1. INTRODUCTION. 2. MULTILEVEL CLIMATE GOVERNANCE. 3. MULTILEVEL GOVERNANCE OF SUSTAINABLE URBAN MOBILITY IN SWEDEN. 3.1. NATIONAL TRANSPORT POLICY OBJECTIVES. 4. THE POLICYMAKING PROCESSES FOR TRANSPORT PLANNING IN UMEÅ. 4.1. LOCAL GOVERNANCE FOR CLIMATE ACTION AND SUSTAINABLE URBAN MOBILITY. 4.1.1. Umeå Climate Roadmap - Agenda 2030. 4.1.2. Urban Transformation for Sustainable Mobility. 4.1.3. Bottom-Up Initiatives. 5. DISCUSSION. 6. CONCLUSION. REFERENCES.

Sustainable urban mobility has long been included in policy discourses as a solution to curb GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions in cities; however, there are persistent disparities in what it means and how it should be achieved (Brůhová et al., 2020). Sustainability requires integration of environmental, economic, social and governance goals in human activities to protect the future of our earth and achieve liveability (Litman, 2023). Based on the famous Brundtland Report3 widely acknowledged definition of sustainable mobility is “transportation that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (Loo & Chow, 2006). Köhler et al. (2009) describes transition to sustainable mobility as “developing alternative social, behavioural, and technological niches to the current car dependent regime”. Sustainable urban mobility upholds the vision of a city, which encourages its inhabitants to alter their travel habits to reduce emissions as well as detrimental impacts on the environment, health, and wellbeing (Brůhová et al., 2020).

The complex challenges for climate change adaptation and mitigation cut across various spatial and jurisdictional realms. Governance of public goods encompasses externalities that traverse boundaries. These issues are addressed in multilevel governance structures through reallocation of power between different tiers and novel modes of public policymaking (Benz, 2021). There is a trend toward greater polycentricity which alters the existing climate governance structures and links multiple governing authorities across various sectors and scales (Jordan et al., 2018). According to Hooghe (1995) “multilevel governance structures embody multi-layered polity across international, national and subnational collaborations without the existence of centrally concentrated authority”. However, scholarly debates emerge around the most effective governance frameworks and mechanisms for implementation of transformative solutions to address the sustainability challenges that include environmental, social, and economic objectives.

Considering that there are multiple benefits and challenges associated with the governance of public common goods in multilevel settings, its impact on delivering sustainable urban mobility policy objectives is not widely explored in the literature (Nykvist & Whitmarsh, 2008). Against this backdrop, this study is built on the following question: “What are the effects of multilevel governance on the design and implementation of sustainable mobility plans?”. The main objective is to analyse the impact of design and implementation of sustainable urban mobility projects in a multilevel governance setting.

The empirical analysis is based on the review of secondary sources and semi-structured interviews to complement it. The secondary sources include key national and local policy documents for climate change action and sustainable urban mobility in Sweden as well as in Umeå. The interview data is incorporated in a way to ensure the that interviewees and provided information are not identifiable. To account for the role of different actors in transport and sustainable mobility planning at national and local government level, the interviewees include policy experts, policymakers, transport, and urban planners working at the Departments of Traffic, Planning, Mobility and City Development at Umeå Municipality, and working at the Department of Central Function and Strategic Development at Trafikverket/Swedish Transport Administration.

The sample size of the interviewees is small which constitutes one of the limitations of this study. As this research paper aims to unpack the effects of multilevel governance on the design and implementation of sustainable mobility plans, the questions asked to the interviewees include:

The article is organized as follows. Section 2 includes a synopsis of the literature on multilevel climate governance and decentralized policymaking. Section 3 explores the multilevel governance of sustainable urban mobility in Sweden together with the national policy objectives. In section 4, the case study of Umeå is presented to empirically analyse the policymaking processes for transport planning and with specific focus on sustainable urban mobility transitions in a multilevel governance framework. Local authorities are given extensive powers and transport policies are formulated through cooperation among various actors in Sweden. Thus, Umeå provides an interesting case study to explore the design and implementation of sustainable urban mobility projects through a web of interactions across national, regional, and local level. The empirical results are discussed in section 5 to readdress the question posited and to account for a critical assessment of the main findings. Lastly, the concluding remarks are made to highlight the most important findings, their relevance within the multilevel governance literature, and recommendations for further research.

