coast (MEC) Region 4 (2011),available at http://metroeast_climate.ciesin.columbia.edu/reports/infrastructure.pdf.

(32.) N.Y.C. Special Initiative on Rebuilding & Resiliency,supra note 2.

(33.) The Panel announced mid-range projections of between four andeight inches by the 2020s, with a high estimate of eleven inches, and bythe 2050s, mid-range projections of between eleven and twenty-fourinches, with a high estimate of thirty-one inches. Climate RiskInformation 2013, supra note 26, at 14-16.

(34.) Brenner, supra note 3, at 8-11; see also Jacob Alderdice,Impeding Local Laboratories: Obstacles to Urban Policy Diffusion inLocal Government Law, 7 Harv. L. & Pol'y Rev. 459, 463-65(2013) (noting the limits on local governments' powers toeffectuate policy innovation inhering in the varying scope of local homerule powers and authority among states to preempt local action); RichardC. Schragger, Can Strong Mayors Empower Weak Cities? On the Power ofLocal Executives in a Federal System, 115 Yale L.J. 2542, 2556, 2563-64(2006) (arguing that in the United States local governments are"subservient" to federal and state governments in the verticalstructure created under federalism, which restricts the efforts ofcities to achieve public policy goals). But see Richard Briffault, HomeRule and Local Political Innovation, 22 J.L. & Pol. 1 (2006)(pointing to successful examples of local legislation concerninggovernment structures and electoral procedures, and arguing that thesemeasures can serve as local "laboratories" for policydevelopments that are potentially national in scope).

(35.) NYS 2100 Commission, Recommendations to Improve the Strengthand Resilience of the Empire State's Infrastructure 139 (2013),available at http://www.governor.ny.gov/assets/documents/NYS2100.pdf.

(36.) Hurricane Sandy Rebuilding Task Force, Hurricane SandyRebuilding Strategy: Stronger Communities, A Resilient Region 36-37(2013), available at portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=hsrebuildingstrategy.pdf (recommending regional coordination ofinfrastructure planning and strengthening). See generally id. at 49-83.

(37.) Mireya Navarro, City to Begin Distributing Storm Aid ThisSummer, N.Y. Times, May 10, 2013,http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/10/nyregion/city-plans-todispense-nearly-2-billion-in-hurricane- aid-starting-this-summer.html?_r=0. The Cityallocated $1.77 billion for Hurricane Sandy recovery, including $648million for housing programs, $293 million for business programs, $360million for infrastructure and other City services, and $294 million inresilience investments. Id.

(38.) See N.Y.C. Special Initiative on Rebuilding & Resiliency,supra note 2, at 402.

(39.) E.g., Patricia E. Salkin & Charles Gottlieb, EngagingDeliberative Democracy at the Grassroots: Prioritizing the Effects ofthe Fiscal Crisis in New York at the Local Government Level, 39 FordhamUrb. L.J. 727, 735-39 (2012) (discussing fiscal federalism and theimpact on local governments of decreasing levels of federal aid).

(40.) N.Y.C. Special Initiative on Rebuilding & Resiliency,supra note 2, at 416-34.

(41.) Id. at 417-18.

(42.) Id. at 420-21. The City is also limited in any effort tocraft resiliency strategies applicable to privately-owned multifamilyresidential buildings that are subject to the requirements ofstate-administered rent stabilization laws, NYU Furman Ctr., The Priceof Resilience: Can Multifamily Housing Afford to Adapt? 37-39 (2014),http://furmancenter.org/files/NYUFurmanCenter_ThePriceofResilience_July2014.pdf, or to federal and state laws governing buildings subjectto affordable housing subsidies. Id. at 39-41.

(43.) N.Y.C. Special Initiative on Rebuilding & Resiliency,supra note 2, at 423.

(44.) See N.Y. Const, art. IX, [section] 2 (conferring home rulepowers of local governments); N.Y. Mun. Home Rule Law [section] 10(McKinney 2014) (authorizing local governments to adopt laws in relationto their property, affairs, or government, in addition to otherenumerated powers). For a discussion of the origins and permutations ofhome rule doctrine, see Richard Briffault, Our Localism: Part 1--TheStructure of Local Government Law, 90 Colum. L. Rev. 1, 10-18 (1990).

