From shared challenges to adaptive cities: Reflections from the UCLG World Congress

UCL IIPP Blog · 9 hrs ago · 5 views

By Maria Nieto and Harry BaigentSource: UnsplashLast month, members of the Public Sector Capabilities Index team travelled to Tangier, Morocco, to join local and regional leaders from around the world at the UCLG World Congress and World Summit of Local and Regional Leaders.The Congress brought together city leaders, civil society, international organisations, and other partners to discuss some of the most pressing issues facing cities today. Across conversations on climate action, equality, care, inclusive public services, paradiplomacy, and closing gender gaps in leadership, one message came through clearly: city governments are increasingly being asked to engage with challenges that are complex, interconnected, and constantly evolving.These challenges may manifest differently from one city to another. Cities have different resources, responsibilities, political systems, and social and economic contexts. But many of the issues discussed in Tangier do not sit only within administrative or geographical borders. Climate change does not stop at a municipal boundary. Economic and social inequalities are shaped by forces operating across different levels of government. Migration, public health, and technological change require cities to respond to developments that they do not fully control.For us, this raised a question at the heart of the Public Sector Capabilities Index: what enables a city government to respond as its environment changes?Complex challenges require more than existing resourcesCities need resources, skills, institutions, and legal authority to deliver for their residents. The conditions in which city governments operate matter greatly. As we have explored through our work on structural capacity, these conditions can enable or constrain what a city government is able to do.When circumstances change, city governments may need to identify emerging risks, reconsider existing priorities, work with new partners, reorganise resources, or test different approaches. The Index refers to these problem-solving abilities as dynamic capabilities: the abilities that enable city governments to adapt their focus, resources, processes, and teams to respond to existing challenges and emerging vulnerabilities.The range of priorities discussed at the Congress illustrated why these capabilities matter. Responding to climate change requires cities to anticipate changing risks and incorporate new information into decisions. Tackling inequality may require governments to reconsider priorities and coordinate across policy areas. Building more inclusive systems of care can require new ways of working with communities. Closing gender gaps in leadership requires institutions to learn from existing barriers and change established practices.There is no organisational model or policy intervention that can address all these challenges. What cities need is the ability to continuously understand, adapt, and act.Coalitions are part of a city’s problem-solving capacityOne of the strongest reflections we took from Tangier was the importance of coalitions.The Congress itself demonstrated this. City leaders from around the world came together not only with other governments, but with civil society and international partners to exchange experiences and shape shared agendas. The inclusion of civil society is particularly important. Governments rarely hold all the information, expertise, resources, or trust needed to understand and address complex public problems alone.This connects directly with one of the five dynamic capabilities we assess through the Public Sector Capabilities Index: building coalitions.For the Index, building coalitions is not simply about whether a city has partnerships. We are interested in how city governments deliberately build and cultivate relationships with external stakeholders, and whether they can mobilise the resources, knowledge, and expertise of others to solve problems and achieve shared goals.This distinction matters. A long list of partners does not necessarily mean that a government can act collectively. The question is whether relationships can be translated into action and impact, whether different resources can be brought together to address gaps, and whether coalitions can evolve as strategic needs change.Spaces such as the UCLG World Congress can play an important role in this process. They create opportunities for city leaders to encounter different approaches, build relationships, and see how other governments are responding to similar challenges. But the value of these exchanges ultimately depends on what happens afterwards: how new knowledge is interpreted, how relationships are mobilised, and whether governments can translate ideas into their own institutional context.Resilience and dynamic capabilities: related, but not the sameResilience was another recurring idea in our reflections from Tangier. Cities are increasingly expected to withstand shocks, respond to crises, and continue delivering essential services in uncertain environments.This has much in common with dynamic capabilities, but the concepts are not identical.Resilience often focuses on a city’s ability to absorb, recover from, or adapt to shocks and stresses. Dynamic capabilities focus more specifically on the processes through which an organisation changes: how a city government identifies shifts in its environment, adjusts priorities, builds coalitions, transforms resources, and embeds experimentation and learning.Rather than starting with the shock or disruption, we look inside government: how are changes identified? How are priorities reconsidered? Can resources and teams be reorganised? And does learning from one response shape the next?The distinction is particularly important because adaptation does not only happen during crises. A city government should not need to wait for a major shock before reconsidering its priorities or reorganising its resources. Our assessment of dynamic capabilities therefore looks at whether adaptation is reactive and episodic or increasingly proactive, structured, and embedded in how government works.In this sense, dynamic capabilities may be one part of understanding how governments build and sustain resilience over time.Different cities, a shared need to adaptPerhaps the most striking feature of the UCLG World Congress was the diversity of the cities and leaders in the room.Our work on the Index starts from the recognition that city governments operate within very different structural conditions. Legal and institutional arrangements, fiscal autonomy, state capacity, population characteristics, and wider socio-economic conditions shape the opportunities and constraints governments face. Structural capacity can define the “opportunity space” within which city governments develop and deploy their dynamic capabilities.This means we should be cautious about assuming that a practice that works in one city can simply be transferred to another. Different structural configurations can require different strategies and different kinds of capabilities.Yet conversations in Tangier also highlighted something shared between cities.Whether discussing climate justice, equality, care, inclusive public services, or cities’ growing role in international affairs, city governments are navigating changing environments and increasingly complex demands. Their starting points differ. Their resources differ. The specific solutions they pursue could differ.But the need to understand change, make strategic choices, work across organisational boundaries, reconfigure resources, and learn is common among them.Cities want to improve, but don’t always know howIn the Congress, we introduced the Index to practitioners and city leaders who were very keen to hear how they could learn from academic research. We presented the motivations for our work and how we translate economic theory into actionable insights for cities.Our presentation resonated with so many cities that understand the increasing scale of the challenges they face. They understood the themes we presented and realised that they need evidence-based advice on how to improve their capabilities.Conversations around organisation management and capabilities so often become vague and platitudinous, so our Index was met very enthusiastically by everyone we spoke to.City leaders told us that they need to improve their capabilities but it is currently far too difficult to understand and learn from comparable cities facing similar challenges. The Index does just that: by clustering cities, we can understand what improvement could actually look like in a local context, rather than giving generic advice.Understanding how cities adaptThrough the Index, we are developing an approach to assess five dynamic capabilities in city government: cultivating strategic awareness, adapting priorities, building coalitions, transforming resources, and embedding experimentation.Our aim is not to identify a single model of the “best” city government. Instead, we want to help cities better understand their own problem-solving abilities: where adaptive practices are already embedded, where they may depend on individual champions or ad hoc responses, and where there may be opportunities to strengthen the routines that support adaptation over time.The UCLG World Congress was an important reminder of why this work matters.The challenges cities are taking on are ambitious, interconnected, and constantly changing. Spaces that bring city leaders, civil society, and partners together are essential for sharing ideas and building collective agendas. But responding to these challenges also requires governments to develop the internal abilities to turn awareness into decisions, partnerships into action, and learning into sustained change.From shared challenges to adaptive cities: Reflections from the UCLG World Congress was originally published in UCL IIPP Blog on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