Climate change is a political phenomenon as its governance is increasingly characterized by polycentricity with linkages between multiple governing authorities (Ostrom, 2010a). Achieving the target of limiting global temperature increases to 1.5 °C necessitates integrated climate change initiatives among cities and through upscaling across multiple levels of climate governance (Fuhr et al., 2018). These initiatives are mostly emphasized within international frameworks and under the supervision of the United Nations. National, regional, and local governments implement the necessary mechanisms to achieve internationally set targets. Climate action across large, medium- sized and small cities is important for effective climate governance (Kern, 2019). Polycentric governance structures involve public and private actors at multiple levels, in which local governments and community organizations are key to reducing carbon emissions at the local level (Ostrom, 2010a; 2010b).

A large body of research has investigated the benefits and challenges of multilevel governance of public goods. Multiple independent governing units can bring practical value as different public goods can be provided more efficiently at various scales (McGinnis & Ostrom, 2012; Jordan et al., 2018). However, policy areas such as the environment contain a basket of policies that may be efficiently provided at different scales of government (Hooghe & Marks, 2009). The evaluation of the most efficient and optimal structure of governance depends on the policy field. According to Stigler (1957), “certain government functions such as transport are more efficiently provided through national coordination and local consideration”. Shifting the attention from global to “multiple governance scales that include actors across polycentric systems” has been regarded as more effective to reduce the negative externalities of climate change (Ostrom, 2010a).

Another benefit of multilevel governance structure is that it perpetuates the establishment of vertical and horizontal policy diffusion across jurisdictions and among a variety of actors (Schoenefeld et al., 2023, pp. 4-5). Vertical links are the interactions between international, national, and local levels. Horizontal links refer to interactions within the same level of governance. Additionally, horizontal links are established through collaboration in national and transnational municipal networks (Bulkeley, 2010). Ostrom (2010a) underlines the benefits of the polycentric systems as they accelerate learning, adaptation, innovation, and cooperation with the potential to generate more effective outcomes at multiple levels of governance against a collective-action problem with global effects. For instance, involvement of cities in transnational networks endorses the knowledge transfer and policy mobilization that foster local climate action.

In contrast to the evidence which presents the view that multilevel governance frameworks can lead to effective outcomes in certain policy fields, an alternative perspective illustrates that it can produce overlap and redundancies in government functions. The top-down delegation of responsibilities from national to local levels can produce “accountability vacuums” within the complex structures of multilevel climate governance (Bache et al., 2015). In addition to that, environmental protection of public goods in decentralized settings can lead to suboptimal outcomes such as the inability to control spill overs and increased resource depletion in the absence of strict regulation (De Mello & Jalles, 2022). Ebinger and Richter (2016) asserts that social policies may benefit from decentralization when horizontal communication and cooperation increases; however, it may lead to decrease in service quality.

Sweden is ranked among the top countries in Climate Change Performance Index (2023)4 with low per capita emissions. Domestic transport and industrial sectors have the biggest share of GHG emissions as each accounted for 32% of total GHG emissions in 20185. However, the emissions originating from road transport have been decreasing since 2010 and are projected to decline because of energy efficiency gains and increased biofuel use6. The two-tiered structure which centres around self-government in Sweden means that subnational authorities are regarded as important actors in climate change governance (Kristianssen & Granberg, 2021). Municipalities and regions have a crucial role in climate transition, particularly concerning urban planning and transport7.

The tradition of strong self-government is an important characteristic of central-local relations in the Nordic countries. For instance, the European Commission’s Self-rule Index 1.0 comparatively measures the level of autonomy obtained by local authorities across Europe in 1990-2014. According to this classification scheme, the countries that have significantly high level of self-government are the Nordic countries -Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Finland, Iceland-, Switzerland, Germany, and Poland. On the other hand, the list of countries with the lowest level of local government autonomy include Cyprus, Ireland, Malta, Moldova, Georgia, and Turkey (European Commission et al., 2016).