(45.) Hurricane Sandy Rebuilding Task Force, supra note 36.

(46.) See id. at 49-83.

(47.) Id. at 129-41.

(48.) Schragger, supra note 34, at 2562 (discussing difficultiesencountered by New Orleans' Mayor Nagin after Hurricane Katrina insecuring aid from higher levels of government); see also Salkin &Gottlieb, supra note 39, at 735-55 (examining the impact on localgovernments of decreasing or fluctuating levels of federal and state aidand, in the specific context of New York, the effect of state-imposedrestrictions on taxation and unfunded mandates).

(49.) Schragger, supra note 34, at 2545-46.

(50.) Id. at 2562-64.

(51.) Id. at 2564-68.

(52.) Briffault, supra note 44, at 18.

(53.) Id. at 57-59. For a recent ruling by the New York Court ofAppeals affirming "the preeminent power of a locality to regulateland use," see Cooperstown Holstein Corp. v. Town of Middlefield,No. 130 (N.Y. 2014), available athttp://www.nycourts.gov/ctapps/Decisions/2014/Jun14/Jun14.htm (holdingthat towns may prohibit hydrofracking within the borders of amunicipality through local zoning laws because state legislation did notpreempt municipalities' home rule authority to regulate land use).

(54.) About C40, C40 Cities, http://www.c40.org/about (last visitedAug. 4, 2014).

(55.) E.g., Bus Rapid Transit: Transportation Initiative, C40Cities, http://www.c40.org/networks/bus_rapid_transit (last visited Aug.4, 2014) (describing how the C40 Bus Rapid Transit Network promotessharing of knowledge and spreading of energy-efficient bus rapid transitacross cities).

(56.) See Brenner, supra note 3, at 286-94.

(57.) Burris et al., supra note 5, at 4-6; Stewart, supra note 5,at 448-52.

(58.) Burris et al., supra note 5, at 12-13.

(59.) See, e.g., id. at 4, 30, 38-39 (discussing characteristics ofnetworks in relation to more traditional state-centered,command-and-control modes of governance); Trubek, supra note 5, at149-50 (noting how soft law entails greater procedural informality,interaction among a range of actors, "learning and feedback"through cooperative exchange of information, and the building ofconsensus).

(60.) Trubek, supra note 5, at 148-49.

(61.) Lobel, supra note 10, at 375-76.

(62.) Id. (quoting Anne-Marie Slaughter, The Accountability ofGovernment Networks, 8 Ind. J. Global Legal Stud. 347 (2001)).

(63.) Anne-Marie Slaughter, The Accountability of GovernmentNetworks, 8 Ind. J. Global Legal Stud. 347-48 (2001).

(64.) Id. at 355-59.

(65.) International Framework for Addressing Adaptation, supra note6.

(66.) Press Release, United Nations, Secretary-General AppointsMichael Bloomberg of United States Special Envoy for Cities and ClimateChange (Jan. 31, 2014), available athttp://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2014/sga1453.doc.htm.

(67.) Id.

(68.) See Jonathan Andrews, New Global Collaboration for UrbanResilience Announced\ Cities Today (Apr. 11, 2014),http://cities-today.com/2014/04/newglobal-collaboration-urban-resilience- announced/#more-4940. The World Urban Forum hosts a biennialconference drawing attendees from national, state, and localgovernments, non-governmental and community-based organizations, theprivate sector, United Nations organizations, and various funders anddevelopment-fostering bodies. It focuses on issues related to theimplications of accelerated growth of cities worldwide. World Urb. F.,http://wuf7.unhabitat.org/theworldurbanforum (last visited June 12,2014).

(69.) UN-Habitat Better Urb. Future, http://unhabitat.org (lastvisited June 12, 2014). The program focuses on seven areas of urbanstudy: urban legislation, land, and governance; urban planning anddesign; urban economy; urban basic services; housing and slum upgrading;risk reduction and rehabilitation; and urban research and capacity. Id.Among its activities are the cities and climate change initiative andthe city resilience profiling program. Id.

(70.) Id.

(71.) Id.

(72.) Our Partners & Funders, supra note 7.

(73.) See, e.g., About the ACCCRN Network, supra note 8.

