The Rise and Fall of the Global Climate Polity

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).

Governing the Climate New Approaches to Rationality, Power and Politics edited by Johannes Stripple and Harriet Bulkeley, 2014

2016

Attention in the literature on global climate politics has recently turned from a focus on intergovernmental negotiations to conceptualizing climate governance ‘beyond’ or ‘outside’ the UN regime. However, this literature differs on three key aspects: the underlying research paradigms, what is identified as the heart of the problem, and proposed solutions. One group of scholars calls for an attention shift from the ‘tip of the iceberg’ of climate governance to its much larger ‘hidden parts,’ conceptualized through notions such as the ‘climate change regime complex,’ a ‘fragmented climate governance architecture,’ and ‘transnational climate governance.’ A second set of authors points to the ‘elephant in the room,’ namely underlying power structures and material configurations in the international system that block effective responses to the climate crisis. A third group has argued that instead of looking at the individual ‘trees’ of climate negotiations, research should focus on the ‘forest’ of climate governance, made up of framings, norms, and emerging ‘climate governmentalities.’ The article proposes the concept of a ‘schism of reality’ as a means to overcome this fragmentation of the literature. This notion offers a new way of understanding interactions between the climate regime and its wider environment by focusing on discrepancies and contradictions. It accommodates different theoretical perspectives and provides common ground for future research: on how paradoxes and contradictions are dealt with in climate governance; how they can be overcome; how current developments in climate governance reduce the schism; and where and why aspects of the schism persist.

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.

Global Environmental Politics, 2009

and the editors and anonymous reviewers for Global Environmental Politics for insightful comments on earlier drafts of this manuscript. 1. By NNSAs we mean all actors operating at local, regional, national and international levels that are not nation-states. They include, for example, cities, corporations and offset organizations.

Review of International Studies, 2006

Environmental Politics, 2021

How do states respond to the challenge of climate governance? The Paris Agreement has led to heightened interest in domestic climate policies, but attention to underlying national climate institutional architectures has lagged behind. This literature gap deserves to be addressed, because climate change brings considerable governance challenges. Drawing on a collection of country studies, this paper outlines a framework to explain the path-dependent emergence of climate institutions, based on the interplay of national political institutions, international drivers, and bureaucratic structures. The resultant institutional forms suggest four varieties of climate governance, based on the extent of political polarisation and the narrative around climate politics in the country. The functioning of existing climate institutions indicates they have so far played a modest role in addressing climate governance challenges, but also illustrates their importance in structuring climate politics and outcomes, suggesting a substantial agenda for future research.

and Eva Lövbrand, Linköping University, Sweden 'A breathtaking review which covers the major approaches and actors in the governance of climate change this carefully edited book includes essays from dozens of scholars who are shaping our understanding of responses to the real and existential risks of a warming world. The book is especially strong in its discussion of how critical social theory can help us understand the politics of climate change, in its histories of climate policy, and in the multiple perspectives it provides on the international climate regime across sectors, institutions, countries and scales. I was impressed by the diversity of authors, including the number of women contributors, and by the efforts to connect research to political action.' -Diana Liverman, University of Arizona, US 'Bäckstrand and Lövbrand have crafted a remarkable volume, gathering over fifty cutting-edge scholars engaging every aspect of climate governance -what it has been, what it is, and what it could and should be. This is truly a one-stop shop for grasping the diversity of research on climate governance. It will engage students exploring the field, scholars seeking to understand the state of the art, and practitioners looking to make sense of the challenges of responding to this most crucial of global issues.' -Matthew Hoffman, University of Toronto, Canada 'As the ambit of climate governance has expanded out from the UN to encompass myriad actors at multiple levels, so too has the challenge of understanding the whole. This comprehensive and expertly edited Handbook provides the alpha and omega of climate governance scholarship. I confidently predict that it will become the standard reference for years to come.' -Andy Jordan, University of East Anglia, UK 'In a field already densely populated with handbooks, the Research Handbook on Climate Governance offers a fresh approach to the burgeoning field of climate governance. Drawing on an impressive list of world-leading scholars, Bäckstrand and Lövbrand have masterfully fashioned a magnificent tour d'horizon of a wide range of climate-related topics, from the normative dimensions of climate governance to its concrete modes of operation and technological underpinnings. This landmark compendium is an indispensable resource for scholars, students and practitioners engaged in climate governance around the world.' -Philipp Pattberg, VU University Amsterdam, the Netherlands 'Bäckstrand and Lövbrand have expertly assembled a cutting-edge collection of essays that look critically at the changing landscape of climate governance in the "post-Copenhagen era". Moving beyond the typical handbook, the collection provides a rich offering of both theoretical and empirical reflections to help students and researchers alike think creatively about governance needs and opportunities in the face of this wicked problem. The book is both an excellent teaching tool and a source of creative inspiration for future climate change research.' -Sikina Jinnah, American University, US

This article challenges the assumption that the boundaries of state versus non-state and public versus private can readily be drawn. It argues that the roles of actors -as state or non-state -and the forms of authority -public or private -are not pregiven but are forged through the process of governing. Drawing on neo-Gramscian and governmentality perspectives, it suggests that a more dynamic account of the state can offer a more nuanced means of analysing the process of governing global environmental affairs. In order to understand this process and the outcomes of governing climate change, we argue that analysis should focus on the hegemonic projects and programmes through which the objects and subjects of governing are constituted and contested, and through which the form and nature of the state and authority are accomplished. We suggest that this is a process achieved and held in place through 'forging alignment' between diverse social and material entities in order to achieve the 'right disposition of things' through which the will to govern climate change can be realized . We illustrate this argument by examining the governing of climate change in two global cities, London and Los Angeles.