Sweden has three levels of government with the national, regional, and local level8. The significance of the European level has been increasing following its accession to the European Union in 1995. Its subnational governance structure is made up of 21 county councils and 290 municipalities that have access to constitutional, political, and financial resources in a non-hierarchical two-tier system (Elander & Montin, 1990; Baldersheim & Ståhlberg, 2002). Decentralization has traditionally been important in Sweden as more responsibilities progressively devolved from the national to the local level that increased the range of municipal activities (Hudson, 1993, p. 43; Elander & Montin, 1990, p. 166; Mukhtar-Landgren et al., 2019). The consolidation of local self-government has signalled a shift towards multilevel governance in Sweden as “the central local relations promote non-hierarchical negotiations among institutions across different levels” (Feltenius, 2015). Municipalities have key functions in delivery of public services ranging from housing, education, childcare, public welfare, and road management. On the other hand, the county councils oversee healthcare and transport policies.

An important feature of policy making within the two-tiered government structure in Sweden is the complex interactions between local and regional governments. Regional authorities provide detailed inspection and oversight in many areas including environmental protection and social welfare policies (Baldersheim & Ståhlberg, 2002, p. 85). In certain policy fields, local governments coordinate tasks with regional administrations and county administrative boards, which are national state agencies. For instance, despite existence of comprehensive local climate adaption plans, county administrative boards provide guidance and support to municipalities (Kristianssen & Granberg, 2021). The umbrella institution, SALAR-Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions, which represents all the municipalities and county councils provides an influential role in multiple policy areas as a mediator between different government levels (Feltenius, 2015, pp. 307-308). Hence, the multilevel governance of sustainable urban mobility transitions in Sweden comprises of multiple public actors interacting across different levels. The next section includes the national policy agenda for transport and sustainable urban mobility to account for the overarching policy objectives and division of responsibilities among different government actors.

Located within the two-tiered government structure, Umeå provides an interesting case study to analyse the formulation and implementation of sustainable urban mobility policies within a multilevel governance setting. This medium-sized Swedish city constitutes the largest city of Northern Sweden and the eleventh largest municipality with an ambitious local climate action agenda16 (Statistics Sweden, 2022). It is located within the Västerbotten County in Upper Norrland, which is the northernmost region of Sweden. The region of Västerbotten is governed by a council, which is an elected institution and consists of elected representative17. Political organization of Umeå Municipality consists of several administrative bodies, and municipal companies18.

The Swedish Transport Administration (Trafikverket), County Council of Västerbotten, County Administrative Board and Umeå Municipality, are key actors that are responsible for transport planning. The national authorities (Swedish Transport Administration) are responsible for long term planning of national roads and railways. Transport policies are implemented through collaboration between Swedish Transport Administration, regional and local authorities.

At regional level, political, administrative, and fiscal responsibilities are divided between the County Council of Västerbotten and Umeå Municipality (Umeå Kommun). As underlined by an interviewee who works at the Swedish National Road and Transport Research Institute, “the regional level is not hierarchically above the local level and has formal powers for public transport planning in regions; but they have to cooperate closely with the municipalities” (Interviewee 3). The national guidelines on climate action provide goals that are implemented through local governments’ power to self-govern (Interviewee 3). However, there are certain limits to local government autonomy in Sweden. County Administrative Boards are “a parliamentary organisation which function as a national supervisory authority in each region and can put sanctions on municipalities if they don’t follow certain rules” (Interviewee 3).

A local councillor explained the level of cooperation between different tiers of government and the role of Municipal Councils in local transport policymaking processes:

This indicates an effective policymaking process with clear division of responsibilities and allocation of multiple funding streams across national, regional, and local level.

