Panel obywatelski jako narzędzie kształtowania polityki klimatycznej miasta: przykład II Łódzkiego Panelu Obywatelskiego

In the IPCC (2021) report, it was indicated that the changes that have already occurred in the environment cannot be reversed, but it is possible to halt the increase in temperature and prevent a global-scale climate catastrophe. The condition for this is the implementation of solutions and actions aimed at achieving emission neutrality at the local level (cities). In light of the above, it is necessary to ask how to define and design local urban climate policy and what tools to use to both reduce the emissions of cities and increase their resilience and adaptation to the changes we are already experiencing. This article aims to define the role of the Citizens' Assembly (CA) as a tool for shaping urban climate policy and stimulating mitigation and adaptation actions to climate change. The literature research was conducted from the perspective of sociology, economics, and environmental protection. The empirical research concerns the city of Łódź and is based on surveys conducted during the 2nd Łódź Citizens' Assembly (2nd ŁCA) titled "How to reduce harmful greenhouse gas emissions in Łódź by 55 per cent by 2030?" as well as a focused group interview with panellists, conducted almost a year after the start of the 2nd ŁCA. The findings indicate that the CA can be an important tool in shaping urban climate policy, as evidenced by the developed recommendations that present a wide spectrum of solutions needed for the residents of Łódź and the city itself. Participants of 2nd ŁCA emphasized the significance of the educational component, highlighting the need for reliable, verified knowledge supported by examples, which is still lacking or incomplete, as well as the importance of direct contacts and discussions with representatives of the city council, social organizations, and others on the subject of city governance. They viewed the CA as a place to express their own opinions, spend quality time, and engage in interesting conversations. Nevertheless, they stressed the importance of the discussions held and the recommendations developed, making it clear that this is not just participation for the sake of participation (Miessen, 2013).