To meet the climate challenge, city leaders are committing to ambitious emissions targets, designing decentralized action plans, and sharing lessons in transnational networks. Since growing cities are a large source of global emissions, their efforts could contribute substantially to global climate objectives. As the world’s climate experts gather next week in Bonn, Germany, for the 23rd Conference of the Parties (COP-23), urban initiatives will be a key focal point of the agenda-setting conversation.

Yet, how can cities, particularly those in developing countries, build long-term climate resiliency—especially where national-level commitment and large-scale funding is lacking?  Aniruddha (Ani) Dasgupta, the global director of World Resources Institute’s Ross Center for Sustainable Cities, answers our questions on the role of fast-growing cities in climate governance.

New Security Beat: Who are the key drivers of sustainable, equitable, and productive growth in developing cities? Are there certain actors that are particularly well positioned to direct positive growth in fast-growing cities? Can the private sector, for instance, act as a catalyst for innovation and productivity, or are regulatory initiatives that affect zoning and land use planning more effective?

Ani Dasgupta: Cities change all the time, but what we really need is dramatic, transformative change in many places. Based on WRI Ross Center research, three factors are key to creating this kind of change: governance, finance, and urban planning and management. To change any of these requires help from all kinds of organizations and people, including businesses and civil society.

Governance is important because it encompasses the urban decision-making structure and government policies from the local to the national level, the role of civil society organizations, and the extent of public participation. Finance and funding includes a city’s access to capital, transfers from higher levels of government, engagement with the private sector, and municipal revenues (e.g., budgetary contributions, taxes, fees, and user charges). Urban planning and management refers to a city’s capacity to plan and manage a changing urban environment over time. This includes the ability to coalesce around a shared vision, create a meaningful participatory process, implement plans and urban policy reforms, and enforce regulations in a manner that is transparent, accountable, and responsive to residents.

Momentum often marks the difference between an isolated urban project and transformative change. Some projects make a larger difference because people see results on the ground and form a constituency that pushes for continued ambition. Building momentum in this way is easier if you involve many stakeholders who can each see their interest in changing the status quo.

NSB: To what extent do rapidly growing cities in the Global South need to transform their energy infrastructures and mobility networks to avoid carbon lock-in? How is it possible to achieve such transformations despite limited resources and rising energy demand?

AD: Major, transformative change is indeed necessary in many places. Some have estimated that more resources will be invested in urban infrastructure this century than all of human history to date. Two and half billion people will be added to urban populations by 2050. Whether resources are invested in projects that are safe, sustainable, and equitable—or not—is the big question. We need to try to get this right the first time in as many places as possible.

It is possible to achieve these objectives with limited resources. Many of the cities that WRI Ross Center has worked in longest, like Mexico City and Belo Horizonte, have achieved major improvements to transportation at relatively little cost by embracing strategies like bus rapid transit systems, which are far less capital intensive than rail networks, but can reduce congestion and pollution. Inexpensive changes to street design, land use, and public spaces, too, can encourage more and safer walking and cycling.

Energy is especially difficult because the model laid out by today’s largest and wealthiest cities—relying on fossil fuels—is no longer viable. There are signs of progress here, too, though. The costs for solar are already at or below coal in many places, and we’re seeing innovative finance models, like pay-as-you-go, that reduce the initial investment required. In 2015, the number of households using pay-as-you-go solar in sub-Saharan Africa doubled to between 450,000 and 500,000. We’ve also seen countries make a major difference when they prioritize cleaner burner cooking fuels in national policy, as Brazil has done with liquefied petroleum gas.

NSB: Are there certain indicators that can be used to determine whether equitable, productive, and sustainable growth is being achieved? In other words, are there adequate measurements of progress in fast-growing cities that could encourage reflexivity?

AD: Measurement of progress has been difficult in cities for many reasons. When we talk about equity, for example, we don’t just mean income equity but we’re looking at people’s access to basic services, like mobility, open space, housing, and water. These are all valuable parts of sustainable cities that all residents should have at a basic level.

For productivity in urban areas, it’s important to consider the impact of the informal sector, as well as the formal—street merchants, laborers, and service workers who work for themselves or in small groups but are largely off the books. In many developing country cities, large numbers of people work and sell goods in the informal sector. If we’re not considering them, we’re missing a big part of the picture and potentially losing opportunities to encourage paths out of poverty.

A good sustainability measure should give some indication of equity, productivity, and environmental impact. I don’t think we’re there yet. There are so many factors that you could focus on, but none that can be easily applied across many settings. Our approach has been to try to simplify the landscape somehow, to come up with fewer things to prioritize. Most importantly, we want to be able to tell what direction a city is moving in. Are things getting better, or worse?

NSB: Cities across distant geographical regions are arguably creating a transboundary climate-action force. For instance, the Climate Summit of Local and Regional Leaders will take place during COP-23 in Bonn on November 12th and the UNFCCC currently lists two city-based NGOs as holding official observer status in the party negotiations. How would you describe the role of cities in governing climate change on a global scale? Also, how do you think this shift in the governance landscape might impact cities in the Global South in particular?

AD: The withdrawal of the United States from the Paris Agreement was a big setback, but it also galvanized energy for subnational leadership. The voices of mayors and city networks, like the Coalition for Urban Transitions, C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group, Global Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy, and ICLEI, have been foremost among those calling for renewed support and more aggressive mitigation, a major goal of COP-23 in Bonn, as experts fear current climate targets are not enough to avoid dangerous warming.

Cities can do much to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to changing conditions. As centers of economic productivity, transportation, and innovation, they are responsible for an outsized portion of emissions. Investments to protect people and assets from the effects of climate change will also go farthest in low-lying urban areas, which suffer the highest exposure to damages. But cities need help.

How the implementation agenda comes through for cities is a major open question. What has been lacking are specific things cities can do to plug in to national, regional, and global plans. Most climate funding mechanisms have focused on funneling money through national governments. How do we fund city-level work on a large scale? How do we ensure they have enough capacity follow through on funding? How do we make sure their efforts are acknowledged and encouraged amidst the national government jockeying at the UNFCCC? These are open questions for the international community as we head into Bonn.