LAUSR

ABSTRACT In this article we examine the limitations of democratic governance of climate transformation in cities. Advancing the literatures on urban climate governance and climate urbanism, the article asks, how do urban governance institutions manage the variety of demands and pressures on the climate agenda? We investigate how urban governance institutions in four Scandinavian cities (Oslo, Bergen, Stockholm and Gothenburg) respond to proactive and reactive demands on their climate agenda. We find distinct differences between the institutional engagement with proactive versus reactive citizen groups. Proactive groups more effectively navigate city bureaucracies and align their agendas with those of the city, while reactive groups are less connected and therefore reliant on more confrontational tactics. We argue that urban climate governance must find ways to be more broadly inclusive of those who do not immediately support the agenda, or else risk further populist backlash and disengagement.