As the local authority, Umeå Municipality has extensive autonomy in land use planning, maintenance of local roads, including cycling and walking infrastructure. One of the interviewees who work as a transport planner at Umeå Municipality expressed that “There are significant levels of interaction between three tiers. For public transport, decisions are made at regional level, but through close cooperation with local level. Every­thing is decided at city level, but then regional level must approve. The regional authorities agree most of the time because the local government has the fiscal resources” (Interviewee 4). However, a concern regar­ding the impact of policy priorities at national level was expressed by an interviewee; “Change in ­government have changed the national plan and the money allocated for roads, railways, cycling lanes. The money has been directed to the road transport. The change in national level has impacted the policy priorities at regional and local level too” (Interviewee 1).

Having clarified the political and administrative functions of Umeå Municipality in implementing transport policies, I will provide further details on the local climate agenda and sustainable urban mobility policies in Umeå.

The policymaking processes for transport and sustainable urban mobility planning in Umeå are the outcome of various vertical and horizontal interactions within the multilevel governance structure of Sweden. The authority and policy responsibilities are allocated between the national, regional, and local tiers with central control over the policymaking processes. It was reaffirmed during the interviews that there is close collaboration between the three levels of government (Interviewee 4; Interviewee 5).

Swedish Transport Administration provides long-term policy priorities according to the national interests and interacts with the regional level through regional offices (Interviewee 5). Public transport across the region is overseen by the regional level; however, land planning, local roads and infrastructure are under the responsibility of municipal councils. It is important to note that “Swedish Transport Administration can intervene in municipalities’ road planning if it conflicts with the national interests; and there is no hierarchy between the regional and local level, which ensures their close cooperation” (Interviewee 3; Interviewee 5). These insights contradict with the empirical findings of Antonson et al. (2016) which concludes that decentralized planning of sustainable transport in Sweden results in conflict among the local and regional level. Moreover, the empirical findings from Vellinge Municipality points to the divergences in the policy positions of local and regional level regarding the impact of increased road capacity (Antonson et al. 2016, p. 301). However, it is not clear how these divergences impact policymaking processes.

At subnational level, the policy responsibilities are divided between the County Council of Västerbotten and Umeå Municipality. It is stated that the strong self-government tradition of Swedish municipalities renders local authorities influential actors in steering climate action (Interviewee 4). The empirical insights from Umeå Municipality reaffirm the important role of local governments for climate action as well as design and implementation of sustainable urban mobility projects in Sweden. Umeå Municipality has policy discretion in land use and traffic planning, local roads, urban infrastructure for cycling and walking. The proactive role of Umeå Municipality with an ambitious local agenda and legislative political, fiscal powers to enact change creates room for policymaking at a level closer to the citizens. However, in Sweden, there are limits to local autonomy despite their strong tradition of self-governance. For instance, “County Administrative Boards are national supervisory authorities in each region and can implement sanctions on local authorities” (Interviewee 3).

The local climate change targets of the city are enshrined in the Umeå Climate Roadmap - Agenda 2030. The existence of urban transformation projects to reduce car use and increase the share of urban trips made by sustainable modes of mobility is a clear sign of the importance given to not only reducing the greenhouse emissions, but also addressing urban problems to turn cities into living spaces. These projects serve multiple functions to create greener spaces in urban areas, improve air quality, reduce congestion, increase safety, promote accessibility, and mitigate prospective problems related to population growth. Additionally, local governance framework for climate action and sustainable urban mobility is made of several collaborative initiatives. Umeå Municipality is involved in multiple national and international networks such as Framtidsgatan, Viable Cities, and the EU funded projects GoGreenRoutes, Ruggedised. These projects provide funding and knowledge exchange for small interventions which contribute to the municipality’s objective of decreasing car use, increasing the share of cycling, and walking in urban mobility. Nevertheless, it is highlighted by the interviewees that car-dependence is a major challenge in achieving sustainability urban mobility targets in Umeå, and in the rest of the country (Interviewee 4; Interviewee 6). Car dependence, and segregation of cycling and walking ways is described as a political issue that involves contestation (Interviewee 2).

