Skip to main content

Table 4 Comparative analysis of four good practices against the proposed model

From: Understanding how city networks are leveraging climate action: experimentation through C40

Step 1: City experiments

Similarity

• All four selected projects are not designed under controlled experimentation logics, rather they use a combination of Darwinian and generative experimentation logics.

• All four selected projects already passed the variation stage and are currently in the selection stage.

Difference

• Not apparent

Step 2: How city networks relate to experiments?

Similarity

• All four selected projects embrace the ‘coordinating’ orchestration mode.

• There are different actors from different domains and organisations actively engaging in all four selected projects (particularly the governments and developers).

Difference

• Only the Royal Seaport demonstrates the explicit involvement of citizens during the design and implementation of the project. The other three projects mention only the engagement of local governments and developers.

Step 3: Leveraging of a local action into a global network

Similarity

• All four experimental projects have generated outputs.

Difference

• For the Royal Seaport project, the outputs are built-environment change and new citizen practices.

• For the Elephant & Castle project, the outputs are policy change and infrastructural change.

• For the Barangaroo South project, the output is infrastructural change.

• For the Mahindra World City project, the outputs are new technology and policy change.