Global Public Policy and Governance (2023) 3:116–136

https://doi.org/10.1007/s43508-023-00066-1

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Intergovernmental relations in climate change governance:

A Pakistani case

Muhammad Mumtaz1

Received: 19 December 2022 / Accepted: 28 March 2023 / Published online: 13 April 2023
© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Institute for Global Public Policy, Fudan University 2023

Abstract
Climate change has posed unprecedented challenges, particularly for developing
countries that are more at risk. Policy initiatives are required by different levels
of government to address the negative consequences of climate change. Intergov-
ernmental relations (IGRs) have a key role to align the coordination among differ-
ent tiers of governments in the formulation and implementation of climate change
adaptation policies. However, there are multiple challenges to ensure smooth IGRs
for effective climate governance. This study is conducted to identify such key chal-
lenges for IGRs for effective climate adaptation governance by using a case study of
the Pakistani agriculture sector. Our findings reveal that the main reason for weak
IGRs is the unstable political situation in the country. IGRs depend heavily on the
goodwill of politicians as there are no effective formal mechanisms of coordina-
tion between the federal government and provinces for dealing with climate change.
Additionally, there is a lack of institutional and technical capabilities of local insti-
tutions and the unavailability of support from other tiers of the government due to
political differences. Local institutions do not have clear actual roles, responsibili-
ties, and powers. This situation creates uncertainties among the institutions, which
ultimately makes them unable to have sound IGRs. There is also a lack of coordina-
tion among the provinces for collective efforts due to different political manifestos
and diverse governance approaches within their territories. Civil society organiza-
tions (CSOs) were found to play an important role in IGRs. CSOs provide a plat-
form for all actors by arranging different workshops and seminars, for example.

Keywords Adaptation · Climate change · Governance · Intergovernmental relations ·

Policies · Pakistan

* Muhammad Mumtaz
m.mumtaz@fjwu.edu.pk
1
Department of Public Administration, Fatima Jinnah Women University, Rawalpindi, Pakistan

1Vol:.(1234567890)
3
Intergovernmental relations in climate change governance:… 117

1 Introduction

Climate change has posed unprecedented challenges for the world. Rural and urban
areas in different countries are facing the negative consequences of these climatic
impacts (O’Brien & Leichenko, 2000). It is reported that the magnitude of climate
change will affect several stakeholders and their interests. Therefore, it is required to
bring all stakeholders on one platform so that effective climate change policies and
action plans can be devised considering the serious threat of climate change for all
sectors (Srivastava et al., 2018).
Bringing all the stakeholders together is best classified as ‘‘governance’’ (Benz,
2004). Good governance is challenging because of the complexity of relations
among various stakeholders. The system of government demands proper coordina-
tion mechanisms among governmental institutions so that implementable measures
can be devised (Benz, 2004; Mumtaz & Ali, 2019; Olsen, 2009).
Local and subnational governance structures are extremely important to develop
effective adaptation initiatives (Adger et al., 2007). Local governance arrange-
ments are critical to ensure the participation of stakeholders to cope with the issue
of climate change (Schwalb & Walk, 2007), but local institutions require technical,
financial, and informational support from subnational, and national levels. However,
there are challenges especially in the developing world to getting due support from
other tiers of the government.
Countries around the world are dealing with many hurdles to explore innovative
and flexible forms of governance to tackle regional and local vulnerabilities and
enhance local capacities facing future change (Mumtaz, 2021). The implementation
of effective climate measures is a major challenge for local governments in different
countries and regions around the world due to a lack of institutional capabilities and
financial assistance among others (Leichenko, 2011).
Local governments in Pakistan are facing multiple governance challenges to man-
age climate change. According to Global Change Risk Index 2020, Pakistan is rated
in the list of the top five countries that are vulnerable to climate change. Pakistan
is one of the most vulnerable countries to climate change (Mumtaz & Ali, 2019)
despite its contribution to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions is less than one percent.
Pakistan’s minimal contribution to GHG and its high vulnerability made it step up
with adaptation policies to face climate change (Mumtaz, 2018).
Adaptation to climate change is the main policy strategy of Pakistan where the
subnational governments are responsible for the implementation of climate policies.
After the 1­ 8th constitutional amendment in Pakistan, provincial governments have
the responsibility for the formulation and implementation of climate change poli-
cies. Provinces such as Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK) have established
climate change policies and action plans. However, without coordination, adaptation
risks of redundancy, fragmentation, or being maladaptive are likely (Magnan et al.,
2016) but IGRs have a key role to play in promoting effective climate change adap-
tation governance initiatives.
IGRs are important for the implementation of climate adaptation policies at the
subnational level, as adaptation requires efforts from different levels of government.

13
118 M. Mumtaz

There are inconsistencies between national and local adaptation policies and strate-
gies that are needed to be addressed through proper coordination (Brouwer et al.,
2013). Local-level governments are usually required to get help from the other
tiers of government for better communication and understanding of the situation
(Mumtaz, 2019) where IGRs have a significant role.
It has identified in adaptation literature that lack of coordination among the
government units is the real challenge for weak implementation of climate adapta-
tion policies at the subnational level (Li & Song, 2016). For instance, if there is no
coordination at the national, subnational, and local levels then it is likely to fail the
implementation of climate adaptation policies. It is, therefore, IGRs are crucial for
producing climate adaptation governance with the engagement of different tiers of
government.
Impacts of climate change are always multisector and require coordinated
responses. For example, the agriculture sector is linked with the energy and water
sectors; therefore, it requires proper coordination with these sectors. The responses
from national, subnational, and local levels must be aligned. IGRs are critical for
implementing climate change policies especially when multi-sectorial approaches
are involved (Urwin & Jordan, 2008). However, there are multiple challenges to
maintaining IGRs. The role of IGRs in adaptation to climate change are not much
explored. Therefore, this study is conducted to explore the challenges for IGRs in
climate change adaptation for the agriculture sector by studying the case of Pakistan.
The research question is: What are the IGRs (vertically and horizontally) challenges
in adaptation to climate change in agriculture sector in Pakistani case?

2 Intergovernmental relations and climate change adaptation

IGRs can be the relationships among different levels of government varying from
the national to the local level (Austin et al., 2015). According to Opeskin (1998), the
term “intergovernmental relations” is normally referred to the relationship among
central, regional, and local governments to facilitate in achieving common goals
through effective cooperation. This show that IGRs facilitate mutual benefits for all
the units of the state. Thornhill (2005) defines IGRs as “intergovernmental relations
consist of all the actions and transactions of politicians and officials in national,
sub-national units of government and organs of the state”. Van der Waldt and Du
Toit (1997) states that IGRs refer to the mutual relations and interactions between
government institutions at horizontal and vertical levels for common purposes. Cli-
mate change is one of such issues which provides a common ground where IGRs are
essential.
IGRs are found in formal and informal settings through studying from the per-
spective of climate change adaptation (Henstra, 2017; Fidelman et al., 2013). For-
mal IGRs include official and expert committees, meeting among regional leaders
and heads of state, or any other form of gathering on the specific subject matter
(Hueglin & Fenna, 2015; Phillimore, 2013; Poirier & Saunders, 2015). However,
informal mechanisms include emails, phone calls, informal meetings, political

13
Intergovernmental relations in climate change governance:… 119

party connections, and long-term interactions, which can later become formalized
(Phillimore, 2013; Poirier & Saunders, 2015).
The establishment of IGRs and their effective utilization is challenging due
to the complexity of institutional governance set up in a country (Fenna, 2012;
Phillimore, 2013). Both formal and informal forms are important for better IGRs
as both shape administrative and political behavior and outcome (Klein & Juhola,
2018; Helmke & Levitsky, 2012). Like formal connections, informal gatherings
and collaboration are essential for IGRs bringing mutual respect, a sense of trust,
and ways to engage and cooperate (Phillimore, 2013; Poirier & Saunders, 2015).
However, there are many issues in establishment of effective IGRs and it is yet
to fully explore those IGRs challenges especially in the context of adaptation
governance.
IGRs help set the jurisdiction of policy implementation within the level of gov-
ernment (Peters, 2015) and define the roles and responsibilities in shared policy
areas to reduce duplication of actions (Poirier & Saunders, 2015). Tackle climate
change, requires better policy coordination among different levels of government
(Puppim de Oliveira, 2019; Sumra et al., 2020). This policy coordination can be
complicated where subnational governments are key players in policy implemen-
tation (Hueglin & Fenna, 2015), because subnational level required proper sup-
port from local and national actors. In this situation, national governments need
to maintain policy cooperation to a certain extent so that national-level objec-
tives can be achieved particularly in climate change adaptation (Bakvis & Brown,
2010) through utilization of local level administration and implementation help.
However, there has been reported different hurdles to maintain effective IGRs and
ensure coordination particularly where subnational governments are more auton-
omous. It is, therefore, needed to investigate those IGRs challenges.
Climate change is a serious issue and efforts are taken from local to global
scale. Previously, the focus remained not only on mitigation but also top-down
governance approach, and the national governments were encouraged to take
action (Mumtaz, 2018). However, presently, the trend has changed drastically
especially after the PA 2015 as the PA strongly encourages subnational/local gov-
ernments and civil society organizations (CSOs) to act against climate change.
The subnational and local governments are getting much attention in policy
debate and they are considered instrumental to curb climate change. It is, there-
fore, imperative to produce coordinated responses from local scale to national
level.
It is suggested in the literature that responses to deal with climate change must
be implemented simultaneously at local and global scales undertaken by public and
private actors (Puppim de Oliveira, 2009; Setzer, 2009). It is argued that a multi-
level governance approach is a promising approach to managing the negative conse-
quences of climate change in the world. Subnational governments from all over the
world are recognized for their effective fight against climate change. It is indicated
that 50–80% adaptation and mitigation measures will be taken at the subnational and
local level (Anderton & Setzer, 2018). However, subnational and local governments
do not have excessive resources so they need required technical, administrative, and

13
120 M. Mumtaz

financial support. IGRs are key to virtualizing the real situation so that governmen-
tal responses can be promoted accordingly as per local requirement.
Climate change has local impacts; the local responses by individuals and commu-
nities are the appropriate form of governance (Adger & Vincent, 2005). In this situ-
ation, when the challenges are local then subnational and local governments’ actions
are more obvious and required (Eckersley & Tobin, 2019). The local community
or individuals closer to the impacts are suitable to deal with it. The adaptation
strategies can play an effective role to address the local challenges (Eriksen et al.,
2021) but they also need help from the subnational and national levels which can
be achieved through IGRs. However, in many cases, the required support especially
from national level is not received. There is need to dig out the key factors which is
responsible for not getting due support from other actors is essential.
The literature suggests that the subnational and local governments are key play-
ers in the implementation of climate policy either alone or coordinating with other
actors (Puppim de Oliveira, 2019; Schwartz, 2019). Subnational and local govern-
ments are in the right position to identify the needs of their societies to be closer to
the climatic impacts (Barbi & da Costa Ferreira, 2017; Mumtaz, 2019) for instance
in case of flooding or heatwaves local governmental institutions are the best and
urgent responder. Subnational governments are well placed to implement and rein-
force national policies (Albris et al., 2020), because they are familiar with the local
context and have more acceptability for local actions. These governments are well
situated to identify local requirements and identify the priority areas for investment
and actions (Bolger & Doyon, 2019). It is argued that the sub-national level is cru-
cial for climate actions by mobilizing resources at local levels and establishing link-
age and coordination among local actors and all sectors (Liu et al., 2021). However,
how to make a better relationship among different actors and sectors and what are
the key issues in establishing proper IGRs is not fully understood.
Subnational governments bring policy innovations and develop better solutions
by identifying local requirements (Vogel et al., 2020), for instance through local
experimentations and piloting (IPCC, 2014). Local governments are taking meas-
ures and innovative actions on their own as per their requirements (Mees et al.,
2019). These governments are responsible for enacting laws and framing poli-
cies which are directly linked to climate change. However, these local policies and
actions must be aligned with national priority goals. These policies and action plans
can only be aligned when better IGRs are in place. However, it has pointed out that
in context of developing and most vulnerable countries such relations are not stable
and the reasons for unstable IRGs are yet to fully diagnose. It is needed to explore
the issue of IGRs which is not fully understood in the context of climate governance
where subnational and local governments are in leading climate actions.
Subnational governments are responsible in many countries for public budgets
and expenditures, and the effective use of these budgets can be helpful for adap-
tive improvements and adjustments (Barbi & da Costa Ferreira, 2017). In populated
and geographically large countries, regional governments or subnational govern-
ments have reasonable administrative powers in many areas including sustainable
development (Chatwin et al., 2019). For example, in many countries, subnational
governments are responsible to implement policies on the environment, agriculture,

