The strategic value of contradictions: exploring the practices of climate planning in Bergen, Norway

Figures & data

Table 1. Understanding organisational change – schematic summary of literature discussion.

	Understanding of institutional change	Understanding of agency	Institutional trigger
Exogenous	Driven by environmental changes in legitimacy-granting criteria	In adapting to institutional incentives and constraints	Misalignment of institutional practices with their context
Institutional Entrepreneur	Driven by forms of cultural and organisational entrepreneurship	Driven by agentic actors	Internal actor-based contestation of institutional set-up (norms, priorities, behaviour)
Practice-driven	Driven by everyday, collective organisational work (Praxis)	As an effect of practices, therefore distributed, habitual and embedded in action	Contingent on how contradictions are addressed by organisational actors. Embedded in the ongoing and everyday work of organisational actors.

Table 2. Summary of contradictions and the accomplishments of organisational work to overcome these contradictions.

Analytical “moment”	Analytical focus	Key contradiction	Organisational work accomplished
Mobilisation of knowledge for the Knowledge base (Kunnskapsgrunnlag)	How the Knowledge base shows the variety of knowledges that come together to make climate, and the city visible.	Contradictions emerged from bringing various knowledges together. It was assumed that bringing them together is not creating tensions, and that they are compatible. Contradictions were used to display the breadth of knowledges and work required to reduce emissions.	Legitimising the central goal of carbon emission reductions
Matching goals with actions	How strategic thinking is articulated (through interventions, strategy, vision), and what work does the strategy prepare for.	Contradictions appeared between the ambition of the plan, and the interventions necessary to achieve it. The strategy paints a picture of precision and control through the identification of priority areas to reduce emissions. Contradiction allowed areas requiring further policy focus to be highlighted.	Expanding the range of available actions
Mobilising actors	How consensus is built (through the communication of the plan itself, and the place given to “the public” in its articulation) through novel communication channels and spaces, and getting feedback and ideas from the working groups.	Contradictions emerged between the Climate Agency’s work on climate change, and the goals of other municipal departments. Focusing on contradictory city goals allowed mobilisation of other municipal actors in the work of the agency.	Signalling the climate strategy to different municipal entities and stakeholder groups