IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v6y2014i2p794-811d33095.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Climate Change Politics through a Global Pledge-and-Review Regime: Positions among Negotiators and Stakeholders

Author

Listed:
  • Katarina Buhr

    (IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute, P.O. Box 210 60, SE-100 31 Stockholm, Sweden
    Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research, Linköping University, SE-601 74 Norrköping, Sweden)

  • Susanna Roth

    (IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute, P.O. Box 210 60, SE-100 31 Stockholm, Sweden
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Peter Stigson

    (IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute, P.O. Box 210 60, SE-100 31 Stockholm, Sweden
    School of Business, Society and Engineering, Mälardalen University, P.O. Box 883, SE-721 23 Västerås, Sweden
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

Abstract

Pledge-and-review is an essential pillar for climate change mitigation up until 2020 under the auspices of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. In this paper, we build on a survey handed out to participants at the Seventeenth Conference of Parties in 2011 to examine to what extent climate negotiators and stakeholders agree with existing critiques towards pledge-and-review. Among the critique examined, we find that the one most agreed with is that the pledges fall short of meeting the 2 degree target, while the one least agreed with is that pledges are voluntary. We also find that respondents from Annex 1 parties are more critical than respondents from Non-Annex 1 parties. Negotiators display strikingly similar responses regardless of where they are from, while there is a remarkable difference between Annex 1 and Non-Annex 1 environmental non-governmental organizations. We build on these results to discuss the legitimacy of pledge-and-review.

Suggested Citation

  • Katarina Buhr & Susanna Roth & Peter Stigson, 2014. "Climate Change Politics through a Global Pledge-and-Review Regime: Positions among Negotiators and Stakeholders," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-18, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:6:y:2014:i:2:p:794-811:d:33095
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/6/2/794/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/6/2/794/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michele M. Betsill & Elisabeth Corell, 2001. "NGO Influence in International Environmental Negotiations: A Framework for Analysis," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 1(4), pages 65-85, November.
    2. Aldy,Joseph E. & Stavins,Robert N. (ed.), 2007. "Architectures for Agreement," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521871631.
    3. Navroz K. Dubash & Lavanya Rajamani, 2010. "Beyond Copenhagen: next steps," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(6), pages 593-599, November.
    4. Peter Heindl & Sebastian Voigt, 2012. "Supply and demand structure for international offset permits under the Copenhagen Pledges," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 343-360, November.
    5. William Hare & Claire Stockwell & Christian Flachsland & Sebastian Oberth�R, 2010. "The architecture of the global climate regime: a top-down perspective," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(6), pages 600-614, November.
    6. Lasse Ringius & Asbjørn Torvanger & Arild Underdal, 2002. "Burden Sharing and Fairness Principles in International Climate Policy," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 1-22, March.
    7. Xinyuan Dai, 2010. "Global regime and national change," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(6), pages 622-637, November.
    8. Lars H. Gulbrandsen & Steinar Andresen, 2004. "NGO Influence in the Implementation of the Kyoto Protocol: Compliance, Flexibility Mechanisms, and Sinks," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 4(4), pages 54-75, November.
    9. Aldy,Joseph E. & Stavins,Robert N. (ed.), 2007. "Architectures for Agreement," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521692175.
    10. Niklas H�hne & Christopher Taylor & Ramzi Elias & Michel Den Elzen & Keywan Riahi & Claudine Chen & Joeri Rogelj & Giacomo Grassi & Fabian Wagner & Kelly Levin & Emanuele Massetti & Zhao Xiusheng, 2012. "National GHG emissions reduction pledges and 2°C: comparison of studies," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(3), pages 356-377, May.
    11. Steve Rayner, 2010. "How to eat an elephant: a bottom-up approach to climate policy," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(6), pages 615-621, November.
    12. Frank Alcock, 2008. "Conflicts and Coalitions Within and Across the ENGO Community," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 8(4), pages 66-91, November.
    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. Svetlana V. Doroshenko & Anna D. Mingaleva, 2020. "Carbon Exchanges: European Experience in Developing the Mechanism of Emission Permit Trading," Finansovyj žhurnal — Financial Journal, Financial Research Institute, Moscow 125375, Russia, issue 4, pages 52-68, August.
    2. Christian Gollier and Jean Tirole, 2015. "Negotiating effective institutions against climate change," Economics of Energy & Environmental Policy, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 2).

