ABSTRACT
In recent years, the dominant configuration for the ‘governance of problems’ in local climate change policies has changed as described by Hoppe, competing frames emerged and new actors entered the arena. This increase in actors, new ways of knowing, the development of methods to evaluate the success of policies and also different guiding principles for governance arrangements are a consequence of the diversity of factors relevant to and covered by the term ‘climate policies’. This shift in what is considered accepted practice indicates an epistemological shift. This raises questions such as: how is existing knowledge devalued or confirmed? And what about the acceptance of new knowledge in local politics? There remains considerable room to address these implications (Holden 2008; Zimmermann 2009; Matthiesen 2005).