13
Intergovernmental relations in climate change governance:… 121

and industry. IGRs can facilitate to bringing different tiers of governments closer to
dedicate proper budgets for climatic activities. However, due to different priorities
of national, subnational and local governments, the dedication of such finances is
still missing. It is, therefore, needed to learn why IGRs are yet to create an environ-
ment where a reasonable and acceptable climate financing can be attained.
Subnational governments are important to raise awareness and influence behavior
and collaboration (Fisher et al., 2018). This can be achieved by launching consumer
education programs, changing consumption habits, and promoting to use of green
goods and services (Nekmahmud et al., (2020). These are key aspects of adaptation
strategies. IGRs are effective to bring multiple stakeholders to the same point and
to establish better relationships among the stakeholders at the local level (Adedeji,
2021). Therefore, the role of IGRs is important to produce harmonic climate actions
at different levels of government and it must be empirically tested. However, it has
reported that in context of developing countries such awareness in public is not fully
achievement due to absence of coordination and cooperation among the related intu-
itions. It is therefore need to dig out those barriers who are the main reasons of weak
IGRs.
Subnational governments have proved that they can take responsibility to tackle
climate change. For example, they have established networking and collaborations
with many other subnational governments for implementing climate policies. This
shows how horizontal coordination is important for climate adaptive governance.
They are sharing best practices, focusing on and encouraging green technologies,
and encouraging transference of low-carbon technology. Subnational governments
are determined to tackle climate change and address economic problems by turn-
ing the challenges into opportunities towards ensuring a green economy. These gov-
ernments are taking effective steps to build more sustainable, less carbon, and low-
energy-intensive communities (Palermo et al., 2020). However, these subnational
governments need help from local and national governments but this help is not
fully given due to the challenges of IGRs. It is, therefore, required to identify and
address those hurdles to produce better climate adaptation governance.
To implement the Paris Agreement (PA) and effective use of the global climate
fund, it is important to understand the dynamics of subnational institutions and their
collaboration with national and local level institutions (Haris et al., 2021). These
subnational level institutions are key to communicating the policy implementation
challenges and opportunities between the national and local level governments.
Although, in the PA, the bottom-up approach and role of civil society organiza-
tions are highlighted but national governments are also important players in a wide
range of motivations such as increasing (economic) damage from climate impacts
(Kowasch et al., 2021), pressure from the public and the non-governmental organi-
zations (NGOs) (Hügel & Davies, 2020), learning through transnational networks
(Haupt et al., 2020), and (economic) competition with other countries (Jänicke &
Wurzel, 2019). Therefore, it is required to have effective IGRs and due cooperation
with international organizations for effective climate adaptation governance at the
subnational level.
The role of local institutions/bureaucracies is significantly emphasized. How-
ever, it has been seen that adaptation policies at the local scale are lacking a certain

13
122 M. Mumtaz

willingness to initiate innovative measures and focus on implementation due to

weak institutional capabilities at the subnational and local levels and getting limited
support from the national level (Stock et al., 2021). These weak aspects of local
governments can be overcome through effective IGRs where national governments
can extend help in terms of institutional support. However, the critical role of IGRs
in the enhancement of institutional capabilities at the local level is not fully utilized.
The adoption of the PA is an emergence of a polycentric governance model where
IGRs are important. PA has created new openings for local governments, and non-
state actors such as businesses and civil society to actively engage while addressing
climate change (Hall & Persson, 2017). Climate change adaptation is an emerging
field of policy action involving subnational and local governments (Lesnikowski et
al., 2021) and better IGRs can define its success. Considering the new field, the
implementation of climate adaptation policies at the subnational level needs to be
followed a balanced governance approach through balanced IGRs.

3 Research methodology

Employing any methodology depends on the research questions and research objec-
tives of the study. The case study method is an appropriate study to uncover things
that are not apparent and this method is suggested where quantitative data alone
cannot explain a phenomenon (Ragin and Becker, 1992). Wagenaar and Babbie,
(2005) notes that qualitative research is “a hands-on process, which involves going
to the scene of the action and checking it out.” In the case study method, an in-depth
investigation is conducted to understand the real-life context of an individual, group,
organization, phenomenon, or project, relying on multiple sources of evidence
(Schoch, 2020). For this study, the case study method is used which is qualitative
research, because it is an appropriate technique to actually identify and diagnose the
root causes of IGRs challenges in context of adaptive governance at horizontal and
vertical scales. The purpose of this study is to identify key challenges of IGRs at
horizontal and vertical levels for climate change adaptation governance and to find
the actual reasons of these challenges. It is, therefore, qualitative design is the most
suitable approach to address the research question. This study specifically explores
how IGRs influence climate change adaptation governance in Pakistan by looking
agriculture sector, because this sector is adversely impacted by climate change and
is managed by different actors from local to the national level. Agriculture sector is
key for economic growth and ensuring food security of the country. It is, therefore,
to study Pakistan’s agriculture sector from the perspective of IGRs is a good and
very relevant case.
The study was conducted from May 2019 to October 2019 in two phases. In
the first phase, five exploratory interviews were conducted with government offi-
cials and policy experts to understand perspectives on climate change adaptation
and the role of IGRs. Based on the first phase, 22 semi-structured interviews at the
national and provincial level with experts, policy-makers in government especially
in the Ministry of Climate Change (MoCC), academia, and representatives of civil
society organizations working in the area of climate change, farmers, and citizens.

13
Intergovernmental relations in climate change governance:… 123

Each interview lasted from 25 to 60 min. Most of the interviews were conducted in
English but some interviews were in Urdu, especially with farmers. After the inter-
views were completed, the interview notes and key observations were reviewed and
summarized using the interview guide and translated into English if it is in Urdu.
The interview questions broadly assess how IGRs for climate adaptation govern-
ance are taking place, how top–down and bottom–up approaches influence adapta-
tion (agriculture sector), coordination or collaboration between levels for adaptation,
and jurisdictional roles and responsibilities for adaptation. Additional interview
questions were also asked to assess administrative structure, institutional set-up,
legal initiatives, policy capacity for adaptation, adaptation progress, the role of non-
governmental actors, and general questions regarding the interviewee’s position and
program areas.

4 Climate institutional arrangements in Pakistan

Pakistan’s government has shown interest to play an effective and important role
to mitigate and adapt to climate change by establishing various climate policies at
the national and sub-national levels. Pakistan has established climate institutions,
enacted climate laws, and signed various international legal bindings and treaties.
Many NGOs, civil society organizations, academics, think tanks and other pressure
groups related to climate change have emerged in Pakistan. The MoCC at the federal
level is the central body that is responsible to deal with all climate change-related
activities at the international level and establish a coordination mechanism among
the subnational/provincial governments and local. It also oversees the implementa-
tion progress of the provinces by regularly arranging meetings through an estab-
lished institutional setup.
According to Pakistan’s MoCC, “The ministry also deals with other countries,
international agencies, and forums for coordination, monitoring, and implementa-
tion of environmental agreements". The ministry is backed by the Planning Com-
mission (PC). The PC contributes to making and establishing national plans and it
has a key role in evaluating and monitoring developmental projects and programs.
On the heels of the 18th constitutional amendment in Pakistan, the subject of envi-
ronment/climate change has been devolved and provinces are responsible for the for-
mulation and implementation of climate change and related policies. Table 1 shows
the history of the institutionalization of climate change in Pakistan.