This study assessed the effects of multilevel governance structures on the design and implementation of sustainable urban mobility plans through an empirical case study. Multilevel governance frameworks are regarded conducive for accelerated climate action with multiple actors interacting in polycentric systems (­Ostrom, 2010b). It implies dispersion of power and responsibilities across different actors rather than a centralized approach to governance (Hooghe, 1995). However, it is acknowledged that decentralization can also generate redundancies and ineffective policymaking without strict regulation (De Mello & Jalles, 2022). Another ­important shortcoming of multilevel climate governance structures is the accountability problem (Bache et al., 2015). As the main objective of this study was to examine the effects of multilevel governance within the context of sustainable urban mobility policies, the political landscape in Sweden which is characterised by a range of interactions among different actors at multiple tiers provided substantial insights. The ­empirical ­findings will contribute to the literature on multilevel climate governance of common goods. The empirical analysis is based on a single case study and a limited number of interviews; however, it reveals important insights to identify the enabling political and administrative conditions in multilevel governance frameworks.

The empirical findings indicate that the close level of collaboration between national, regional, and local authorities for transport policymaking with distinct set of responsibilities undertaken by different authorities can facilitate the implementation of sustainable urban mobility policies in Umeå, Sweden. The positive impacts of the multilevel governance of transport and sustainable urban mobility policies in Sweden are as follows: First, it sets clear division of responsibilities among different public authorities for coordinated transport policymaking at national, regional, and local level. The national authority, Trafikverket/Swedish Transport Administration, is responsible for long term planning of national roads and railways. At regional and local level, transport planning responsibilities are divided between the County Council of Västerbotten and Umeå Municipality. As it was explained in the interviews the overall policy directions are provided by the national government and these targets are addressed at the lower levels. The regional level oversees public transport policies, whereas the local authorities are responsible for local roads and infrastructure; however, in Sweden there are mechanisms for checks and balances. Therefore, it addresses the problems related to multilevel governance such as lack of accountability and responsibility. Second, it enhances the access of local authorities to resources from national, regional, and local level. It was explained by a local Councillor that “there is national funding for transport infrastructure including roads and railways; but the municipal funding is available through local taxes for local roads and their maintenance. Then the municipalities can get additional funding from the regional level” (Interviewee 1). Third, multilevel governance of sustainable urban mobility policies enables interactions with various public and private actors through access to vertical and horizontal networks. As shown in the case of Umeå’s involvement in projects such as Cultivating Cities- GoGreenRoutes, Ruggedised, 100 Climate-Neutral and Smart Cities, local authorities’ access to multinational networks enables external funding opportunities for climate action.

In conclusion, multilevel governance can contribute to effective design and implementation of sustainable urban mobility projects. The enabling political and administrative conditions that consolidate the impact of multilevel governance of sustainable urban mobility policies in Sweden are clear division of responsibilities among government bodies with strict regulatory mechanisms, strong role of local government in steering the transition at a level closer to the citizens, local governments’ access to substantial financial resources and knowledge exchange as a result of vertical and horizontal links. The case of Umeå demonstrates the positive effects of multilevel governance of sustainable urban mobility projects through inter-administrative cooperation, resource allocation across multiple levels, tradition of local self-government, and commitment to an ambitious local agenda. Multilevel governance frameworks can facilitate sustainable urban mobility transitions through increased cooperation among different stakeholders, mobilization of additional funding opportunities, and exchange of best practices through governance networks. The bottom-up and top-down interactions among state and non-state actors in multilevel settings can accelerate implementation of local sustainable urban mobility plans. The impact of high local government autonomy in steering the urban transition process within the described multilevel governance framework cannot be overlooked. However, an important ambiguity in multilevel governance of sustainable urban mobility policies in Sweden is the impact of congruence among different levels. This has become particularly relevant with the recent change in the national government as a right-wing coalition government was formed in the aftermath of the 2022 general elections. Concerns about its repercussions for the national funding allocated to roads as opposed to sustainable mobility projects was expressed in an interview as well (Interviewee 1). There is need for extensive empirical research to analyse how party politics, and incongruent policy preferences across the national, regional, and local governments would impact sustainable urban mobility policies.