IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/ieaple/v19y2019i1d10.1007_s10784-018-9425-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The global stocktake: design lessons for a new review and ambition mechanism in the international climate regime

Author

Listed:
  • Manjana Milkoreit

    (Purdue University)

  • Kate Haapala

    (Purdue University)

Abstract

The pledge-and-review architecture of the Paris Agreement on Climate Change has been praised as a new model of global environmental governance. Instead of internationally agreed-upon emission reduction targets, the agreement relies on countries’ repeated, voluntary pledges and actions. A key mechanism for monitoring progress toward shared global goals, putting pressure on countries to live up to their promises, and increasing ambition over time is the global stocktake. The stocktake’s twin-purposes to act simultaneously as a review and ambition mechanism render it a global governance innovation. Absent a clear institutional precedent, the global stocktake presents a design challenge for the climate negotiation community. This paper develops a number of lessons for designing the stocktaking process based on a review of relevant scholarship and an analysis of the 2013–2015 Periodic Review as a limited precedent within the climate regime. While we cannot predict what will make the stocktake successful, these design principles could increase the chances for its effectiveness. These lessons offer potential guidance for decision-makers with implications for the future effectiveness of the Paris Agreement.

Suggested Citation

  • Manjana Milkoreit & Kate Haapala, 2019. "The global stocktake: design lessons for a new review and ambition mechanism in the international climate regime," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 89-106, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:ieaple:v:19:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1007_s10784-018-9425-x
    DOI: 10.1007/s10784-018-9425-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10784-018-9425-x
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10784-018-9425-x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Steinar Andresen & Ellen Hey, 2005. "The Effectiveness and Legitimacy of International Environmental Institutions," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 5(3), pages 211-226, September.
    2. Biermann, Frank & Gupta, Aarti, 2011. "Accountability and legitimacy in earth system governance: A research framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 1856-1864, September.
    3. Wendt, Alexander, 1994. "Collective Identity Formation and the International State," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 88(2), pages 384-396, June.
    4. Sam Laird, 1999. "The WTO’s Trade Policy Review Mechanism – From Through the Looking Glass," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(6), pages 741-764, August.
    5. Oran R. Young, 2001. "Inferences and Indices: Evaluating the Effectiveness of International Environmental Regimes," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 1(1), pages 99-121, February.
    6. Teresa Kramarz & Susan Park, 2016. "Accountability in Global Environmental Governance: A Meaningful Tool for Action?," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 16(2), pages 1-21, May.
    7. Biermann, Frank & Gupta, Aarti, 2011. "Accountability and legitimacy: An analytical challenge for earth system governance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 1854-1855, September.
    8. Scott Barrett & Robert Stavins, 2003. "Increasing Participation and Compliance in International Climate Change Agreements," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 3(4), pages 349-376, December.
    9. Carl-Friedrich Schleussner & Joeri Rogelj & Michiel Schaeffer & Tabea Lissner & Rachel Licker & Erich M. Fischer & Reto Knutti & Anders Levermann & Katja Frieler & William Hare, 2016. "Science and policy characteristics of the Paris Agreement temperature goal," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(9), pages 827-835, September.
    10. Michael Mason, 2008. "The Governance of Transnational Environmental Harm: Addressing New Modes of Accountability/Responsibility," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 8(3), pages 8-24, August.
    11. Joanna Depledge, 2006. "The Opposite of Learning: Ossification in the Climate Change Regime," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 6(1), pages 1-22, February.
    12. Brianna Craft & Susannah Fisher, 2018. "Measuring the adaptation goal in the global stocktake of the Paris Agreement," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(9), pages 1203-1209, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Agni Kalfagianni & Oran R. Young, 2022. "The politics of multilateral environmental agreements lessons from 20 years of INEA," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 245-262, June.
    2. Maximilian S. T. Wanner, 0. "The effectiveness of soft law in international environmental regimes: participation and compliance in the Hyogo Framework for Action," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-20.
    3. Maximilian S. T. Wanner, 2021. "The effectiveness of soft law in international environmental regimes: participation and compliance in the Hyogo Framework for Action," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 113-132, March.
