Transnational Climate Change Governance (original) (raw)
Related papers
With this paper we present an analysis of sixty transnational governance initiatives and assess the implications for our understanding of the roles of public and private actors, the legitimacy of governance 'beyond' the state, and the North-South dimensions of governing climate change. In the fi rst part of the paper we examine the notion of transnational governance and its applicability in the climate change arena, refl ecting on the history and emergence of transnational governance initiatives in this issue area and key areas of debate. In the second part of the paper we present the fi ndings from the database and its analysis. Focusing on three core issues, the roles of public and private actors in governing transnationally, the functions that such initiatives perform, and the ways in which accountability for governing global environmental issues might be achieved, we suggest that signifi cant distinctions are emerging in the universe of transnational climate governance which may have considerable implications for the governing of global environmental issues. In conclusion, we refl ect on these fi ndings and the subsequent consequences for the governance of climate change.
With this paper we present an analysis of sixty transnational governance initiatives and assess the implications for our understanding of the roles of public and private actors, the legitimacy of governance 'beyond' the state, and the North-South dimensions of governing climate change. In the fi rst part of the paper we examine the notion of transnational governance and its applicability in the climate change arena, refl ecting on the history and emergence of transnational governance initiatives in this issue area and key areas of debate. In the second part of the paper we present the fi ndings from the database and its analysis. Focusing on three core issues, the roles of public and private actors in governing transnationally, the functions that such initiatives perform, and the ways in which accountability for governing global environmental issues might be achieved, we suggest that signifi cant distinctions are emerging in the universe of transnational climate governance which may have considerable implications for the governing of global environmental issues. In conclusion, we refl ect on these fi ndings and the subsequent consequences for the governance of climate change.
The transnational regime complex for climate change
Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 2012
In climate change as in other areas, recent years have produced a "Cambrian explosion" of transnational institutions, standards, financing arrangements and programs. As a result, climate governance has become complex, fragmented and decentralized, operating without central coordination. Most studies of climate governance focus on inter-state institutions. This paper, in contrast, maps a different realm of climate change governance: the diverse array of transnational schemes. The paper analyzes this emerging system in terms of two theoretical frameworks developed to describe, explain and evaluate complex governance arrangements --regime complex theory and polycentric governance theory --revealing fruitful avenues for positive and normative research. The paper concludes by arguing that the benefits of institutional complexity could be increased, and the costs reduced, through non-hierarchical "orchestration" of climate change governance, in which international organizations or other appropriate authorities support and steer transnational schemes that further global public interests. a Thanks for valuable suggestions to Jessica F. Green and two anonymous reviewers.
National Policy and Transnational Governance of Climate Change: Substitutes or Complements?
International Studies Quarterly
Many scholars and policymakers see transnational governance as a substitute for lackluster national and international policies, particularly in the context of intergovernmental gridlock or limited state capacity. The bulk of the literature explains sub-and non-state actors' participation in transnational initiatives as a product of, on the one hand, micro-level incentives and, on the other, diffusion processes that create and spread normative and market-based pressures. We argue that such theoretical perspectives overlook the dynamic relationship between national policies and transnational governance. First, we argue that ambitious national policies positively affect sub-and non-state actors' participation in transnational governance. Second, we posit that domestic institutions condition the effects of micro-level incentives and transnational pressures on participation in transnational governance. We test these claims in the climate regime, using an original dataset that, for the first time, measures cross-national participation in transnational climate initiatives across jurisdictions. The results support our expectations. They therefore suggest that we should understand national policies and transnational governance as complements, rather than competitors, to one another. Finally, by showing how and when national policies affect participation in transnational initiatives, we identify important scope conditions for their significance in addressing climate change.
Strengthening the Transnational Regime Complex for Climate Change †
Transnational Environmental Law, 2013
ABSTRACT Available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2219554\. The inadequacies of the inter-state institutions and negotiating processes central to international climate policy create a pressing need for governance innovation. This article proposes one promising and feasible approach: strengthening the existing transnational regime complex for climate change. Leading organizations could strengthen the regime complex by forging stronger links among institutions, increasing coordination and collaboration, supporting weaker institutions and encouraging the entry of new ones where governance gaps exist. An enhanced regime complex would have a multilevel structure, enabling transnational institutions to bypass recalcitrant national governments by directly engaging sub-state and societal actors at multiple levels of authority and scale. It would also help to manage recalcitrant states by mobilizing advocacy, demonstration effects and other pressures on governments. Regime entrepreneurs, using the strategy of orchestration, could deploy a range of incentives and other tools of influence to enrol, support and steer transnational organizations.
Remapping Global Climate Governance Remapping Global Climate Governance
Abstract The aim of this paper is to provide a first step towards a better theoretical and empirical knowledge of the emerging arena of transnational climate governance. The need for such a re-conceptualization emerges from the increasing relevance of non-state and transnational approaches towards climate change mitigation in a time where the intergovernmental negotiation process experiences substantial stalemate and the classical international arena becomes increasingly fragmented.
Remapping Global Climate Governance. Fragmentation beyond the Public and Private Divide
2007
The aim of this paper is to provide a first step towards a better theoretical and empirical knowledge of the emerging arena of transnational climate governance. The need for such a re-conceptualization emerges from the increasing relevance of non-state and transnational approaches towards climate change mitigation in a time where the intergovernmental negotiation process experiences substantial stalemate and the classical international arena becomes increasingly fragmented. Based on a brief discussion of the increasing trend towards fragmentation of the global climate governance arena (section 1), we conclude that a remapping of climate governance is necessary and needs to take into account different spheres of authority beyond the public and international. Hence, we provide a brief analysis (section 2) of how the public/private divide has been conceptualized in the discipline of political science and International Relations (IR). Subsequently, we analyze the emerging transnational ...
Emergence of polycentric climate governance and its future prospects
Nature Climate Change, 2015
I t is a truism that humanity is struggling to govern climate change. In spite of all the resources invested in the regime centred on the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), emissions continue to rise, dramatically reducing the probability of remaining within 2 °C above pre-industrial temperatures 1. Achieving the emissions reductions that are factored into many low-concentration pathways arguably requires new and much more 'integrated and aggressive' 2 forms of governance (that is, modes and mechanisms to steer society) 3. But where will these new forms originate, how will they diffuse, and what factors will shape their ability to perform as hoped? Most analysts used to assume that the innovative thrust in governance would spring from a comprehensive global climate regime 4. However, even before the failure of the 2009 Copenhagen conference, some international relations scholars had moved on from the idea of a single, monocentric regime to consider multiple, interlocking 'regime complexes' , such as those focusing on trade, energy, and climate 5-9. What is striking about this strand of work is that while it hints at the potential of more pluralistic forms of governing 9 , its scale is still international and its underlying ontology remains essentially top down and state centric. While this is clearly an important and flourishing perspective, there is a growing belief that it is only a partial one, and that the landscape of climate governance has extended beneath the international level 10 through changes initiated by numerous actors from different backgrounds, such as business, local government, and civil society. Armed with less top-down, more governance-centred analytical frameworks, social scientists have started to chart the changing landscape of climate governance, now increasingly populated by novel forms, including emissions trading systems 11 , offsetting standards, emissions registries, carbon-labelling schemes, and collaborations between cities 4,12. These efforts have spilled back into the UNFCCC negotiations to some degree, with discussions on climate action pre-2020 engaging with non-state actors more deeply (for example, through so-called technical expert meetings and the UNFCCC Secretariat's web portal: Non-State Actor Zone for Climate Action; http://climateaction.unfccc.int).