13
 Table 1  History of institutionalization of climate change in Pakistan
124

Year Accomplishment Purpose and/or function

13
1974 Environmental and Urban Affairs Division established at the Federal Level Follow-up to Stockholm Declaration June 1972
1983 Pakistan Environmental Protection Ordinance enacted First comprehensive environmental-specific legislation
1989 Environmental and Urban Affairs Division upgraded to the Federal Ministry
of Environment, Forestry, and Wildlife
1991–1993 National Conservation Strategy prepared It provided a broad framework for addressing environmental challenges
National Environmental Quality Standards adopted in 1993
1995 Cabinet Committee on Climate Change established Acted as a policy coordination forum for climate change
1997 Pakistan Environmental Protection Act enacted First environmental act of the country
2002 Global Center for Impact Studies on Climate Change established This research center on climate change functioned for 10 years as a develop-
ment project
2004–2005 Prime Minister Committee on Climate Change convenes National Environ- Includes the Prime Minister, Ministers of Water and Power, Food and Agricul-
mental Policy ture, Science and Technology, Environment, Planning Commission, Special
Advisor to the Prime Minister
2006 National Energy Conservation Policy
National Renewable Energy Policy
Clean Development Mechanism
National Operational Strategy
2010 18th Amendment to the 1973 Constitution Devolution of power to the provinces
2011 Ministry of Environment ceases to exist Functions transferred to the Planning Commission
The New Ministry of Disaster Management established
2012 Ministry of Disaster Management renamed to the Ministry of Climate Elevate climate change issues to a cabinet-level portfolio
Change A dedicated policy on climate change
National Climate Change Policy approved by Federal Cabinet Deals with environmental cases; the 2013 decision prioritizes environmental
Punjab and Baluchistan Environmental Protection Act prepared and enacted cases in the High Courts
“Green Benches” established in all High Courts and the Supreme Court of
Pakistan by the Chief Justice of Pakistan
National Disaster Management Plan approved
National Sustainable Development Strategy
M. Mumtaz
 Table 1  (continued)
Year Accomplishment Purpose and/or function

2013 Ministry of Climate Change downgraded to Division of Climate Change Become part of the Cabinet Secretariat
Global Change Impact Studies Center granted an autonomous status Serve as the Secretariat for the Prime Minister Committee through “GCISC
National Disaster Risk Reduction Policy Approved Act 2013”
2014 Framework for Implementation of Climate Change Policy adopted
2015 Division of Climate Change upgraded to the Ministry of Climate Change Federal focal ministry on all climate change-related issues
2016 National Forest Policy established
2017–2018 Climate Change Act was passed Establishment of Clime Change Council
National Water Policy of Pakistan Establishment of Clime change Fund
Establishment of Climate Change Authority
2019 Clean Green Pakistan Movement (CGPM) launched
2021 Revised National Climate Change Policy of Pakistan

Source: Adapted from I. Ahsan and S.A. Khuwaja (2013). Development of Environmental Laws and Jurisprudence in Pakistan and the author’s contribution
Intergovernmental relations in climate change governance:…
125

13
126 M. Mumtaz

At the federal level, the initial national communication report to the UNF-
CCC was developed in 2003 by the national government in consultation with other
stakeholders. It highlights the efforts of Pakistan to confront climate change. Moreo-
ver, it envisioned the required policies and plans related to climate change in the
country. This document described all the major vulnerable sectors to climate change
and proposed measures to overcome the challenges in each sector.
In 2005, national environment policy was set to counter the environmental issues
in the country. The policy provided 171 policy guidelines for protecting, conserva-
tion restore and effectively managing resources related to the environment of the
country. It particularly focuses to tackle contamination of clean water, waste man-
agement systems, deforestation, and others.
In 2006, the national energy conservation policy (NECP) was developed. The
NECP was framed to address the energy-related challenges in the country and estab-
lish a framework so that conversation about energy can be maintained. It took initia-
tive to not only overcome the energy crises in Pakistan but also focused on energy
efficiency and renewable energy. Based on the NECP, the implementation framework
was also established to actually operationalize the policy. In 2008, the PC formed
the TFCC. The TFCC was comprised of different shareholders including climate
experts and civil society members, climate researchers, and academics. It issued a
comprehensive report stating the actual impacts of climate change on Pakistan and
demanded concrete actions for fixing the issue of climate change in Pakistan. It gave
a very detailed overview of climate change scenarios in Pakistan and proposed cer-
tain recommendations to tacking climate change amicably.
The National Climate Change Policy of Pakistan (NCCP) was established in 2012
and revised in 2021. The policy attempts to effectively manage the issue of climate
change by providing guidelines and required climate actions. The policy measures
recommended in the NCCP are related to various sectors including water, agricul-
ture, bio-diversity, disaster preparedness, energy, and so on. It was a positive move
to establish the NCCP and Pakistan was named as one of the few developing coun-
tries that have established climate policy.
Based on the NCCP, the implementation framework for national climate change
policy (IFNCCP) was set in 2013. The framework was prepared based on the NCCP
and it has suggested various adaptation and mitigation measures and actions. It was
a good effort by the federal government to prepare such a document but it could not
give the intended results for its effective implementation. It is because the provin-
cial governments are the implementers of climate policies and they did not own the
framework as such.
All the provincial governments are establishing their climate change policies
and action plans as per their requirements. The NCCP and IFNCCP are important
for subnational governments to get guidance before establishing their policies at
the subnational level. The provincial governments of the KPK, Punjab, and Sindh
have already established their provincial climate change policy (PCCP) so far. How-
ever, Baluchistan province and other federal units and Azad Jammu Kashmir are
still in process of framing their climate change policies. The established policies
in the three provinces are multi-sectoral policies and cover all the related sectors,

13
Intergovernmental relations in climate change governance:… 127

especially the agriculture sector which is affected by climate change. The implemen-
tation frameworks for PCCPs are also in progress in the KPK, Punjab, and Sindh.

