From fragmentation to coordination? Governing urban heat risks in Greater Sydney
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 24212868 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Nicky Morrison (0000-0001-6774-5945, Western Sydney University, Sydney, NSW, Australia), Vanita Yadav (0000-0001-5237-1186, Western Sydney University, Sydney, NSW, Australia), Judith Bruinsma (Western Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils, Blacktown, NSW, Australia), Kelly Gee (Western Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils, Blacktown, NSW, Australia), Patrick Harris (0000-0002-4649-4013, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia) |
| Year | 2026 |
| Publication date | 2026-09-24 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Urban Studies (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0042-0980 • E-ISSN: 1360-063X |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/00420980261485096 |
| OpenAlex | W7214236577 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 32 |
Climate-related events such as heatwaves and their impacts on health and wellbeing pose an increasing threat to the future livability of cities. However, in Australia, governance for heat risk management remains less developed than for other climate-related hazards, such as bushfires and floods, and is characterised by fragmented institutional arrangements. This paper examines the formation of the Greater Sydney Heat Taskforce and the co-design of Greater Sydney’s inaugural Heat Smart City Plan as a case through which to interrogate broader challenges in urban climate governance. Drawing on a participatory action research approach, the study analyses how multi-stakeholder governance arrangements emerge in contexts with limited legislative mandate, and how coordination, legitimacy, and shared ownership are constructed across diverse actors. The findings show that while the Taskforce generated progress—improving cross-sectoral understanding, clarifying roles, and building collaborative momentum—significant challenges remain. In particular, unresolved issues relating to resourcing, institutional capacity, and the evolving clarification of governance responsibilities continue to constrain implementation. The paper argues that governance for emerging risks such as extreme heat is shaped not only by formal institutional frameworks, but also by processes of co-design, negotiation, and knowledge co-production, which both enable coordination and challenge existing institutional capabilities. These insights have broader relevance for cities developing coordinated responses to complex climate risks.
Co-design · heat risk management · heat waves · institutional capacity · institutional fragmentation · knowledge co-production · multi-stakeholder governance · urban climate governance · urban heat · urban livability · Climate Change and Sustainable Development · Disaster Management and Resilience · Sustainability and Climate Change Governance
Multilevel risk governance and urban adaptation policy
A framework to diagnose barriers to climate change adaptation
Global, regional, and national burden of mortality associated with non-optimal ambient temperatures from 2000 to 2019
Heatwave fatalities in Australia, 2001–2018
Critical Heat Studies
Comprehensive Urban Policy for Australia
Action research for transformative change
Stakeholder involvement in strategic adaptation planning
Why and How Do Cities Plan for Extreme Heat
Urban Governance and the Politics of Climate change
Participatory action research
Extreme Heat Governance
Scale and modularity in thermal governance
Heat and the city
Cities, Climate Change and Urban Heat Island Mitigation
Institutionally configured risk
Urban climate governance informed by behavioural insights
Urban heat islands and the transformation of Singapore
A decade of adaptive governance scholarship
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |