The monthly Global Local Think Tank review highlights relevant research and policy publications from leading think tanks and research institutes around the world. This month’s edition focuses on active travel, office space conversion to homes,  the impact of major fiscal programmes, digital for public services, fraud and Covid recovery and whistleblowing. We pull out key lessons and findings for local government.

This roundup is normally only available to Global Local subscribers and LGIU members. Find out more about a Global Local subscription or explore our membership options.

American President Joe Biden has introduced large infrastructure programmes, aimed at modernising and decarbonising US infrastructure. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) and the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) together are worth $1.25 trillion across the transportation, energy, water resources and broadband sectors for the next five to 10 years. The European Union (EU) has responded with its own green deal industrial plan: a combination of targets, carbon prices, taxes, subsidies and regulations.

Think tanks and research institutes have been considering the implications for the global economy – and their own countries – of these substantial interventions. The C D Howe Institute warns that battles loom over green subsidies. It claims that many national measures to aid the transition to net-zero emissions may fall foul of trade rules that prohibit both the subsidisation of goods that enter international markets and local content requirements that discriminate against imports. Existing World Trade Organisation (WTO) agreements and region trade agreements do not contain any exemptions for environmental subsidies or net zero policies. Talks are underway to try to get an international ‘stand still’ agreement for carbon reduction measures, in order to support the achievement of international carbon reduction commitments. However, there is a further problem as trade agreements are designed to allow domestic producers rights to challenge subsidised imports, and any moves to curtail these rights would be controversial.

Transportation is a major contributor to global carbon emissions. While electric vehicles are part of the solution, a ‘modal shift’ away from private car use to public transport, walking and cycling can make a big difference. Research from Green Alliance and Cardiff University have developed a ‘modal shift model’ which shows the effects of various combinations of measures to reduce car miles driven by 25%, such as improving public transport or changing speed limits. The model, developed in the UK context, shows the impact on emissions, costs to government and users, and the revenue raised. The modal shift model is available to download from the website.

The Pembina Institute in Canada has highlighted a report containing four papers on the important role that Canadian municipalities currently play in transportation, and how other tiers of government can support that role. The papers propose policies to strengthen the municipal role in transportation in order to alleviate congestion, move goods more efficiently, and promote active transportation and sustainability.

The Young Foundation in the UK has published a discussion paper on Digital solutions: tech-powered responses to 21st century crises. It points to recent examples of tech platforms playing a role in community responses. Examples include WhatsApp neighbourhood groups being used to organise community support during Covid-19 or flooding incidents, and the use of Facebook to match UK homes with refugees from Ukraine. Often these grassroots responses were faster than official channels and although hyperlocal and haphazard in nature, had national impact. The tech-enabled initiatives have different needs for ensuring trust, safety and accountability, but they have proven effective at matching resources, skills and capacity to where it is most needed and provide learning for those planning and managing official responses that seek to match resources to needs.

Gig work and app-based ways of finding it have become core features of advanced industrialised economies. While gig work has a bad press for being insecure and exploitative, some workers value the flexibility it provides. A report from the Brookings Institution describes how local governments are building their own gig work platforms that facilitate community services while giving vulnerable workers an alternative to private gig platforms. This is a two-sided government innovation: the modernisation of public work-finding platforms is coupled with the modernisation of public service delivery. Pacific Gateway in Long Beach, California was the first to develop its gig work app. It now uses the platform to recruit flexible school support staff, events workers, community health teams, responsive at-home childcare, and parks and recreation seasonal positions; and it offers better protections for workers than other gig work. The initiative has achieved critical mass and is benefiting the wider local economy and labour market.

In the wake of Covid-19, many city centres are facing a crisis. Remote working has led to plummeting demand for city centre real estate, especially office space. At the same time, a shortage of homes in many large cities makes housing unaffordable to many residents. In this context, the conversion of vacant office space into housing seems like a ‘no-brainer’ – but two research institutions have published papers explaining why it may not be the neat answer that it seems.

The Brookings Institution has produced a report on Myths about converting offices into housing—and what can really revitalize downtowns, addressing policy makers who regard office-residential conversion as a key strategy for addressing the housing crisis and revitalising downtowns – some of whom argue for public intervention and subsidy for the conversions. The authors argue that office-to-residential conversions can be the right solution in some circumstances but there must a clear public interest in subsidy. It concludes that such schemes are not a panacea, but rather one tool in a much broader toolkit for downtown revitalisation.

As the pandemic recedes, those with a role in – or interest in – accountability and value for money are taking stock of the public funds lost to fraud and corruption around the world. The U4 Anti-corruption Resource Centre has published a study on Corruption during Covid-19: Trends, drivers, and lessons learned for reducing corruption in health emergencies. Between January 2020 and October 2022, corruption infiltrated Covid responses across the world and hampered the efforts. Worldwide trends included petty corruption at the point of service delivery, procurement corruption, embezzlement and mismanagement of funds, state capture, the growth of black markets, the selling of substandard and fake medicines, data manipulation and misuse, and corruption in health workforce governance, recruitment, and management. The report concludes that lessons learned during the pandemic should inform policy responses to ongoing and future health emergencies. Better transparency in decision-making, integrating a gender perspective, strengthening public financial management, investing in data governance, and supporting health workers should be at the heart of all future strategies.

Effective whistleblowing mechanisms increase accountability and trust, and help uncover misconduct and fraud in both the private and public sector. The U4 Anti-corruption Resource Centre has recently published two relevant briefs. The first, Obligations to report corruption: examples of national statutory and non-statutory provisions, discusses the range of global approaches to whistleblowing. Some countries make it a legal obligation, whether on all citizens or only on public officials, whereas others use non-legal methods like codes of conduct in public services. In many cases, legislation requires individuals to report on any type of wrongdoing witnessed, including corruption. The brief contends that the existence of a duty to report cannot replace a proper whistleblowing policy and protective measures. There is a contradiction in the countries that impose a legal obligation but do not provide the necessary protections for whistle-blowers.