5 Intergovernmental relations and climate change governance

in Pakistan

Climate change has emerged as one of the biggest challenges for Pakistan as the
country has been listed among those ten countries that are vulnerable to climate
change. The recent floods of 2022 in Pakistan have brought devastating challenges
where one-third of the country was affected. This shows how Pakistan is experienc-
ing the issue of climate change and it needs coordinating efforts at different tiers of
the government. Pakistan’s main strategy to deal with climate change is an adapta-
tion to climate change where subnational and provincial governments are respon-
sible for establishing climate change policies and action plans. However, relevant
support and technical assistance are required from the federal level as the MoCC is
responsible for monitoring climate governance and the progress of provinces to deal
with climate change. Moreover, handling climate change matters in Pakistan at the
international level is also in the scope of MoCC. Therefore, IGRs are key to produc-
ing effective climate adaptive governance.
IGRs are essential for the implementation of climate adaptation policies at the
subnational level. The coordination among the different level of governance such
as national, subnational, and local levels are important. These relations are funda-
mental to establishing effective networks for governance systems which are instru-
mental for implementing climate change policies, especially when multi-sectorial
approaches are involved and subnational governments are managing climate change
(Meadowcroft, 2009).
In the Pakistani case, effective IGRs are required so that climate adaptation poli-
cies can be implemented in line with established national priorities. The role of the
federal government is still there as it is responsible for creating the intended nation-
ally determined contributions (INDCs) and presenting Pakistan at the international
level. Moreover, the federal government has more resources and specialty to deal
with climate change keeping in view before 2010; it was the federal government in
Pakistan responsible for the implementation of climate change policies.
After the 18th amendment, the provincial governments in Pakistan established
institutions, established climate change policies, and enhanced their effectiveness
in dealing with climate change. For instance, the KPK has established the climate
change cell (CCC) to interact with other government departments and relevant agen-
cies to incorporate climate change considerations into their respective policies, strat-
egies, and actions to address climate change in the province. One of the respond-
ents believe that CCC is also responsible for establishing coordination among the
departments/institutions in the province and also presenting the province at the fed-
eral level when the quarterly meeting is held at the MoCC. However, according to
respondent 3, it is yet to achieve any substantial results from quarterly meeting held
at the MoCC due diversity of opinion among national and provincial stakeholders.

13
128 M. Mumtaz

The Punjab province has created a network of 26 agriculture institutes in the

province to produce strategies for climate change adaptation, especially for the agri-
culture sector. These institutions are mandated to discuss the challenges of climate
change in the province and propose implementable suggestions so that such sugges-
tions can be incorporated into the policy documents. For instance, a respondent from
Ayub Agricultural Research Institute (AARI) informed that AARI disseminates cli-
mate governance actions particularly adaptation to climate change in the agriculture
sector among other institutions.
Sindh Environmental Protection Agency (SPEA) established Sindh Climate
Change Policy (SCCP) in 2022 to manage the issue of climate change. The SCCP
has been framed in line with the NCCP and this policy indicates some climate-
related institutions such as the Provincial Cloud Acquisition Office with the aim
to standardize and adopt emerging tools and technologies. In this province, SEPA
is mainly responsible for handling climate change-related matters at the provincial
level as well as with the federal government. The SCCP emphasized that there is
a need for establishing coordination among the institutions within the province as
well as with the federal government for better management of climate change in the
province.
KPK, Punjab and Sindh, Baluchistan, other federal units, and the government of
AJK are also in line to devise their climate change policies and action plan to miti-
gate the consequences of climate change. Despite various institutional setups, the
establishment of climate change policies and action plans, and the promulgation of
climate change laws and acts in the provinces, there is still a lack of coordination
at horizontal and vertical levels. The establishment of institutions is not sufficient
but effective governance, it is important to build robust institutions for sophistical
IGRs (Puppim de Oliveira, 2019). However, in the Pakistani case, the respondent 5
was of the view that the role of IGRs is still missing in the climate adaptation gov-
ernance structure. All the provinces recognize the importance of IGRs in climate
governance but are practically unable to produce desired results due to some of the
key factors mentioned below.

5.1 Political instability

Political stability is an important aspect of good governance (Morrissey & Udomk-

erdmongkol, 2012). It is one of the key indicators for effective governance that can
promote innovation and input in dealing with climate change (Afrifa et al., 2020).
Literature dictates that political instability creates vulnerability and weak coordi-
nation among institutions and governments to develop innovative policies toward
maintaining a sustainable environment (Gani, 2012). This political stability is cru-
cial to influence the relationship between innovation input and climate change (Mor-
rissey & Udomkerdmongkol, 2012). The political system in Pakistan was never sta-
ble since its inception, especially during the last few years. Respondent 11 has an
opinion that political instability in Pakistan is one of the major reasons for not emer-
gence of effective IGRs in general and for climate governance in specific due to the
complexity of the issue. The consistent and in short-span, changing of governments

13
Intergovernmental relations in climate change governance:… 129

in the country has weakened the governmental institutions and could not provide the
foundation for sound IGRs. This political instability leads to a lower public–private
partnership, weak linkage with international organizations, and a lack of productive
coordination within the provinces and with the MoCC.

5.2 Vertical coordination challenges

Vertical coordination is critical for the implementation of climate adaptation poli-

cies and the decision-making process when the multi-governance approach is fol-
lowed. The integration of climate adaptation policies at different tiers of govern-
ment is widely acknowledged particularly where subnational/local governments are
responsible for the implementation of climate policies (Bauer et al., 2012). In the
Pakistani case, the system of vertical coordination exists but has yet to achieve any
substantial results.
The MoCC at the federal level oversees the international obligation and legally
binding elements of provisions in national laws. A committee composed of members
from provinces and federal units’ representation arranges a quarterly meeting at the
MoCC to discuss the overall achievements to curb climate change in the country. All
provinces present their progress in these meetings. The Ministry also gets climate
change-related progress data from the provinces when it is needed. So far, 15 meet-
ings have been arranged at the ministry since its establishment in 2013. However,
after the ­18th constitutional amendment and devolution of the environmental subject
to the provinces, the existing monitoring and evaluation committee at the MoCC
may not be effective.
Moreover, after the devolution, as per one of the respondent’s view that there is
confusion of power between the federal and provincial levels with respect to the sub-
ject of climate change in the country. The provinces feel more autonomy, while the
MOCC considers itself more responsible as it deals with climate change matters at
the international level. Consequently, there are limited IGRs at the vertical scale in
Pakistan which is creating hurdles in sharing relevant information, and climate data,
experts in Pakistan are proposing that there is an urgent need to establish a climate
change council on the heels of the climate change act 2017 which would be a legal
and powerful entity to ensure coordination between the federal government and pro-
vincial governments.

