“Cities are part of the climate change problem, but they are also a key part of the solution. So do not repeat the mistake of the Kyoto Protocol: do not forget local authorities”. This summarises the message hammered home by the local authorities and the city and regional networks present in Copenhagen.

However, urban issues remain on the fringes of the negotiations. Several elements restrict the emergence and recognition of urban agglomerations, both as a subject in the negotiations and especially as a new actor in climate change: the negotiations aim for a multilateral agreement which commits States, first and foremost, under international law. This does not preclude the integration of the sub-national levels, but the UNFCCC still bears the stamp of Rio, which confirmed State sovereignty in the management of sustainable development. Indeed, the COP15 talks are taking place within a well-defined framework, the UNFCCC on the one hand and the Bali Action Plan on the other, neither of which makes any mention of cities. Finally, due to the difficulties in progressing on the key points of a post-Kyoto agreement, it is not easy to put new issues on the table, however relevant they may be. The aim of the local authorities was summed up during the last meeting of the C40, in Seoul (18-21 May 2009), by the phrase “Engage, empower and resource”, which is pinning its hopes on precise and quantified commitments with a fixed deadline, greater competence for local authorities so that they truly have the means to act, and the release of substantial financial resources.

As Ronan Dantec (Vice-President of Nantes Métropole) said on 7 December 2009 in his intervention during the opening session of the Ad-Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention (AWG-LCA), for two years “the main local and regional government networks have raised their voices to express the role played by local authorities in the fight against climate change. (…)No country will ever meet its own targets, which we hope to be ambitious, without the commitment of the local level”.

Although many local representatives from all over the world and several networks of local authorities are present at COP15 (Energie-Cités, Climate Alliance, Metropolis, Eurocities, WMCCC, etc.), ICLEI is undoubtedly the most visible and the most active. Situated in Hall C of the Bella Center, which houses the delegation secretariats, the ICLEI offices (which are between the delegations of France and Papua New Guinea) enable it to continuously organise side events, but particularly provide it with proximity that is conducive to its lobbying activities. This access to the delegations especially takes the form of in camera meetings between negotiators and their local representatives. During these informal meetings, ICLEI not only provides a necessary place for dialogue to remove the obstacles to understanding and appreciating the challenges, but also presents the demands of the local representatives, this time supported by an international community.

For Copenhagen, the networks of local authorities have a dual objective: improving communications between local representatives and governments on the one hand and, on the other, obtaining references to the key role of cities and regions in the texts that are adopted during COP15. This international recognition must be understood as a stage in mobilising the local and sub-national levels, while respecting the prerogatives of national governments, in other words finding a new equilibrium for multi-level governance and boosting the negotiating power of sub-national authorities.

The first objective – improving recognition and understanding of the role that cities can and want to play in the fight against climate change – seems to have been achieved. The second objective – the quest for “wording” – has been the subject of intense activity since COP13 in Bali in 2007, and more particularly in 2009. Many developed and developing countries have recognised the importance of the role of the sub-national levels and have backed official submissions integrating the partnerships needed between all levels of government. This resulted in almost 100 references in the shared vision, mitigation and adaptation chapters. Unfortunately, most of these amendments had disappeared in the texts presented at the end of the Barcelona Conference, and the local representatives must now resume the mission. The task has been complicated during this first week by the multiplicity of texts and therefore the difficulty of knowing which one to work on, and also by the toughening of negotiations focusing on the heart of a future international agreement and closing the door to any new subjects.

Will the arrival of the mayors from the major cities of the world during the Copenhagen Climate Summit for Mayors (15 and 16 December), alongside the arrival of ministers and heads of government, provide the political weight needed to gain this international recognition?