    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. Aviel Verbruggen, 2011. "A Turbo Drive for the Global Reduction of Energy-Related CO 2 Emissions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 3(4), pages 1-17, April.
    2. Harro Asselt & Fariborz Zelli, 2014. "Connect the dots: managing the fragmentation of global climate governance," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 16(2), pages 137-155, April.
    3. Kempf, Hubert & Rossignol, Stéphane, 2013. "National politics and international agreements," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 93-105.
    4. Phillip M. Hannam & Vítor V. Vasconcelos & Simon A. Levin & Jorge M. Pacheco, 2017. "Incomplete cooperation and co-benefits: deepening climate cooperation with a proliferation of small agreements," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 144(1), pages 65-79, September.
    5. Richard Stewart & Michael Oppenheimer & Bryce Rudyk, 2013. "A new strategy for global climate protection," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 120(1), pages 1-12, September.
    6. J. Timmons Roberts & Romain Weikmans, 2017. "Postface: fragmentation, failing trust and enduring tensions over what counts as climate finance," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 129-137, February.
    7. Gary D. Libecap, 2013. "Addressing Global Environmental Externalities: Transaction Costs Considerations," NBER Working Papers 19501, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Narasimha Rao, 2014. "International and intranational equity in sharing climate change mitigation burdens," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 129-146, May.
    9. Luke Kemp, 2015. "A climate treaty without the US Congress: Using executive powers to overcome the 'Ratification Straitjacket'," CCEP Working Papers 1513, Centre for Climate & Energy Policy, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    10. Joanna Depledge, 2022. "The “top-down” Kyoto Protocol? Exploring caricature and misrepresentation in literature on global climate change governance," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 673-692, December.
    11. Michael Mehling, 2012. "Alternative Frameworks for International Climate Cooperation: Towards a Systematic Assessment Matrix," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 44538, April.
    12. Kemp, Luke, 2015. "A climate treaty without the US Congress: Using executive powers to overcome the ‘Ratification Straitjacket’," Working Papers 249518, Australian National University, Centre for Climate Economics & Policy.
    13. Joseph E. Aldy & William A. Pizer, 2009. "Issues in Designing U.S. Climate Change Policy," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 3), pages 179-210.
    14. Frankel, Jeffrey A. & Bosetti, Valentina, 2011. "Politically Feasible Emission Target Formulas to Attain 460 ppm CO[subscript 2] Concentrations," Working Paper Series rwp11-016, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    15. Marc N. Conte & Matthew J. Kotchen, 2010. "Explaining The Price Of Voluntary Carbon Offsets," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 1(02), pages 93-111.
    16. Thomas Norman & Heinrich H. Nax, 2011. "Leading the Way: Coalitional Stability in Technological Cooperation & Sequential Climate Policy," Economics Series Working Papers 585, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    17. Seidman, Laurence & Lewis, Kenneth, 2009. "Compensations and contributions under an international carbon treaty," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 341-350, May.
    18. repec:dau:papers:123456789/4521 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Wood, Peter John & Jotzo, Frank, 2011. "Price floors for emissions trading," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 1746-1753, March.
    20. Gilbert E. Metcalf & David Weisbach, 2012. "Linking Policies When Tastes Differ: Global Climate Policy in a Heterogeneous World," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 6(1), pages 110-129.
    21. Flachsland, Christian & Marschinski, Robert & Edenhofer, Ottmar, 2009. "Global trading versus linking: Architectures for international emissions trading," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 1637-1647, May.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:6:y:2014:i:2:p:794-811:d:33095. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.