5.3 Horizontal coordination challenges

Horizontal coordination refers to the policy activities of different sectoral actors

working at the same level of government (von Lüpke et al., 2022). This coordina-
tion is key for climate adaptation policies to bring the local actors from multi-sec-
toral areas in taking coordinated climate actions (Rauken et al., 2015). Our results
found that there is limited evidence of horizontal coordination in climate adapta-
tion planning and poly implementation whereas all relevant government actors and

13
130 M. Mumtaz

related sectors must be involved in climate adaptation policies and strategies. The
interviews results showed that there is a clear lack of inter-organizational coordina-
tion in the implementation phase of climate change policies within a province and
beyond. For instance, the CCC has established PCCP in KPK but agricultural exten-
sion departments in the province are not much familiar with the adaptation strate-
gies proposed in the policy documents. It is, therefore, the subnational/provincial
governments are yet to fully understand the dynamics of horizontal coordination for
climate adaptation governance in the country.
The committee at MoCC is the only place where the provinces can sit together
and share information and their progress on climate change. However, the efficacy
of the committee is weak and it did not show any impactful results. It is, therefore,
noted that all the actions on climate change taken by the provinces are nascent and
there is no evidence of cooperation among the provinces or learning from each other
on the issue of climate change. The experts suggest that there must active central-
ized institutional set-up with legal backing to ensure effective IGRs.
The engagement of external stakeholders such as academia, civil society, and the
private sector, can facilitate technical–analytical capacities of public bureaucrats
(Howlett & Wellstead, 2011). It has been reported that in some cases, actors are
not official members of institutional arrangements for horizontal coordination but
are organized into auxiliary institutions, such as expert groups or scientific coun-
cils, which support political and administrational actors in the policy process. In the
case of Pakistan, various stakeholders especially academia (Universities) and inter-
national and local organizations such as the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale
Zusammenarbeit (GIZ), the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN),
The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), Leadership for Environment
And Development (LEADS) Pakistan, Sustainable Development Policy Institute
(SPDI), and Institute of Policy Studies(IPS) are involved in the provision of advo-
cacy and technical assistance to all provinces in handling climate change. These
organizations are playing an active role not only in bringing different institutions
within the same province but also provide a platform for all provinces to discuss the
matter of climate governance. For instance, recently a consultative workshop was
organized by InsuResilience Solutions Fund Management in Islamabad on the chal-
lenges of climate change and the way forward in light of the recent floods of 2022.
In this workshop, representatives from all provinces and MoCC were there where
they shared their viewpoints on climate change, their approaches to addressing cli-
mate change, and their future strategies. Such interactive workshops help in estab-
lishing IGRs. The experts also suggest that there must be a cross-ministerial com-
mittee or working group at the national level that ensures IGRs.

5.4 Lack of defined roles, responsibilities, and powers

Climate change is a multi-dimensional challenge and it requires efforts for adaptation

from multiple actors including stake and no-stake actors at different levels with clear
roles and responsibilities (Koch et al., 2007). Climate change encompasses stakehold-
ers and institutions simultaneously at local, national, and international scales and

13
Intergovernmental relations in climate change governance:… 131

according to Clark et al. (2002), effective responses require integration across these
different levels of governance. In the Pakistani case, various institutions and organi-
zations are involved in climate change adaptation planning and policies. However,
they are not clear about their specific roles, responsibilities, and powers. For instance,
different departments in provincial governments are not clear about their as seen
based on our interviews with the officials in the respective departments. Moreover,
the provinces themselves are in a state of confusion about the actual domain of cli-
mate change subject as the subject has been devolved to the provinces but they view
that the federal government is yet to fully provide the autonomy. Although three out
of four provinces have established their climate change policies in viewing their cli-
mate change vulnerabilities but the federal government has also revised the NCCP of
2012. One of the interviewee questioned that when climate change is the provincial
subject then what is the purpose of revising the NCCP which was created before the
18th constitution amendment? The developments clearly show that there is a lack of
clearly defined roles, responsibilities, and powers of institutions within the provinces
and with the federal institutions as well. Effective IGRs may remove these barriers of
communication and misunderstanding, and confusion among the institutions.

6 Conclusion

Climate change has posed a serious threat to the world especially developing coun-
tries like Pakistan are more at risk due to scarce resources and limited adaptability to
handle climate change. The subnational and local governments in Pakistan have the
responsibility to deal with climate change. Various institutions and climate actions
at provincial levels are taken to mitigate climate change. IGRs are key to effective
climate adaptation through effective communication and sharing policy directions
and measures. Horizontal and vertical coordination and integration are necessary to
ensure that all actors and organizations take into account the adaptation actions of
others. However, it has seen that there are various challenges ensuring IGRs. This
study was dedicated to identified and highlight those challenges. In this case study,
some hurdles have been identified for IGRs which are actually responsible for weak
climate adaptation governance in Pakistan. In Pakistani context, we found that there
is weak horizontal and vertical coordination among the institutions, limited financial
resources, confusion about roles and powers of institutional structure, and lack of
practical research and innovations particularly at the local scale.
It has been found that provincial governments are trying their best to ensure the
provision of climate actions in terms of climate adaptation policies and plans in dif-
ferent sectors including the agriculture sector. However, government departments of
the provinces seem to be struggling in the implementation of their respective policy
measures as there are limited IGRs at horizontal and vertical scale. We found that one
of the reasons among others for weak IGRs is unstable political situation in the coun-
try. There is no goodwill and any effective mechanism of coordination between the
federal government and provinces and among the provinces in case of dealing with
climate change. Moreover, there is a lack of institutional and technical capabilities

13
132 M. Mumtaz

of local institutions and the unavailability of support from other tiers of the govern-
ment due to political differences. It is further found that local institutions are not clear
about their actual roles, responsibilities, and powers. This situation creates confusion
among the institutions and ultimately unable to produce sound IGRs. Moreover, there
is a lack of coordination among the provinces due to different political manifestos and
diverse approaches within their government territories. However, CSOs are playing a
pivotal role in production of IGRs through providing a platform to national, provincial,
and local actors where workshops and seminars are arranged to bring related actors
together and produce coordinated efforts managing climate change. There is a need for
improvements particularly employing an integrative approach with respect to climate
change and its impacts on various sectors through effective IGRs. Moreover, there is a
need to improve horizontal and vertical coordination among governmental institutions
so as to remove institutional confusion while handling climate change in the country.

Appendix 1

Respondents’ profiles

Respondent ID Respondents’ responsibilities/roles Respondents’ organization

1 Director Ministry of Climate Change

2 Chairman and member of board of
governance
3 Professor of Policy Study and Sustainable Center for Policy Study, COMSATS Uni-
Development
4 Head of Department
5 Professor of water and climate change
6 Senior Researcher for agriculture and
climate change
7 Senior Researcher for climate change and
head for water section
8 Researcher for climate change and agri-
culture sector
9 General Manager and compiling climate
change data in Pakistan
10 Director Agronomic and an active mem-
ber for climate negotiation and policies
in Punjab
11 PhD student working on climate adapta-
tion and agriculture sector
12 Regional Director for agriculture exten-
sion department
13 Deputy Director dealing with climate
change in Punjab region
14 Farmer’s community(nine interviews)
Sustainable Development Policy Institute
versity, Islamabad
Center for Climate Research and Develop-
ment
Department of Meteorology, COMSATS
University, Islamabad
Global Chang Impact Studies Center
Global Chang Impact Studies Center
Pakistan Agriculture Research Council
Pakistan Space and Upper Atmosphere
Research Commission
Ayub Agriculture Research Institute,
Faisalabad
University of Agriculture, Faisalabad
Agriculture Extension Department in
Faisalabad
Environmental Protection Agency in
Lahore, Punjab
Farmers in Punjab

13
Intergovernmental relations in climate change governance:… 133

Declarations

Conflict of interest The author declared no conflict of interest in this manuscript.