    4. Marco Schletz & Laura A. Franke & Søren Salomo, 2020. "Blockchain Application for the Paris Agreement Carbon Market Mechanism—A Decision Framework and Architecture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-17, June.
    5. Anne J. Sietsma & Rick W. Groenendijk & Robbert Biesbroek, 2023. "Progress on climate action: a multilingual machine learning analysis of the global stocktake," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 176(12), pages 1-12, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Duncan Weaver, 2018. "The Aarhus convention and process cosmopolitanism," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 199-213, April.
    2. Pickering, Jonathan & Jotzo, Frank & Wood, Peter J., 2015. "Splitting the difference: can limited coordination achieve a fair distribution of the global climate financing effort?," Working Papers 249508, Australian National University, Centre for Climate Economics & Policy.
    3. Michelle Scobie, 2018. "Accountability in climate change governance and Caribbean SIDS," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 769-787, April.
    4. Philipp Pattberg & Cille Kaiser & Oscar Widerberg & Johannes Stripple, 2022. "20 Years of global climate change governance research: taking stock and moving forward," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 295-315, June.
    5. Tareq K. Al-Awad & Motasem N. Saidan & Brian J. Gareau, 2018. "Halon management and ozone-depleting substances control in Jordan," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 391-408, June.
    6. Park, Mi Sun & Lee, Hyowon, 2019. "Accountability and reciprocal interests of bilateral forest cooperation under the global forest regime," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 32-44.
    7. Catacora-Vargas, Georgina & Tambutti, Marcia & Alvarado, Víctor & Rankovic, Aleksandar, 2022. "Governance approaches and practices in Latin America and the Caribbean for transformative change for biodiversity," Documentos de Proyectos 48542, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    8. Nasiritousi, Naghmeh & Hjerpe, Mattias & Buhr, Katarina, 2014. "Pluralising climate change solutions? Views held and voiced by participants at the international climate change negotiations," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 177-184.
    9. Schouten, Greetje & Leroy, Pieter & Glasbergen, Pieter, 2012. "On the deliberative capacity of private multi-stakeholder governance: The Roundtables on Responsible Soy and Sustainable Palm Oil," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 42-50.
    10. Teresa Kramarz & Susan Park, 2016. "Accountability in Global Environmental Governance: A Meaningful Tool for Action?," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 16(2), pages 1-21, May.
    11. Marin-Burgos, Victoria & Clancy, Joy S. & Lovett, Jon C., 2015. "Contesting legitimacy of voluntary sustainability certification schemes: Valuation languages and power asymmetries in the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil in Colombia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 303-313.
    12. Cathrin Zengerling, 2019. "Governing the City of Flows: How Urban Metabolism Approaches May Strengthen Accountability in Strategic Planning," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 4(1), pages 187-199.
    13. Schouten, Greetje & Bitzer, Verena, 2015. "The emergence of Southern standards in agricultural value chains: A new trend in sustainability governance?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 175-184.
    14. van Oosten, Cora & Runhaar, Hens & Arts, Bas, 2021. "Capable to govern landscape restoration? Exploring landscape governance capabilities, based on literature and stakeholder perceptions," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    15. Klusáček, Petr & Alexandrescu, Filip & Osman, Robert & Malý, Jiří & Kunc, Josef & Dvořák, Petr & Frantál, Bohumil & Havlíček, Marek & Krejčí, Tomáš & Martinát, Stanislav & Skokanová, Hana & Trojan, Ja, 2018. "Good governance as a strategic choice in brownfield regeneration: Regional dynamics from the Czech Republic," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 29-39.
    16. Adelaide Glover & Heike Schroeder, 2017. "Legitimacy in REDD+ governance in Indonesia," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 17(5), pages 695-708, October.
    17. Röckmann, Christine & van Leeuwen, Judith & Goldsborough, David & Kraan, Marloes & Piet, Gerjan, 2015. "The interaction triangle as a tool for understanding stakeholder interactions in marine ecosystem based management," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 155-162.
    18. Karlijn Muiderman & Aarti Gupta & Joost Vervoort & Frank Biermann, 2020. "Four approaches to anticipatory climate governance: Different conceptions of the future and implications for the present," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(6), November.
    19. Tobias Böhmelt & Gabriele Spilker, 2016. "The interaction of international institutions from a social network perspective," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 67-89, February.
    20. Craik, Neil & Gardner, Holly & McCarthy, Daniel, 2017. "Indigenous – corporate private governance and legitimacy: Lessons learned from impact and benefit agreements," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 379-388.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:ieaple:v:19:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1007_s10784-018-9425-x. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.