By Maria Nieto and Harry Baigent

Last month, members of the Public Sector Capabilities Index team travelled to Tangier, Morocco, to join local and regional leaders from around the world at the UCLG World Congress and World Summit of Local and Regional Leaders.

The Congress brought together city leaders, civil society, international organisations, and other partners to discuss some of the most pressing issues facing cities today. Across conversations on climate action, equality, care, inclusive public services, paradiplomacy, and closing gender gaps in leadership, one message came through clearly: city governments are increasingly being asked to engage with challenges that are complex, interconnected, and constantly evolving.

These challenges may manifest differently from one city to another. Cities have different resources, responsibilities, political systems, and social and economic contexts. But many of the issues discussed in Tangier do not sit only within administrative or geographical borders. Climate change does not stop at a municipal boundary. Economic and social inequalities are shaped by forces operating across different levels of government. Migration, public health, and technological change require cities to respond to developments that they do not fully control.

For us, this raised a question at the heart of the Public Sector Capabilities Index: what enables a city government to respond as its environment changes?

Complex challenges require more than existing resources

Cities need resources, skills, institutions, and legal authority to deliver for their residents. The conditions in which city governments operate matter greatly. As we have explored through our work on structural capacity, these conditions can enable or constrain what a city government is able to do.

When circumstances change, city governments may need to identify emerging risks, reconsider existing priorities, work with new partners, reorganise resources, or test different approaches. The Index refers to these problem-solving abilities as dynamic capabilities: the abilities that enable city governments to adapt their focus, resources, processes, and teams to respond to existing challenges and emerging vulnerabilities.

The range of priorities discussed at the Congress illustrated why these capabilities matter. Responding to climate change requires cities to anticipate changing risks and incorporate new information into decisions. Tackling inequality may require governments to reconsider priorities and coordinate across policy areas. Building more inclusive systems of care can require new ways of working with communities. Closing gender gaps in leadership requires institutions to learn from existing barriers and change established practices.

There is no organisational model or policy intervention that can address all these challenges. What cities need is the ability to continuously understand, adapt, and act.

Coalitions are part of a city’s problem-solving capacity

One of the strongest reflections we took from Tangier was the importance of coalitions.

The Congress itself demonstrated this. City leaders from around the world came together not only with other governments, but with civil society and international partners to exchange experiences and shape shared agendas. The inclusion of civil society is particularly important. Governments rarely hold all the information, expertise, resources, or trust needed to understand and address complex public problems alone.

