Springer Nature is making Coronavirus research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Effect of transnational climate networks on climate experiments: the Nilüfer Municipality, a case from Turkey

  • 187 Accesses


Climate change is a serious environmental problem, to be solved only with global participation. However, implementation of global policies is associated closely with national, regional and local processes. For this reason, it is critically important to strengthen our understanding of the diversity of experiments because such urban climate change initiatives may affect the expectations and demands that will be placed on future projects. Moreover, to reveal the effect of the factors, such as participation in transnational networks, on the experiments at local level is also critically important in contextually different settings. From this point of view, the present study aims to present experimentation in addressing climate change in the case of the Nilüfer Municipality in northwestern Turkey and to examine the effect of joining an international network, as a key factor that may support urban climate experiments. The research is designed as a case study built on both primary and secondary sources. The Nilüfer Municipality is selected as the case area as it is the only signatory of Mayors Adapt and one of sixteen signatories of the Covenant of Mayors (CoM) among the 1397 municipalities within the Turkish Republic. Finally, this case study shows that although local governments have not been involved in the climate change policies at the national level in the Turkish context, the Nilüfer Municipality was able to develop its own experiments by being part of a transnational network, especially after signing the Covenant of Mayors in 2014. This finding leads us to the conclusion that supranational organizations can have significant impact on the climate experiments initiation of local governments that are important actors in the implementation of policies to address climate change as a global problem.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.


  1. 1.

    In the climate policy area, innovation can be interpreted from different perspectives including the source of new elements (invention), their entry into wider use (diffusion) and their subsequent effects (evaluation) (Hildén et al. 2014; Jordan and Huitema 2014).

  2. 2.

    In the Turkish context, a mayor of municipality is elected by local people within the boundaries of a municipality among the candidates nominated by the political parties. The nomination of Bozbey for the 4th time could be accepted as an indication that the mayor has received the support and appreciation of his party depending on the love and interest that have been shown to him in the local and the works that have been conducted by the mayor. Although he is an elected mayor in his district, being elected is not decisive on the power was given to him by Bursa Metropolitan Municipality and the central government. While the Metropolitan Municipality is managed by a mayor from Justice and Development Party (AKP in Turkish) since 2004, the central government is also ruling by the same party since 2002. In short being powerful within the context of Nilüfer and his party is not mean that the mayor has also same power in Bursa and Turkey.

  3. 3.

    GHG-e belonging to the District under the control and sanction capacity of the municipality; Emissions related to Municipality’s own activities and those related to anthropological activities in the responsible administrative area are prepared based on the report format of CoM.

  4. 4.

    Membership cost is determined as 100 TL, about 17 Euros (according to Euro Tl exchange rate in November 2018), and monthly contribution is 10 TL.


  1. Adger, W. N. (2005). Scales of governance and environmental justice for adaptation and mitigation of climate change. Journal of International Development, 13(7), 921–931.

  2. Adıgüzel, Ş. (2012). 6360 Sayılı Yasa’nın Türkiye’nin yerel yönetim dizgesi üzerine etkileri: Eleştirel bir değerlendirme. Toplum ve Demokrasi, 6(13–14), 153–176.

  3. Anderson, J., Adey, P., & Bevan, P. (2010). Positioning place: Polylogic approaches to research methodology. Qualitative Research, 10(5), 589–604.

  4. Anguelovski, I., & Carmin, J. A. (2011). Something borrowed, everything new: Innovation and institutionalization in urban climate governance. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 3(3), 169–175.

  5. Aygün-Doğan, K. B., & Kocabaş, A. (2011). C40 Kentleri, Avrupa’nın Yeşil Başkentleri ve İstanbul’a İlişkin Çıkarımlar. In A. Eraydın, et al. (Eds.), KBAM Kentsel ve Bölgesel Araştırmalar 2. Sempozyumu Bildiriler Kitabı (pp. 499–510). Ankara: Matsa Basımevi.

  6. Balaban, O. (2016). Küresel ısınma, iklim değişikliği ve düşük karbonlu şehirler. In S. S. Özdemir, Ö. B. Özdemir-Sarı, & N. Uzun (Eds.), Kent planlama (pp. 619–642). Ankara: İmge Kitabevi.

  7. Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report, 13(4), 544–559.