(74.) About the Global Forum, supra note 9.

(75.) C40 Cities, http://www.c40.org/about (last visited July 10,2014).

(76.) Why Cities? Ending Climate Change Begins in the City, C40Cities, http://c40.org/ending-climate-change-begins-in-the-city (lastvisited Aug. 4, 2014).

(77.) In addition to the Clinton Climate Initiative, partnersinclude Arup, an interdisciplinary professional services group that hasassisted with workshops on carbon reduction and producing reportsdocumenting the work of C40 mayors; ICLEI--Local Governments forSustainability to help develop a broadly applicable standard fortabulating and reporting greenhouse gas emissions: World ResourcesInstitute, to work with ICLEI on an instrument for measuring city-levelemissions; CDP (formerly the Carbon Disclosure Project) to assist incollecting and reporting data on cities' greenhouse gas emissions;the World Bank, to institute a metric to facilitate cities'measuring and reporting emissions and demonstrating progress inqualifying for financial assistance for major projects; Siemens, acorporation engaged in energy, healthcare, financial, and technologysectors that has helped institute a city climate leadership competition.See Our Partners & Funders, supra note 7.

(78.) Funders include Bloomberg Philanthropies, Children'sInvestment Fund Foundation, an organization working to supportchildren's welfare in developing nations; Realdania, aphilanthropic group derived from a former mortgage credit organizationthat focuses on built resources; and Siemens, also a partner providingvarious kinds of support for cities' capacity to measure theirclimate initiatives. See Our Partners & Funders, supra note 7.

(79.) Networks: Connecting Cities on Topics of Common Interest, C40Cities, http://www.c40.org/networks (last visited Aug. 4, 2014).

(80.) Connecting Delta Cities: Adaptation and Water Initiative, C40CITIES, http://www.c40.org/networks/connecting_delta_cities (lastvisited July 10, 2014).

(81.) Sustainable Urban Development: Sustainable CommunitiesInitiative, C40 CITIES,http://www.c40.org/networks/Sustainable_Urban_Development (last visitedJuly 10, 2014).

(82.) Melbourne to Lead Global Network of Cities on SustainableUrban Development, City Melbourne (Mar. 30, 2012), http://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/AboutCouncil/MediaReleases/Pages/MelbournetoleadGlobalNetworkofCi tieson.aspx.

(83.) Networks: Connecting Cities on Topics of Common Interest,supra note 79.

(84.) ARUP & C40 Cities, Climate Action in Megacities: C40Cities Baseline and Opportunities Volume 2.0 5 (2014), available athttp://issuu.com/ c40cities/docs/c40_climate_action_in_megacities/3?e=10643095/6541335.

(85.) Why Cities? Ending Climate Change Begins in the City, supranote 76.

(86.) Michael R. Bloomberg, Foreword to ARUP & C40 Cities,supra note 84, at 3. For example, survey data indicate that mayors havethe largest degree of authority

(87.) ARUP & C40 Cities, supra note 84, at 17-18.

(88.) See, e.g., Burris et al., supra note 5; Trubek, supra note 5;Slaughter, supra note 63, at 363-64 (noting the view that informationdistribution supplants more coercive measures for achieving "policyconvergence").

(89.) See generally C40 Research, C40 Cities,http://www.c40.org/research (last visited Aug. 4, 2014).

(90.) See Research Spotlight: Demonstrating City Impact on NationalEmissions Reduction Targets, C40 Blog (May 14, 2014),http://www.c40.org/blog_posts/research-spotlight-kerem-yilmaz-c40-director-of-research-projects.

(91.) See Case Studies, C40 Cities, http://www.c40.org/case_studies(last visited Oct. 5, 2014). Examples include programs to reducegreenhouse gas emissions and improve energy efficiency in Seoul,Eco-mileage: A Citizen's Participation Programme for Protecting theEnvironment, C40 Cities (Apr. 21, 2014),http://www.c40.org/case_studies/eco-mileage-a-citizen-s-participation-programmefor-protecting-the-environment, lessen vulnerability to floodingfrom sea level rise and high tides through a system of moveable barriersin Venice, The Mose System to Safeguard Venice from Flooding, C40 Cities(Apr. 21, 2014), http://www.c40.org/case_studies/the-mose-system-to-safeguard-venice-from-flooding, reducecarbon dioxide levels in transportation, Venice Integrated MobilityPlan, C40 Cities (Apr. 17, 2014),http://www.c40.org/case_studies/venice-integrated-mobility-plan, and usealternate energy sources in Boston, Renew Boston, C40 Cities (Apr. 4,2014), http://www.c40.org/case_studies/renew-boston.