This connects directly with one of the five dynamic capabilities we assess through the Public Sector Capabilities Index: building coalitions.

For the Index, building coalitions is not simply about whether a city has partnerships. We are interested in how city governments deliberately build and cultivate relationships with external stakeholders, and whether they can mobilise the resources, knowledge, and expertise of others to solve problems and achieve shared goals.

This distinction matters. A long list of partners does not necessarily mean that a government can act collectively. The question is whether relationships can be translated into action and impact, whether different resources can be brought together to address gaps, and whether coalitions can evolve as strategic needs change.

Spaces such as the UCLG World Congress can play an important role in this process. They create opportunities for city leaders to encounter different approaches, build relationships, and see how other governments are responding to similar challenges. But the value of these exchanges ultimately depends on what happens afterwards: how new knowledge is interpreted, how relationships are mobilised, and whether governments can translate ideas into their own institutional context.

Resilience and dynamic capabilities: related, but not the same

Resilience was another recurring idea in our reflections from Tangier. Cities are increasingly expected to withstand shocks, respond to crises, and continue delivering essential services in uncertain environments.

This has much in common with dynamic capabilities, but the concepts are not identical.

Resilience often focuses on a city’s ability to absorb, recover from, or adapt to shocks and stresses. Dynamic capabilities focus more specifically on the processes through which an organisation changes: how a city government identifies shifts in its environment, adjusts priorities, builds coalitions, transforms resources, and embeds experimentation and learning.

Rather than starting with the shock or disruption, we look inside government: how are changes identified? How are priorities reconsidered? Can resources and teams be reorganised? And does learning from one response shape the next?

The distinction is particularly important because adaptation does not only happen during crises. A city government should not need to wait for a major shock before reconsidering its priorities or reorganising its resources. Our assessment of dynamic capabilities therefore looks at whether adaptation is reactive and episodic or increasingly proactive, structured, and embedded in how government works.

In this sense, dynamic capabilities may be one part of understanding how governments build and sustain resilience over time.

Different cities, a shared need to adapt

Perhaps the most striking feature of the UCLG World Congress was the diversity of the cities and leaders in the room.

Our work on the Index starts from the recognition that city governments operate within very different structural conditions. Legal and institutional arrangements, fiscal autonomy, state capacity, population characteristics, and wider socio-economic conditions shape the opportunities and constraints governments face. Structural capacity can define the “opportunity space” within which city governments develop and deploy their dynamic capabilities.

This means we should be cautious about assuming that a practice that works in one city can simply be transferred to another. Different structural configurations can require different strategies and different kinds of capabilities.

Yet conversations in Tangier also highlighted something shared between cities.

Whether discussing climate justice, equality, care, inclusive public services, or cities’ growing role in international affairs, city governments are navigating changing environments and increasingly complex demands. Their starting points differ. Their resources differ. The specific solutions they pursue could differ.

But the need to understand change, make strategic choices, work across organisational boundaries, reconfigure resources, and learn is common among them.

Cities want to improve, but don’t always know how

In the Congress, we introduced the Index to practitioners and city leaders who were very keen to hear how they could learn from academic research. We presented the motivations for our work and how we translate economic theory into actionable insights for cities.

Our presentation resonated with so many cities that understand the increasing scale of the challenges they face. They understood the themes we presented and realised that they need evidence-based advice on how to improve their capabilities.

Conversations around organisation management and capabilities so often become vague and platitudinous, so our Index was met very enthusiastically by everyone we spoke to.

City leaders told us that they need to improve their capabilities but it is currently far too difficult to understand and learn from comparable cities facing similar challenges. The Index does just that: by clustering cities, we can understand what improvement could actually look like in a local context, rather than giving generic advice.

Understanding how cities adapt

Through the Index, we are developing an approach to assess five dynamic capabilities in city government: cultivating strategic awareness, adapting priorities, building coalitions, transforming resources, and embedding experimentation.

Our aim is not to identify a single model of the “best” city government. Instead, we want to help cities better understand their own problem-solving abilities: where adaptive practices are already embedded, where they may depend on individual champions or ad hoc responses, and where there may be opportunities to strengthen the routines that support adaptation over time.

The UCLG World Congress was an important reminder of why this work matters.

The challenges cities are taking on are ambitious, interconnected, and constantly changing. Spaces that bring city leaders, civil society, and partners together are essential for sharing ideas and building collective agendas. But responding to these challenges also requires governments to develop the internal abilities to turn awareness into decisions, partnerships into action, and learning into sustained change.

---

From shared challenges to adaptive cities: Reflections from the UCLG World Congress was originally published in UCL IIPP Blog on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.