The shifting role of cities in the global climate change regime: From Paris to Pittsburgh and back?

In recent years cities have asserted themselves as relevant actors in the global climate change regime. International law practice and scholarship has so far only partly embraced this development. The self‐asserting move of cities on the global level has been accompanied by a rhetoric according to which States would have failed to live up to their responsibilities with respect to the fight against climate change. Instead, cities would be well‐positioned to fill this governance gap, in particular through global networks such as ICLEI and C40. This contribution discusses how this narrative is affected by the entry into force of the Paris Agreement on climate change. This was seen as a milestone for the global climate change regime. The Paris Agreement and the decision adopting it are also evidence for a cautious embrace of the importance of cities and other subnational authorities in this field. Yet, new questions arise after the announcement by the United States of their intent to withdraw from the Paris Agreement. This has generated more attention than ever for what cities and other subnational authorities can do in this field. At the same time, the struggle between the US federal executive and US cities is emblematic for a wider debate on the future of the international (legal) order: how will the balance between States as central actors of the international system on the one hand and an increasingly assertive league of cities and subnational authorities be struck?