(92.) See 2nd C40 Green Growth Network Workshop, C40 Cities,http://c40.org/events/2nd-c40-green-growth-network-workshop (lastvisited Aug. 4, 2014) (green growth); C40 Bus Rapid Transit Workshop,C40 Cities, http://c40.org/ events/c40-bus-rapid-transit-workshop (lastvisited Aug. 4, 2014) (bus rapid transit); Solid Waste NetworksWorkshop, C40 Cities, http://c40.org/events/solid-wastenetworks-workshop(last visited Aug. 4,2014) (solid waste management).

(93.) See Networks: Connecting Cities on Topics of Common Interest,supra note 79.

(94.) See ARUP & C40 Cities, supra note 84, at 5-6. Forexample, survey data show that fifty-seven percent of C40 cities thatcurrently have, or plan to implement, bus rapid transit systems arelocated in the global north. Id.

(95.) See C40 Cities, Research Spotlight: New PublicationsHighlight 10 Cities Delivering Best in Class Climate Action Reporting,C40 Blog (June 4, 2014),http://c40.org/blog_posts/research-spotlight-new-publications-highlight-10-citiesdelivering-best-in-class-climate- action-reporting.

(96.) See generally CDP, Data Provided for the CDP Cities 2013Report: New York City (2013), available athttp://c40-production-images.s3.amazonaws.com/other_uploads/images/82_CDP_2013_New_York_small.original.pdf?1401861985.This report covers the city's governance, risks and adaptations,opportunities created by climate change, greenhouse gas emissions at thegovernmental and community levels, and strategy. Id. at 3.

(97.) See id. at 10-12.

(98.) See Press Release, C40 Cities, C40 Mayors Summit DemonstratesWhy Cities are Leading On Global Climate Change (Feb. 5, 2014),available at http://c40production-images.s3.amazonaws.com/press_releases/images/54_Summit_all-up_FINAL_1_5_14_9am.original.pdf? 1391599813.

(99.) See Steering Committee, C40 CITIES,http://www.c40.org/steering_committees (last visited Aug. 4, 2014).

(100.) See Chair of the C40, C40 Cities,http://www.c40.org/leadership (last visited Aug. 4, 2014) (notingrotating role of mayors acting as Chair and indicating that mayors todate generally have served a three-year term).

(101.) See Board of Directors, C40 Cities,http://www.c40.org/board_of_directors (last visited Aug. 4, 2014).

(102.) Rockefeller Found., Building Climate Change Resilience(2009), available athttp://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/uploads/files/c9725eb2-b76e-42eb82db-c5672a43a097-climate.pdf.

(103.) See Matt Chaban, Rockefeller Foundation Target: 100Resilient Cities, Crain's N.Y. Bus. (May 14, 2013),http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20130514/ RE AL_ESTATE/130519952/rockefeller-foundation-target- 100-resilient-cities.

(104.) See Katie Watkins, The Rockefeller Foundation Kicks Off Its100 Resilient Cities Challenge, ArchDaily (Aug. 28, 2014),http://www.archdaily.com/541742/therockefeller-foundation-kicks-off-its-2014-resilient-cities-challenge/.

(105.) City Resilience, 100 Resilient Cities,http://www.100resilientcities.org/ resilience (last visited Aug. 4,2014); see also About Us, 100 Resilient Cities,http://www.100resilientcities.org/pages/about-us#/ (last visited Mar.11, 2015); 100 Resilient Cities Challenge, 100 Resilient Cities,www.100resilientcities.org/ pages/100-resilient-cities-challenge#/ (lastvisited Mar. 11,2015).

(106.) See Judith Rodin, 100 Resilient Cities, Rockefeller Found.(Aug. 5, 2013), http://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/blog/100-resilient-cities.

(107.) About Us, supra note 105.

(108.) See generally City Resilience, supra note 105.