  8. Betsill, M. M., & Bulkeley, H. (2004). Transnational networks and global environmental governance: The Cities for Climate Protection Program. International Studies Quarterly, 48, 471–493.

  9. Betsill, M. M., & Bulkeley, H. (2007). Looking back and thinking ahead: A decade of cities and climate change research. Local Governments, 12(5), 447–456.

  10. Bicknell, J., Dodman, D., & Satterthwaite, D. (2009). Adapting cities to climate change: Understanding and addressing the development challenges. London: Earthscan.

  11. Biesbroek, G. R., Swart, R. J., & Van der Knaap, W. G. M. (2009). The mitigation–adaptation dichotomy and the role of spatial planning. Habitat International, 33(3), 230–237.

  12. Brown, H. C. P. (2009). Climate change and Ontario forests: Prospects for building institutional adaptive capacity. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 14, 513–536.

  13. Brown, M., & Knopp, L. (2008). Queering the map: The productive tensions of colliding epistemologies. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 98(1), 40–58.

  14. Bulkeley, H. (2010). Cities and governing of climate change. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 35, 229–253.

  15. Bulkeley, H., & Betsill, M. M. (2003). Cities and climate change: Urban sustainability and global environmental governance. London: Routledge.

  16. Bulkeley, H., & Betsill, M. M. (2005). Rethinking sustainable cities: Multilevel governance and the ‘urban’ politics of climate change. Environmental Politics, 14(1), 42–63.

  17. Bulkeley, H., & Betsill, M. M. (2013). Revisiting the urban politics of climate change. Environmental Politics, 22(1), 136–154.

  18. Bulkeley, H., & Castan Broto, V. (2013). Government by experiment? Global cities and the governing of climate change. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 38(3), 361–375.

  19. Bulkeley, H., & Kern, K. (2006). Local government and the governing of climate change in Germany and the UK. Urban Studies, 43(12), 2237–2259.

  20. Bulkeley, H., & Newell, P. (2010). Governing climate change. London: Routledge.

  21. Bulkeley, H., Schroeder, H., Janda, K., Zhao, J., Armstrong, A., Chu, S. Y., & Ghosh, S. (2009). Cities and Climate Change: The role of institutions, governance and urban planning. Accessed 02 Jan 2017.

  22. Castan Broto, V., & Bulkeley, H. (2013). A survey of urban climate change experiments in 100 cities. Global Environmental Change, 23(1), 92–102.

  23. Collier, U. (1997). Local authorities and climate protection in the EU: Putting subsidiarity into practice? Local Environment, 2(1), 39–57.

  24. Covenant of Mayors. (2016). Signatories.…&country_search=tr&population=&date_of_adhesion=&status=&commitments=. Accessed 23 April 2016.

  25. Covenant of Mayors. (2018). Signatories. Accessed 17 Nov 2018.

  26. Davies, A. R. (2005). Local action for climate change: Transnational networks and the Irish experience. Local Environment: The International Journal of Justice and Sustainability, 10, 21–40.

  27. De Sherbinin, A., Schiller, A., & Pulsipher, A. (2007). The vulnerability of global cities to climate hazards. Environment and Urbanization, 19, 39–64.

  28. Demirci, M. (2014). İklim değişikliğinin yerel bir sorun olarak inşası. Aksaray Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 7(1), 103–114.

  29. Demirci, M. (2015). Kentsel iklim değişikliği yönetişimi. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 46, 75–100.

  30. Dodman, D. (2009). Blaming cities for climate change? An analysis of urban greenhouse gas emissions inventories. Environment and Urbanization, 21, 185–201.

  31. Energy Cities. (2016). Energy Cities in Europe. Accessed 01 May 2016.

  32. Erençin, A. (2005). Büyükşehirlerde belediyeler arası ilişkilerin yeniden yapısı. Mülkiye Dergisi, 29(246), 121–131.

  33. Eurocities. (2016). Eurocities. Members lists. Accessed 01 May 2016.

  34. Europe Direct Leeds (2013). Clean air—it’s your move! European Mobility Week 16th–22nd September 2013. Accessed 13 Jan 2018.

  35. Evans, J. P. (2011). Resilience, ecology and adaptation in the experimental city. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 36(2), 223–237.

