Multi-Level Governance in Addressing Climate Change in Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore: Systematic Literature Review


The utilization of multilevel governance (MLG) is a significant factor in effectively addressing the challenges posed by climate change in Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore. The objective of this study is to examine the significance of MLG in mitigating the effects of climate change and its ramifications for policymaking and proficient governance. The present research has identified the importance of intergovernmental collaboration and coordination, along with the active participation of diverse stakeholders such as civil society organizations and the private sector. The investigation employed a Systematic Literature Review approach. Through an analysis of the experiences and practices of these nations, this study elucidates the pivotal elements that facilitate an efficacious response to climate change. Additionally, this study addressed the obstacles and constraints faced during the implementation of the MLG methodology. The results presented herein enhance the comprehension of the function of MLG in mitigating climate change. They also offer valuable perspectives for policymakers and practitioners to formulate effective strategies and policies that foster sustainable development and resilience in the context of climate change in Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore.

Keywords: multi-level governance, climate change, Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore

[1] Letchumanan R. Climate change: Is Southeast Asia up to this challenge? Is there ASEAN policy on climate change? 2010.

[2] Coen D, Kreienkamp J, Pegram T, Bal C. ”Multilevel governance of global climate change: Problems, policies and politics,” 2020.

[3] Iklim DNP. Rencana Aksi Nasional Adaptasi Perubahan Iklim Indonesia, Kerjasama Bappenas, Kementrian Lingkungan Hidup, dan DNPI, 2012.

[4] Ulum MC, Ngindana R. Environmental Governance: Isu Kebijakan dan Tata Kelola Lingkungan Hidup. Universitas Brawijaya Press; 2017.

[5] Schmitter PC. ”Participation in governance arrangements: Is there any reason to expect it will achieve “sustainable and innovative policies in a multi-level context”?” Participatory governance: Political and societal implications. 2002: 51- 69.

[6] Brown HC, Nkem J, Sonwa N, Bele Y, Bele Y. Institutional adaptive capacity and climate change responses in the Congo Basin forests of Cameroon. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change. 2010;15(3):263–282.

[7] Krisnanto W, Suryawati N. Peningkatan Kapasitas Aparatur Pemerintah Daerah dalam Perencanaan Pembangunan (Studi Kasus di lingkungan Pemerintah Kota Probolinggo). Jurnal Ilmiah Universitas Batanghari Jambi. 2019;19(3):481–489.

[8] Pereira JJ, Zain MK. Climate change adaptation in Malaysia. Climate Change Adaptation in Southeast Asia; 2022:103–116.

[9] Hamilton-Hart N. Multilevel (mis) governance of palm oil production. Australian Journal of International Affairs. 2015;69(2):164–184.

[10] Marquardt J, Delina LL, Smits M. Governing Climate Change in Southeast Asia: Critical Perspectives. Routledge;

[11] Jabeen H, Pasa A. Multilevel governance for climate change in Indonesia, 2018.

[12] Zen IS, Al-Amin AQ, Doberstein B. Mainstreaming climate adaptation and mitigation policy: towards multilevel climate governance in Melaka, Malaysia. Urban Climate. 2019;30:100501.

[13] Wal SV. ”Multi-level governance as a cause of lacking institutional capacity in the application of land value capture at large infrastructure projects in Indonesia,”, 2020.

[14] Ibrahim AZ, Alam MM. Climatic changes, government interventions, and paddy production: an empirical study of the Muda irrigation area in Malaysia. International Journal of Agricultural Resources, Governance and Ecology. 2016;12(3):292–304.

[15] Gouldson A, Colenbrander S, Sudmant A, Papargyropoulou EK, Hall S. Cities and climate change mitigation: economic opportunities and governance challenges in Asia. Cities. 2016;54:11–19.

[16] Hwang BG, Tan JS. Green building project management: obstacles and solutions for sustainable development. Sustainable Development (Bradford). 2012;20(5):335– 349.

[17] Akhmouch A, Clavreul D. Stakeholder engagement for inclusive water governance:“ Practicing what we preach” from the OECD Water Governance Initiative. Water. 2016;8(5):204.

[18] 18. Lian KK, Robinson NA. ”Regional environmental governance: examining the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) models,” Global Environmental Governance: Options and opportunities, pp. 101-121.

[19] Schreurs MA. Multi￿level governance and global climate change in East Asia. Asian Economic Policy Review. 2010;5(1):88–105.

[20] Sarzynski A. Public participation, civic capacity, and climate change adaptation in cities. Urban Climate. 2015;14:52–67.

[21] Zeigermann U. Knowledge integration in sustainability governance through sciencebased actor networks. Global Environmental Change. 2021;69:102314.

[22] Khan AS, Ramachandran A, Usha N, Aram IA, Selvam V. Rising sea and threatened mangroves: A case study on stakeholders, engagement in climate change communication, and informal education. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology. 2012;19(4):330–338.

[23] Setzer J, Vanhala LC. Climate change litigation: A review of research on courts and litigants in climate governance. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change. 2019;10(3):e580.

[24] Ge K, Zou S, Lu X, Ke S, Chen D, Liu Z. Dynamic Evolution and the Mechanism behind the Coupling Coordination Relationship between Industrial Integration and Urban Land-Use Efficiency: A Case Study of the Yangtze River Economic Zone in China. Land (Basel). 2022;11(2):261.

[25] Uyarra E, Sörvik J, Midtkandal I. ”Inter-regional collaboration in research and innovation strategies for smart specialization (RIS3),” Seville: Joint Research Centre. 2014;10(09654313.2017):1283391.