(109.) Rodin, supra note 106.

(110.) See Anna Brown, Three Keys for Protecting Mid-Sized AsianCities, Rockefeller Found. (Mar. 12, 2014),http://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/blog/three-keys-protecting-mid-sized-asian.

(111.) See generally ABOUT ACCCRN, supra note 8.

(112.) See ACCCRN Partners, ACCCRN,http://www.acccrn.org/about-acccrn/ acccrn-partners (last visited Aug.4, 2014).

(113.) See Advisory Board, ACCCRN,http://www.acccrn.org/about-acccrn/advisory-board (last visited Aug. 4,2014).

(114.) See generally ACCCRN, http://www.acccrn.org/ (last visitedAug. 4, 2014).

(115.) See, e.g., ACCCRN Newsletter August 2013, ACCCRN,http://us6.campaignarchive2.com/?u=5e61f404aed445cfeldbb07a9&id=94961de618 (last visited Aug. 4, 2014).

(116.) See Brown, supra note 110.

(117.) About the Global Forum, supra note 9; Partners, ResilientCities, http://resilient-cities.iclei.org/resilient-cities-hub-site/partners/ (last visited Oct. 8, 2014).

(118.) About the Global Forum, supra note 9; Partners, supra note117.

(119.) See 5th Global Forum on Urban Resilience and Adaptation,Resilient Cities 2014, http://resilient-cities.idei.org/index.php?id=773(last visited Aug. 4, 2014).

(120.) GIS refers to a geographic or geospatial information system,a computer system for gathering and displaying data, drawn from suchsources as satellites and maps related to land use and location. GIS(Geographic Information System), Nat'l Geographic Educ.,http://education.nationalgeographic.com/education/encyclopedia/geographic-information-system-gis/?ar_a=1 (last visitedAug. 13, 2014).

(121.) Mayors Adaptation Forum at Resilient Cities, ResilientCities, http://resilient-cities.idei.org/index.php?id=833 (last visitedOct. 2, 2014).

(122.) Id., see, e.g., 2013 Bonn Declaration of Mayors, ICLEI,http://www.iclei.org/fileadmin/user_upload/ICLEI_WS/Images/events/Suwon2013/Resilient_Cities_2013/ MAF2013_Bonn_Declaration_of_Mayors_Draft_20130602.pdf (lastvisited Aug. 4, 2014).

(123.) Endorsing Partners, Resilient Cities,http://resilient-cities.iclei.org/resilientcities-hub-site/partners/endorsing-partners/(last visited Aug. 4, 2014).

(124.) The Congress of Local and Regional Authorities, theGuarantor of Local and Regional Democracy in Europe, Congress Loc. &Regional Authorities,http://www.coe.int/t/congress/presentation/default_en.asp?mytabsmenu=1(last visited Aug. 4,2014).

(125.) Missions and Objectives, Network Regional Gov't forSustainable Dev., http://www.nrg4sd.org/missions-and-objectives (lastvisited Aug. 4, 2014).

(126.) Harpur, supra note 5, at 50; Lobel, supra note 10. at381-85.

(127.) Burris et al., supra note 5, at 3.

(128.) Stewart, supra note 5, at 447-50, 451-52 (describingnetwork-based systems in use in the United States and the EuropeanUnion).

(129.) Trubek, supra note 5, at 149-50.

(130.) See Bradley C. Karkkainen, "New Governance" inLegal Thought and in the World: Some Splitting as Antidote toOverzealous Lumping, 89 Minn. L. Rev. 471, 472 (2004).

(131.) Burris et al., supra note 5, at 3.

(132.) Ld. at 4-5; Stewart, supra note 5, at 450, 452.

(133.) See generally Burris et al., supra note 5, at 12-44(discussing wide-ranging scholarship of networks).

(134.) See Brenner, supra note 3, at 286-94.

(135.) Id.

(136.) Id. at 292-93.

(137.) Id. at 292 (quoting Helga Leitner et ah, Networks,Governance, and the Politics of Scale: Inter-Urban Networks and theEuropean Union, in Geographies of Power: Placing Scale 207 (Andrew Herod& Melissa W. Wright eds., 2002)).