  36. Giddens, A. (2009). The politics of climate change. Cambridge: Polity Press.

  37. Görmez, K. (1997). Yerel demokrasi ve Türkiye. Konya: Vadi Yayınları.

  38. Güler, B. A. (2012). Hükümetin 8 Ekim 2012 Günlü Bütünşehir Yasa Tasarısı Üzerine. Accessed 11 Nov 2018.

  39. Hildén, M., Jordan, A., & Rayner, T. (2014). Climate policy innovation: Developing an evaluation perspective. Environmental Politics, 23(5), 884–905.

  40. Hoffman, M. J. (2011). Climate governance at the crossroads: Experimenting with a global response after Kyoto. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  41. IPCC. (2006). IPCC Guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories. Hayama: Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES).

  42. IPCC. (2014). Climate Change 2014: Impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Part A: Global and sectoral aspects. Contribution of working group II to the fifth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  43. Jordan, A., & Huitema, D. (2014). Policy innovation in a changing climate: Sources, patterns and effects. Global Environmental Change, 29, 387–394.

  44. Kalabalık, H. (1999). Metropolitan alan yönetim modelleri içerisinde Türkiye metropolitan yönetimlerininyeri ve yasal çerçevesi. In H. Cengiz (Ed.), Metropolitan alanlar: Planlama sorunları (pp. 322–345). İstanbul: Yıldız Teknik Üniversitesi Basım Merkezi.

  45. Karabağ, F. S. (2011). Climate change management approaches of cities: A comparative study between globally leading and Turkish cities. European Journal of Economic and Political Studies, 4(1), 113–141.

  46. Keck, M. E., & Sikkink, K. (1998). Activist beyond borders: Advocacy networks in international politics. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

  47. Kern, K., & Bulkeley, H. (2009). Cities, Europeanization and multi-level governance: Governing climate change through transnational municipal networks. Journal of Common Market Studies, 47(2), 309–332.

  48. Keyman, F. (2014). Globalization, governance, and decentralization. In K. Göymen & O. Sazak (Eds.), Centralization decentralization debate revisited (pp. 5–7). İstanbul: İstanbul Politikalar Merkezi.

  49. Kousky, C., & Schneider, S. H. (2003). Global climate policy: Will cities lead the way? Climate Policy, 3, 359–372.

  50. Lamba, M., Aktel, M., Altan, Y., & Kerman, U. (2014). Türkiye’de bakanlık tipi örgütlenme: Tarihsel ve yasal süreç. Yönetim ve Ekonomi Dergisi, 21(1), 173–189.

  51. Martins, R. D. A., & Ferreira, L. C. (2010). Enabling climate change adaptation in urban areas: A local governance approach. INTERthesis, 7(2), 241–275.

  52. Martins, R. D. A., & Ferreira, L. C. (2011). Climate change action at the city level: Tales from two megacities in Brazil. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 3, 344–357.

  53. Mayors Adapt. (2015a). Nilüfer joins Mayors Adapt. Accessed 23 April 2016.

  54. Mayors Adapt. (2015b). Climate Change Adaptation in Europe. Accessed 23 April 16.

  55. Mayor of Nilüfer Municipality. (2016). Message of the Mayor. Bursa Nilüfer Belediyesi Sürdürülebilir Enerji Eylem Planı (pp. 2–4). Bursa: Bursa Nilüfer Belediyesi.

  56. Mayor of Nilüfer Municipality. (2017). Nilüfer’de 181 ortaklı kooperatif! Message of the Mayor. Accessed 15 Dec 2017.

  57. Mazlum, S. C. (2009). Turkey’s foreign policy on global atmospheric commons: Climate change and ozone depletion. In P. G. Harris (Ed.), Climate change and foreign policy: Case studies from east to west (pp. 68–84). New York: Routledge.

  58. Meserve, R. A. (2008). An introduction to energy and climate change. Bulletin of the American Academy, 1, 29–32.

  59. Ministry of Environment and Urbanization. (2011). İklim değişikliği ulusal eylem planı (2011–2023). Ankara: TR Ministry of Environment and Urbanization.

  60. Ministry of Environment and Urbanization. (2013). Türkiye iklim değişikliği beşinci bildirimi. Ankara: TR Ministry of Environment and Urbanization.

