ABSTRACT
We have seen that Sweden's central government opted for an implementation of the national climate strategy, which expects ‘each and everyone’ to take appropriate action. But such multilevel and multi-actor governance will encounter constraints that are strongly embedded in the present structure and culture of public affairs. We find local jurisdictions that run counter to an ideal organization for effective climate policy implementation (see Hooghe and Marks, 2003). Swedish local government is based on ‘territory’, charged with a multitude of sometimes competing responsibilities organized along ‘sectoral’ lines, and with long-term legitimacy. Responsibilities for such issues as transport, energy, physical planning, housing and the handling of material flows through society are either explicitly placed on local governments or constitute legally binding regulations and constraints on municipal action (Cabinet Bill 2001/02:55). This potential clash between effectiveness and legitimacy comes out clearly in the Climate Commission's final report (SOU 2000:23, p242):
… it is probable that both already implemented organizational reforms and the present administrative structure are sub-optimal for an effective implementation of the climate policy. The diffusion of responsibilities among a large number of agents makes it difficult to get an overview of measures, results and lines of responsibility.