(138.) See, e.g., id. at 293 n.7; Bruce Katz & JenniferBradley, The Metropolitan Revolution: How Cities and Metros Are FixingOur Broken Politics and Fragile Economy 166-68 (2013). See generallyMargrit Schulte Beerbuhl, Networks of the Hanseatic League, EGO: Eur.Hist. Online (Jan. 13, 2012),http://www.ieg-ego.eu/schultebeerbuehlm-2011-en.

(139.) Beerbuhl, supra note 138, at [paragraph] 2.

(140.) Id.

(141.) Id at [paragraph][paragraph] 12, 46.

(142.) Id at [paragraph] 25.

(143.) Id. at [paragraph] 28.

(144.) See UN-Habitat Better Urb. Future, supra note 69.

(145.) Mayors on Frontline of Battle Against Climate Change--UN, UNNews Centre (May 29, 2014),http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=47924.

(146.) Id.

(147.) Id. Analogously, interurban networks have been viewed as away to bypass national governments in the context of local urbandevelopment in Western Europe, as noted in Neil Brenner's analysis.Brenner, supra note 3, at 288.

(148.) Special Envoy Bloomberg's assessment actually may applyto mayors in other political systems more reliably than in the UnitedStates, for example in Germany and Russia, where cities are allowed tobe represented at higher levels of government, and in France, wheremayors can also occupy national office. Schragger, supra note 34, at2570. By contrast, in the United States, the dominant form of mayoraltyis the council-city manager system, in which the council, thelegislative body, appoints an administrator and the mayor has no realauthority. Alderdice, supra note 34, at 466; Schragger, supra note 34,at 2550. The strong-mayor alternative is more prevalent in larger U.S.cities such as New York. Alderdice, supra note 34, at 466; Schragger,supra note 34, at 2550. Even there, the mayor shares power with a citycouncil that is empowered by the City Charter to enact legislation,adopt budgets, and exercise authority over land use. See Elizabeth Fine& James Caras, Twenty-Five Years of the Council-Mayor Governance ofNew York City: A History of the Council's Powers, The Separation OfPowers, and Issues for Future Resolution, 58 N.Y.L. Sch. L. Rev. 119,126-35 (2013-2014). However, that is with a mayoral veto for significantcategories of land use action, including zoning map changes, landdisposition or acquisition, and urban renewal plans. See N.Y.C. Charter[section] 197-c. Further, New York City mayors' resort to executiveorders, and other executive agency action to effectuate policy, is notwithout limitation. Courts have invalidated such orders when theydetermine that they trench upon legislative policymaking authority. SeeFine & Caras, supra, at 127. As a recent example, the New York Courtof Appeals held that the New York City Board of Health's adoptionof a rule limiting the portion size of sugary beverages provided in foodservice establishments constituted an exercise of lawmaking andinfringed on the legislative powers of the City Council. N.Y. StatewideCoal, of Hispanic Chambers of Commerce v. N.Y.C. Dep't of Health& Mental Hygiene, No. 134 (N.Y. 2014), available athttp://www.nycourts.gov/ctapps/Decisions/2014/Jun14/134opn14-Decision.pdf.

(149.) Alderdice, supra note 34, at 461-62 (citing JusticeBrandeis' oft-quoted reference in New State Ice Co. v. Liebmann,285 U.S. 262, 311 (1932) to a subnational state government as"laboratory" for trying out new policy approaches in thecontext of U.S. federalism).

(150.) ARUP & C40 Cities, supra note 84. A recent example ofurban policy diffusion in the United States context is New YorkCity's adoption of a measure authorizing cities to issue municipalidentification cards, seen as benefitting undocumented immigrants,homeless persons, and other individuals whose statuses might otherwisebe questioned. Mara Gay, New York Municipal ID Program Approved by CityCouncil. Wall St. J., June 26, 2014, http://online.wsj.com/articles/new-york-city-council-has-approved-a-municipal-id-program-expanding-access-for500-000-illegal-immigrants-1403818740. Similar measures have beenadopted in other U.S. cities, including New Haven and Los Angeles. Id.

(151.) Heather Gerken and Ari Holtzblatt point to Resnik'swork in their discussion of horizontal federalism in the U.S. context.Heather Gerken & Ari Holtzblatt, The Political Safeguards ofHorizontal Federalism, 113 Mich. L. Rev. 57, 60 n.7 (2014).

