IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/endesu/v27y2025i6d10.1007_s10668-023-04437-w.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

“IPCC-envy”? Shaping global soil and land governance through science-policy activism

Author

Listed:
  • Matteo Donà

    (University of Gothenburg)

Abstract

Understanding the relationship between science and policy, including the role of actors engaged in facilitating science-policy interplay, is crucial in the study of global environmental governance. In spite of this, theorization of agency in science-policy relations has been limited in the IR field. Concomitantly, limited knowledge exists about the role played in this respect by international bureaucracies. This paper addresses these issues by introducing the concept of science-policy activism. The paper is based on the study of two UN institutions, the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) and the Global Soil Partnership (GSP) of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), which operate in the issue—area of soil and land degradation. Informed by a combination of elite interviews and participant observation, the study investigates the ways in which the UNCCD and GSP secretariats steer the interplay between scientific advice and policymaking. The qualitative analysis reveals that, although both secretariats engage in normative narratives of cooperation, they actively and competitively pursue self-interested agendas. Unearthing the key role of secretariats in comparison with other relevant actors, such as member states and epistemic communities, the study shows that science-policy activism is conducive to “regime conflict,” limiting opportunities for interplay management and ultimately benefiting the interests of international bureaucracies themselves.

Suggested Citation

  • Matteo Donà, 2025. "“IPCC-envy”? Shaping global soil and land governance through science-policy activism," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 27(6), pages 12827-12844, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:endesu:v:27:y:2025:i:6:d:10.1007_s10668-023-04437-w
    DOI: 10.1007/s10668-023-04437-w
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10668-023-04437-w
    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/s10668-023-04437-w?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. Fariborz Zelli & Harro van Asselt, 2013. "Introduction: The Institutional Fragmentation of Global Environmental Governance: Causes, Consequences, and Responses," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 13(3), pages 1-13, August.
    2. Kari De Pryck, 2021. "Intergovernmental Expert Consensus in the Making: The Case of the Summary for Policy Makers of the IPCC 2014 Synthesis Report," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 21(1), pages 108-129, Winter.
    3. Raustiala, Kal & Victor, David G., 2004. "The Regime Complex for Plant Genetic Resources," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 58(2), pages 277-309, April.
    4. Joanna Depledge, 2007. "A Special Relationship: Chairpersons and the Secretariat in the Climate Change Negotiations," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 7(1), pages 45-68, February.
    5. Hannah Hughes & Alice B. M. Vadrot, 2019. "Weighting the World: IPBES and the Struggle over Biocultural Diversity," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 19(2), pages 14-37, May.
    6. Steffen Bauer, 2006. "Does Bureaucracy Really Matter? The Authority of Intergovernmental Treaty Secretariats in Global Environmental Politics," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 6(1), pages 23-49, February.
    7. Haas, Peter M., 1992. "Introduction: epistemic communities and international policy coordination," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(1), pages 1-35, January.
    8. Frank Biermann & Philipp Pattberg & Harro van Asselt & Fariborz Zelli, 2009. "The Fragmentation of Global Governance Architectures: A Framework for Analysis," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 9(4), pages 14-40, November.
    9. Marybeth Long Martello, 2004. "Expert Advice and Desertification Policy: Past Experience and Current Challenges," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 4(3), pages 85-106, August.
    10. Alexandra Conliffe, 2011. "Combating Ineffectiveness: Climate Change Bandwagoning and the UN Convention to Combat Desertification," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 11(3), pages 44-63, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Rakhyun Kim & Brendan Mackey, 2014. "International environmental law as a complex adaptive system," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 5-24, March.
    2. Michelle Betsill & Navroz K. Dubash & Matthew Paterson & Harro van Asselt & Antto Vihma & Harald Winkler, 2015. "Building Productive Links between the UNFCCC and the Broader Global Climate Governance Landscape," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 15(2), pages 1-10, May.
    3. Clara Brandi, 2021. "The Interaction of Private and Public Governance: The Case of Sustainability Standards for Palm Oil," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 33(6), pages 1574-1595, December.
    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. Benjamin Cashore & Jette Steen Knudsen & Jeremy Moon & Hamish van der Ven, 2021. "Private authority and public policy interactions in global context: Governance spheres for problem solving," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(4), pages 1166-1182, October.
    6. Thomas Hickmann & Joshua Philipp Elsässer, 0. "New alliances in global environmental governance: how intergovernmental treaty secretariats interact with non-state actors to address transboundary environmental problems," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-23.
    7. Ingrid J Visseren-Hamakers, 2018. "Integrative governance: The relationships between governance instruments taking center stage," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 36(8), pages 1341-1354, December.
    8. Jonathan Pickering & Carola Betzold & Jakob Skovgaard, 2017. "Special issue: managing fragmentation and complexity in the emerging system of international climate finance," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 1-16, February.
    9. Thomas Gehring & Benjamin Faude, 2014. "A theory of emerging order within institutional complexes: How competition among regulatory international institutions leads to institutional adaptation and division of labor," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 9(4), pages 471-498, December.
    10. Linda Mederake & Barbara Saerbeck & Alexandra Goritz & Helge Jörgens & Mareike Well & Nina Kolleck, 2022. "Cultivated ties and strategic communication: do international environmental secretariats tailor information to increase their bureaucratic reputation?," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 481-506, September.
    11. Barbara Saerbeck & Mareike Well & Helge Jörgens & Alexandra Goritz & Nina Kolleck, 2020. "Brokering Climate Action: The UNFCCC Secretariat Between Parties and Nonparty Stakeholders," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 20(2), pages 105-127, May.
    12. Mairon G. Bastos Lima & Gabrielle Kissinger & Ingrid J. Visseren-Hamakers & Josefina Braña-Varela & Aarti Gupta, 2017. "The Sustainable Development Goals and REDD+: assessing institutional interactions and the pursuit of synergies," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 589-606, August.
    13. Thomas Hickmann & Joshua Philipp Elsässer, 2020. "New alliances in global environmental governance: how intergovernmental treaty secretariats interact with non-state actors to address transboundary environmental problems," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 459-481, September.
    14. Ongolo, Symphorien, 2015. "On the banality of forest governance fragmentation: Exploring ‘‘gecko politics’’ as a bureaucratic behaviour in limited statehood," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 12-20.
    15. Reinsberg,Bernhard Wilfried & Michaelowa,Katharina & Knack,Stephen, 2015. "Which donors, which funds ? the choice of multilateral funds by bilateral donors at the World Bank," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7441, The World Bank.
    16. Mette Eilstrup-Sangiovanni, 2022. "Ordering global governance complexes: The evolution of the governance complex for international civil aviation," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 293-322, April.
    17. Melanie van Driel & Frank Biermann & Rakhyun E. Kim & Marjanneke J. Vijge, 2022. "International organisations as ‘custodians’ of the sustainable development goals? Fragmentation and coordination in sustainability governance," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 13(5), pages 669-682, November.
    18. Kreuder-Sonnen, Christian & Zangl, Bernhard, 2015. "Which post-Westphalia? International organizations between constitutionalism and authoritarianism," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 21(3), pages 568-594.
    19. Jeff Colgan & Robert Keohane & Thijs Van de Graaf, 2012. "Punctuated equilibrium in the energy regime complex," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 117-143, June.
    20. Oliver Westerwinter & Kenneth W. Abbott & Thomas Biersteker, 2021. "Informal governance in world politics," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 1-27, January.

    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:endesu:v:27:y:2025:i:6:d:10.1007_s10668-023-04437-w. 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.