  61. Ministry of Environment and Urbanization. (2017). Şehircilik şurası komisyon raporları. Ankara: TR Ministry of Environment and Urbanization.

  62. Ministry of Public Works and Settlement. (2009). Yerel yönetimler, katılımcılık ve kentsel yönetim, kentleşme şurası. Ankara: TRMinistry of Public Works and Settlement.

  63. Moser, S. (2008). Personality: A new positionality? Area, 40(3), 383–392.

  64. Nilüfer Municipality. (2013). Yeşil Nilüfer Haftası Başladı. Accessed 23 April 2016.

  65. Nilüfer Municipality. (2016). Bursa Nilüfer Belediyesi sürdürülebilir enerji eylem planı. Bursa: Nilüfer Municipality.

  66. Nilüfer Municipality. (2016b). Müdürlükler. Accessed 23 April 2016.

  67. Nilüfer Municipality. (2018a). Mustafa Bozbey. Accessed 19 Jan 2018.

  68. Nilüfer Municipality. (2018b). Bisiklet Yolları.[popup]/0/. Accessed 19 Jan 2018.

  69. O’Brien, K., Hayward, B., & Berkes, F. (2009). Rethinking social contracts: building resilience in a changing climate. Ecology and Society 14(2), 12. Accessed 9 Feb 2019.

  70. Ostrom, E. (2009). A polycentric approach for coping with climate change. Policy research working paper 5095. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

  71. Ostrom, E. (2010a). Polycentric systems for coping with collective action and global environmental change. Global Environmental Change, 20, 550–557.

  72. Ostrom, E. (2010b). A multi-scale approach to coping with climate change and other collective action problems. Solutions, 1(2), 27–36.

  73. Ostrom, E. (2012). Nested externalities and polycentric institutions: Must we wait for global solutions to climate change before taking actions at other scales? Economic Theory, 49, 353–369.

  74. Özdemir, M. (2010). Nitel veri analizi: Sosyal bilimlerde yöntembilim sorunsalı üzerine bir çalışma. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 11(1), 323–343.

  75. Payne, S. (2007). Grounded theory. In E. Lyons & A. Coyle (Eds.), Analysing qualitative data in psychology (pp. 65–86). Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.

  76. Puppim de Oliveira, J. A. (2009). The implementation of climate change related policies at the subnational level: An analysis of three countries. Habitat International, 33, 253–259.

  77. REC Turkey. (2016). İklim Dostu Kentler Projesi. Accessed 23 April 2016.

  78. Romero Lankao, P. (2007a). How do local governments in Mexico city manage global warming? Local Environment: The International Journal of Justice and Sustainability, 12, 519–535.

  79. Romero Lankao, P. (2007b). Are we missing the point? Particularities of urbanization, sustainability and carbon emissions in Latin American cities. Environment and Urbanization, 19, 159–175.

  80. Şahin, Ü. (2014). Türkiye’nin iklim politikalarında aktör haritası. İstanbul: İstanbul Politikalar Merkezi.

  81. Sánchez-Rodriguez, R., Seto, K., Simon, D., Solecki, W., Kraas, F., & Laumann, G. (2005). Science plan: Urbanization and global environmental change. Bonn: International Human Dimensions Programme on Global Environmental Change.

  82. Satterthwaite, D., Huq, S., Pelling, M., Reid, H., & Lankao, P. R. (2007). Adapting to climate change in urban areas: the possibilities and constraints in low-and middle-income nations. Discussion Paper No. 1. London: International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED).

  83. Schaffrin, A., Sewerin, S., & Seubert, S. (2014). The innovativeness of national policy portfolios—Climate policy change in Austria, Germany, and the UK. Environmental Politics, 23(5), 860–883.

  84. Schreurs, M. A. (2008). From the bottom up: Local and subnational climate change politics. The Journal of Environment & Development, 17(4), 343–355.

  85. Seto, K. C., Dhakal, S., Bigio, A., Blanco, H., Delgado, G. C., & Dewar, D., et al. (2014). Human settlements, infrastructure and spatial planning. In O. Edenhofer et al. (Ed.), Climate change 2014: mitigation of climate change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.