References
Adedeji, A. (2021). Intergovernmental relations and the birthing of collaborative governance in Nige-
ria. Contemporary Journal of Politics and Administration, 1(2).
Adger, W. N., & Vincent, K. (2005). Uncertainty in adaptive capacity. Comptes Rendus Geoscience,
337(4), 399–410.
Adger, W. N., Aggarwal, P., Agrawala, S., & Alcamo, J. (2007). Summary for policy-makers. Climate
Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the
Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (pp. 7–22). Cam-
bridge University Press.
Afrifa, G. A., Tingbani, I., Yamoah, F., & Appiah, G. (2020). Innovation input, governance and climate
change: Evidence from emerging countries. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 161,
120256.
Ahsan, I., & Khawaja, S. A. (2013). Development of Environmental Laws and Jurisprudence in Pakistan.
Asian Development Bank.
Albris, K., Lauta, K. C., & Raju, E. (2020). Strengthening governance for disaster prevention: The
enhancing risk management capabilities guidelines. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduc-
tion, 47, 101647.
Anderton, K., & Setzer, J. (2018). Subnational climate entrepreneurship: Innovative climate action in
California and São Paulo. Regional Environmental Change, 18(5), 1273–1284.
Austin, S. E., Ford, J. D., Berrang-Ford, L., Araos, M., Parker, S., & Fleury, M. D. (2015). Public health
adaptation to climate change in Canadian jurisdictions. International Journal of Environmental
Research and Public Health, 12(1), 623–651.
Bakvis, H., & Brown, D. (2010). Policy coordination in federal systems: comparing intergovernmental
processes and outcomes in Canada and the United States. Publius: the Journal of Federalism, 40(3),
484–507.
Barbi, F., & da Costa Ferreira, L. (2017). Governing climate change risks: subnational climate policies in
Brazil. Chinese Political Science Review, 2(2), 237–252. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s41111-​017-​0061-3
Bauer, A., Feichtinger, J., & Steurer, R. (2012). The governance of climate change adaptation in 10
OECD countries: Challenges and approaches. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 14(3),
279–304.
Benz, A. (2004). Governance—Modebegriff oder nützliches sozialwissenschaftliches Konzept? Govern-
ance—Regieren in Komplexen Regelsystemen (pp. 11–28). VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Bolger, K., & Doyon, A. (2019). Circular cities: Exploring local government strategies to facilitate a cir-
cular economy. European Planning Studies, 27(11), 2184–2205.
Brouwer, S., Rayner, T., & Huitema, D. (2013). Mainstreaming climate policy: The case of climate adap-
tation and the implementation of EU water policy. Environment and Planning C: Government and
Policy, 31(1), 134–153.
Chatwin, M., Arku, G., & Cleave, E. (2019). Defining subnational open government: Does local context
influence policy and practice? Policy Sciences, 52(3), 451–479.
Clark, W. C., Mitchell, R., Cash, D., & Alcock, F. (2002). Information as influence: how institutions
mediate the impact of scientific assessments on global environmental affairs. Available at SSRN
357521.
Eckersley, P., & Tobin, P. (2019). The impact of austerity on policy capacity in local government. Policy
& Politics, 47(3), 455–472.
Eriksen, S., Schipper, E. L. F., Scoville-Simonds, M., Vincent, K., Adam, H. N., Brooks, N., & West, J.
J. (2021). Adaptation interventions and their effect on vulnerability in developing countries: Help,
hindrance or irrelevance? World Development, 141, 105383.

13
134 M. Mumtaz

Fenna, A. (2012). Federalism and Intergovernment coordination. The SAGE Handbook of Public Admin-
istration (pp. 750–763). Sage Publications.
Fidelman, P. I., Leitch, A. M., & Nelson, D. R. (2013). Unpacking multilevel adaptation to climate change
in the Great Barrier Reef Australia. Global Environmental Change, 23(4), 800–812.
Fisher, S., Dodman, D., Van Epp, M., & Garside, B. (2018). The usability of climate information in sub-
national planning in India, Kenya and Uganda: The role of social learning and intermediary organi-
sations. Climatic Change, 151(2), 219–245.
Gani, A. (2012). The relationship between good governance and carbon dioxide emissions: Evidence
from developing economies. Journal of Economic Development, 37(1), 77.
Hall, N., & Persson, Å. (2017). Global climate adaptation governance: Why is it not legally binding?
European Journal of International Relations, 10, 11771354066117724000.
Haris, S. M., Mustafa, F. B., & Raja Ariffin, R. N. (2021). Roles of non-governmental organisations in
the national climate change governance: A systematic literature review. Journal of Administrative
Science, 18(2), 222–248.
Haupt, W., Chelleri, L., van Herk, S., & Zevenbergen, C. (2020). City-to-city learning within climate city
networks: Definition, significance, and challenges from a global perspective. International Journal
of Urban Sustainable Development, 12(2), 143–159.
Helmke, G., & Levitsky, S. (2012). Informal institutions and comparative politics: a research agenda.
International Handbook on Informal Governance. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Henstra, D. (2017). Climate adaptation in Canada: Governing a complex policy regime. Review of Policy
Research, 34(3), 378–399.
Howlett, M., & Wellstead, A. M. (2011). Policy analysts in the bureaucracy revisited: The nature of pro-
fessional policy work in contemporary government. Politics & Policy, 39(4), 613–633.
Hueglin, T. O., & Fenna, A. (2015). Comparative Federalism: A Systematic Inquiry. University of
Toronto Press.
Hügel, S., & Davies, A. R. (2020). Public participation, engagement, and climate change adaptation: A
review of the research literature. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 11(4), e645.
Jänicke, M., & Wurzel, R. K. (2019). Leadership and lesson-drawing in the European Union’s multilevel
climate governance system. Environmental Politics, 28(1), 22–42.
Klein, J., & Juhola, S. (2018). The influence of administrative traditions and governance on private
involvement in urban climate change adaptation. Review of Policy Research, 35(6), 930–952.
Koch, I. C., Vogel, C., & Patel, Z. (2007). Institutional dynamics and climate change adaptation in South
Africa. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 12(8), 1323–1339.
Kowasch, M., Cruz, J. P., Reis, P., Gericke, N., & Kicker, K. (2021). Climate youth activism initiatives:
Motivations and aims, and the potential to integrate climate activism into ESD and transformative
learning. Sustainability, 13(21), 11581.
Leichenko, R. (2011). Climate change and urban resilience. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustain-
ability, 3(3), 164–168.
Lesnikowski, A., Biesbroek, R., Ford, J. D., & Berrang-Ford, L. (2021). Policy implementation styles and
local governments: The case of climate change adaptation. Environmental Politics, 30(5), 753–790.
Li, C., & Song, Y. (2016). Government response to climate change in China: A study of provincial and
municipal plans. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 59(9), 1679–1710.
Liu, M., & Lo, K. (2021). Governing eco-cities in China: Urban climate experimentation, international
cooperation, and multilevel governance. Geoforum, 121, 12–22.
Magnan, A. K., Schipper, E. L. F., Burkett, M., Bharwani, S., Burton, I., Eriksen, S., & Ziervogel, G.
(2016). Addressing the risk of maladaptation to climate change. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews
Climate Change, 7(5), 646–665.
Meadowcroft, J. (2009). Climate change governance. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper,
(4941).
Mees, H. L., Uittenbroek, C. J., Hegger, D. L., & Driessen, P. P. (2019). From citizen participation to
government participation: A n exploration of the roles of local governments in community ini-
tiatives for climate change adaptation in the Netherlands. Environmental Policy and Governance,
29(3), 198–208.
Morrissey, O., & Udomkerdmongkol, M. (2012). Governance, private investment and foreign direct
investment in developing countries. World Development, 40(3), 437–445.
Mumtaz, M. (2018). The National Climate Change Policy of Pakistan: An evaluation of its impact on
institutional change. Earth Systems and Environment, 2(3), 525–535.

