How cities prepare for climate change: Comparing Hamburg and Rotterdam

This paper compares the different ways in which the cities of Hamburg and Rotterdam are taking preemptive action to adapt to climate change. Literature, interviews, secondary data, official statistics, project reports and policy briefs were used to identify institutional arrangements used by the city governments to encourage innovations in climate adaptation strategies and involve the private sector in climate change policy implementation. We focus on cases that create positive opportunities; exploring how innovations are facilitated within the theoretical frameworks of the Porter hypothesis and eco-innovation. We examine two possible pathways of climate change governance, firstly strict regulation and formal enforcement, and secondly institutional eco-innovation and voluntary measures. We found that different emphasis is placed on the preferred pathway in each of the case studies. Hamburg focuses on formal enforcements while the Rotterdam city government encourages institutional eco-innovation by acting as a platform and also providing incentives. Our findings suggest that a well-designed institutional framework can enhance innovation and increase environmental and business performance. The framework could vary in instruments and patterns, using both formal constraints and incentives to increase voluntary actions to shape policy. The formal rules could be stringent or incentivising to shape the climate change measures. The research aims to contribute to both practice and science by providing examples that might motivate and inspire other cities to design appropriate institutions for climate change policy implementation.