  86. State Planning Organization. (2013). İllerin ve bölgelerin sosyo-ekonomik gelişmişlik sıralaması araştırması (SEGE-2011). Ankara: TR Prime Ministry State Planning Organization Bölgesel Gelişme Ve Yapısal Uyum Genel Müdürlüğü.

  87. Stevenson, H., & Dryzek, J. S. (2014). Democratizing global climate governance. New York: Cambridge University Press.

  88. Talu, N. (2015). Türkiye’de iklim değişikliği siyaseti. Ankara: Phoneix Yayınevi.

  89. TBMM. (2005). Belediye Kanunu (Law No. 5393, date: 03 July 2005).

  90. The World Bank. (2010). Cities and climate change: An urgent agenda. Washington: The World Bank.

  91. Torres, P. B., & Doubrava, R. (2010). The covenant of mayors: Cities leading the fight against the climate change. In M. Van Staden & F. Musco (Eds.), Local governments and climate change: Sustainable energy planning and implementation in small and medium sized communities (pp. 91–98). Dordrecht: Springer.

  92. TR Prime Ministry. (2001). Circular 2001/2, date: 22 January 2001.

  93. TR Prime Ministry. (2004). Circular 2004/13, date: 17 February 2004.

  94. TR Prime Ministry. (2010). Circular 2010/18, date: 17 August 2010.

  95. TR Prime Ministry. (2012). Circular 2012/02, date: 04 January 2012.

  96. TR Prime Ministry. (2013). Circular 2013/11, date: 04 October 2013.

  97. True, J., & Mintrom, M. (2001). Transnational networks and policy diffusion: The case of gender mainstreaming. International Studies Quarterly, 45(1), 27–57.

  98. TÜİK. (2014). National greenhouse gas inventory report (1990–2012). Ankara: TÜİK.

  99. TÜİK. (2016). Nüfus İstatistikleri. Accessed 21 Aug 2015.

  100. Union of Municipalities of Turkey. (2017). Genel Istatistikler. Accessed 09 Jan 2018.

  101. United Nations. (2012). World economic situation and prospects 2012. New York: United Nations.

  102. United Nations. (2014). World’s population increasingly urban with more than half living in urban areas. Accessed 24 April 2016.

  103. United Nations-Habitat. (2011). U.N-Habitat global report on human settlements 2011 cities and climate change. London: Earthscan.

  104. Urban Climate Change Research Network. (2011). Climate change and cities first assessment report of urban climate change research network. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  105. Uysal, O. C. (2010). İklim değişikliği ile mücadelede yerel yönetimlerin rolü: Seattle örneği. Yönetim ve Ekonomi, 17(2), 25–41.

  106. Weingart, P., Engels, A., & Pansegrau, P. (2000). Risks of communication: Discourses on climate change in science, politics, and the mass media. Public Understanding of Science 9(3). Accessed 9 Feb 2019.

  107. While, A., Jonas, A. E. G., & Gibbs, D. (2010). From sustainable development to carbon control: Eco-state restructuring and the politics of urban and regional development. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 35(1), 76–93.

  108. Yerel Yönetimler Portalı. (2016). Nilüfer Belediyesi Nüfus Listesi. Accessed 01 May 2016.

  109. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2003). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayınları.

  110. Yılmaz, A. (2007). AB’ye uyum sürecinde türk kamu yönetiminin dönüsümü üzerine notlar. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 17. Accessed 11 Nov 2018.

  111. Yılmaz, M. (2015). Türkiye’de kırsal nüfusun değişimi ve illere göre dağılımı (1980–2012). Doğu Coğrafya Dergisi, 33, 161–188.

  112. Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

  113. Zengin, O. (2014). Büyükşehir belediyesi sisteminin dönüşümü: Son on yılın değerlendirmesi. Ankara Barosu Dergisi, 2014(2), 93–116.

Download references


This work was supported by Atatürk University Scientific Research Projects (BAP) (Grant Numbers 2015/03).

Author information

Correspondence to Neslihan Kulozu Uzunboy.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kulozu Uzunboy, N. Effect of transnational climate networks on climate experiments: the Nilüfer Municipality, a case from Turkey. Environ Dev Sustain (2019).

Download citation


  • Climate change
  • Experiments
  • Local government
  • Transnational climate network
  • Nilüfer Municipality