13
Intergovernmental relations in climate change governance:… 135

Mumtaz, M. (2019). Climate change adaptation in the agriculture sector: an analysis of governance
challenges in two Pakistani provinces (Doctoral dissertation).
Mumtaz, M. (2021). Role of civil society organizations for promoting green and blue infrastructure to
adapting climate change: Evidence from Islamabad city Pakistan. Journal of Cleaner Production,
309, 127296.
Mumtaz, M., & Ali, S. H. (2019). Adaptive governance and sub-national climate change policy: A com-
parative analysis of Khyber Pukhtunkhawa and Punjab provinces in Pakistan. Complexity, Govern-
ance & Networks, 5(1), 81–100.
Nekmahmud, M., & Fekete-Farkas, M. (2020). Why not green marketing? Determinates of consumers’
intention to green purchase decision in a new developing nation. Sustainability, 12(19), 7880.
O’Brien, K. L., & Leichenko, R. M. (2000). Double exposure: Assessing the impacts of climate change
within the context of economic globalization. Global Environmental Change, 10, 221–232.
Olsen, S. B. (2009). A Practitioner’s perspective on coastal ecosystem governance. In: Integrated Coastal
Zone Management.
Opeskin, D. (1998). The reform of intergovernmental fiscal relations in developing and emerging market
economies. World Bank.
Palermo, V., Bertoldi, P., Apostolou, M., Kona, A., & Rivas, S. (2020). Assessment of climate change
mitigation policies in 315 cities in the Covenant of Mayors initiative. Sustainable Cities and Society,
60, 102258.
Peters, B. G. (2015). Pursuing Horizontal Management: The Politics of Public Sector Coordination (pp.
1–214). University Press of Kansas.
Phillimore, J. (2013). Understanding intergovernmental relations: key features and trends (理解政府间关
系: 关键特性和趋势). Australian Journal of Public Administration, 72(3), 228–238.
Poirier, J., & Saunders, C. (2015). Conclusion: comparative experience of intergovernmental relations in
federal systems.
Puppim de Oliveira, J. A. (2009). The implementation of climate change related policies at the subna-
tional level: An analysis of three countries. Habitat International, 33(3), 253–259.
Puppim de Oliveira, J. A. (2019). Intergovernmental relations for environmental governance: Cases of
solid waste management and climate change in two Malaysian States. Journal of Environmental
Management, 233, 481–488.
Ragin, C. C., & Becker, H. S. (Eds.). (1992). What is a case? Exploring the foundations of social inquiry.
Cambridge University Press.
Rauken, T., Mydske, P. K., & Winsvold, M. (2015). Mainstreaming climate change adaptation at the local
level. Local Environment, 20(4), 408–423.
Schoch, K. (2020). Case study research. Research Design and Methods: An Applied Guide for the
Scholar-Practitioner (pp. 245–258). SAGE.
Schwalb, L., & Walk, H. (2007). Blackbox Governance—Lokales Engagement im Aufwind? Local Gov-
ernance—Mehr Transparenz und Bürgernähe? (pp. 7–20). VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Schwartz, E. (2019). Autonomous local climate change policy: An analysis of the effect of intergovern-
mental relations among subnational governments. Review of Policy Research, 36(1), 50–74.
Setzer, J. (2009). Subnational and transnational climate change governance: Evidence from the state
and city of São Paulo, Brazil. In Fifth Urban Research Symposium, Cities and Climate Change:
Responding to an Urgent Agenda (pp. 28–30).
Srivastava, A. K., Mboh, C. M., Zhao, G., Gaiser, T., & Ewert, F. (2018). Climate change impact under
alternate realizations of climate scenarios on maize yield and biomass in Ghana. Agricultural Sys-
tems, 159, 157–174.
Stock, R., Vij, S., & Ishtiaque, A. (2021). Powering and puzzling: Climate change adaptation policies in
Bangladesh and India. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 23(2), 2314–2336.
Sumra, K., Mumtaz, M., & Khan, K. (2020). National water policy of Pakistan: A critical analysis. Jour-
nal of Managerial Sciences, 14.
Thornhill, C. (2005). The political/administrative interface: Time for reconsideration? Journal of Public
Administration (October Edition), 176–185.
Urwin, K., & Jordan, A. (2008). Does public policy support or undermine climate change adaptation?
Exploring policy interplay across different scales of governance. Global Environmental Change,
18(1), 180–191.
Van der Walt, G., & Du Toit, D. F. P. (1997). Managing for Excellence in the Public Sector. Juta & Co.

13
136 M. Mumtaz

Vogel, B., Henstra, D., & McBean, G. (2020). Sub-national government efforts to activate and motivate
local climate change adaptation: Nova Scotia, Canada. Environment, Development and Sustainabil-
ity, 22(2), 1633–1653.
von Lüpke, H., Leopold, L., & Tosun, J. (2022). Institutional coordination arrangements as elements of
policy design spaces: insights from climate policy. Policy Sciences, 56, 1–20.
Wagenaar, T. C., & Babbie, E. R. (2005). Study Guide for the Basics of Social Research. Thomson/Wads-
worth Pub.

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

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under
a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted
manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and
applicable law.

13