(152.) Judith Resnik, The Internationalism of American Federalism:Missouri and Holland, 73 Mo. L. Rev. 1105, 1132 (2008).

(153.) See Judith Resnik, Foreign as Domestic Affairs: RethinkingHorizontal Federalism and Foreign Affairs Preemption in Light ofTranslocal Internationalism, 57 Emory L.J. 31, 50-63 (2007) (citingexamples in which U.S. cities adopted measures or asserted policypositions supporting international norms embodied in the Convention onthe Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women and theKyoto Accord for reducing greenhouse gas emissions when nationalgovernment institutions in the United States failed to do so).

(154.) What is Urban Climate Change Resilience?, ACCCRNhttp://www.acccrn.org/ uccr/what-urban-climate-change-resilience (lastvisited Aug. 4, 2014).

(155.) See Beerbiihl, supra note 138.

(156.) See supra note 146 and accompanying text (discussingUN-Habitat Executive Director's call for cities to sign a compactcommitting to climate-change resilience strategies).

(157.) Beerbiihl, supra note 138, at 31-34, 46.

(158.) The network model discussed here arguably bears some surfaceresemblances to the global experimentalist governance (GXG) model, aprocess for collective problem solving that operates transnationally,and requires the following steps: (1) discussion among stakeholders of ashared problem; (2) development of a "framework understanding"with aims that are not preordained; (3) adaptation of framework norms byactors knowledgeable about local conditions; (4) assessment of results,subject to peer review; and (5) periodic review and revision of goalsand practices based on results of peer review. Grainne de Biirca et al.,Global Experimentalist Governance (Columbia Law Sch. Pub. Law &Legal Theory, Research Paper No. 14-393, 2014).

Because the model contemplates the participation of actors atmultiple levels and a more structured, systematized process foradvancing its work, id., it is distinguishable from the interurbannetwork models discussed here, which link cities in a range of morediffuse exchanges and collaborations. However, the steps identified withthe GXG process are, at least in their attention to problem solving,reference to local expertise and local implementation, and peerexchanges, compatible with key premises under which the urban climatechange networks have formed.

(159.) Alderdice, supra note 34, at 470-72 (summarizing theoriesand rationales for cities' pro-growth orientation).

(160.) N.Y.C. Dep't of City Planning, supra note 28, at 109;N.Y.C. Special Initiative on Rebuilding & Resiliency, supra note 2,at 7.

(161.) Kate Sheppard, Flood, Rebuild, Repeat: Are We Ready for aSuperstorm Sandy Every Other Year?, CityLab (July 29, 2013),http://www.theatlanticcities.com/politics/2013/07/flood-rebuilld-repeat-are-we-ready-superstorm-sandy-every-otheryear/6352/.

(162.) "Hard armoring" mechanisms include sea walls,bulkheads, levees, and riprap or revetments, which entail installinglarge boulders or concrete structures at shorelines. See, e.g., Megan M.Herzog & Sean B. Hecht, Combatting Sea-Level Rise in SouthernCalifornia: How Local Governments Can Seize Adaptation OpportunitiesWhile Minimizing Legal Risk, 19 Hastings W.-NW. J. Envtl. L. &Pol'Y 463, 472 (2013).

(163.) Sheppard, supra note 161. Beyond the costs involved, whenthese protective measures fail, coastal buildings, infrastructure, andresidents are put at risk. Id.

(164.) See, eg., Brenner, supra note 3, at 287.

(165.) History of the C40, C40 CITIES, http://www.c40.org/history(last visited Aug. 4, 2014).

(166.) See Slaughter, supra note 63; Stewart, supra note 5.

(167.) See Burris et al., supra note 5, at 23.

(168.) Slaughter, supra note 63, at 360-66; Stewart, supra note 5,at 452.

(169.) See Brenner, supra note 3, at 293 n.7.

(170.) Lobel, supra note 10, at 396.

(171.) See Burris et al., supra note 5, at 14-19.

(172.) N.Y. Const, art. IX, [section] 2; N.Y. Mun. Home Rule Law[section] 10 (McKinney 2014).

Andrea McArdle, Professor of Law, City University of New YorkSchool of Law.