CC-regime-complex-0
Download
Report
Transcript CC-regime-complex-0
Climate change as a regime complex
Global climate governance is best understood as a regime
complex, which has led to more effective and legitimate
governance in the issue area.
Ahsan Syed, Johannes Ropers, Milan Ilnyckyj, Tanya Whyte, Wonmi Hwang
Summary
1 - Defining a regime complex
2 - Climate as a regime complex
3 - Effectiveness
4 – Legitimacy
1 - Defining a regime complex
“An array of partially overlapping and nonhierarchical
institutions covering a particular issue area”
-Raustiala and Victor (279)
Raustiala and Victor make four observations about regime
complexes:
They “demonstrate path dependence,” (279)
They promote “forum-shopping” by states looking to maximize
their interests (280)
There are legal inconstancies within complexes, which a variety
of actors negotiate at different times and places rather than in
one negotiation (280)
States deal with inconsistencies through “implementation and
interpretation” on a domestic level (280)
2 - Climate as a regime complex
Overlapping and nonhierarchical institutions
The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change (UNFCCC)
The Kyoto Protocol
European regional climate programs, including the Emission
Trading System
Emerging North American GHG trading systems: Regional
Greenhouse Gas Initiative, Western Climate Initiative, etc
Voluntary private sector initiatives
Emission reduction efforts through multilateral bodies,
including the UN, World Bank, etc
Collaborative efforts between cities
2 - Climate as a regime complex
Path dependence
To a degree, the UNFCCC process is modeled on the approach
used for ozone depletion:
A framework convention (the 1985 Vienna Convention for
ozone)
Protocols to implement the objectives of the framework
(1987 Montreal Protocol for ozone)
The Kyoto Protocol was meant to achieve concrete gains
toward UNFCCC objectives
The climate process has been less effective – there are no
simple substitutes to GHGs, and a far wider variety of activities
produce them
Still, the climate governance system demonstrates the path
dependence that is characteristic of a regime complex
2 - Climate as a regime complex
Promotion of forum shopping
Different states have sought to address climate change
through fora where they have influence and which they feel
will produce outcomes consistent with their preferences
The US Senate Byrd–Hagel Resolution blocked
implementation of the Kyoto Protocol
The US subsequently tried to address climate change
through other fora, for instance by creating the Major
Economies Forum in 2009
States have also engaged in regional efforts at cooperation
2 - Climate as a regime complex
Legal inconsistencies, negotiations at many different
times and places
The UNFCCC process has already involved 19 Conferences
of the Parties, held all over the world
In addition, there have been countless other meetings
among both governmental and non-governmental actors
States have widely endorsed the objective of restraining
warming to less than 2˚C above pre-industrial levels, but
none have been willing to adopt and implement the
emissions reductions necessary to meet that objective
States have also failed to live up to their specific and
voluntary Kyoto commitments, including Canada
3 - Effectiveness
So far, at least, the climate change governance regime
has not been effective
In order to avoid dangerous climate change, the
atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases (GHGs)
must be stabilized at a safe level
Stabilizing the concentration of GHGs requires that net
emissions fall to zero.
What stabilization would look like:
3 - Effectiveness
“Essentially, any specific concentration or radiativeforcing target requires emissions to fall to very low levels
as the removal processes of the ocean and terrestrial
systems saturate… [T]o reach a given stabilization target,
emissions must ultimately be reduced well below current
levels. For achievement of the stabilization categories I
and II, negative net emissions are required towards the
end of the century in many scenarios considered (high
agreement, much evidence)”
Climate Change 2007: Working Group III: Mitigation of Climate Change
https://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg3/en/tssts-ts-3-2-stabilization-scenarios.html
What the world has been doing:
Rising concentrations in parts per
million
(black line)
Emissions in billions of tonnes per year
(black line)
Source: Climate Change 2007: Working Group I: The Physical Science Basis
https://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch2s2-3.html#2-3-1
Global Carbon Dioxide (CO2) emissions from fossil-fuels 1990-2008
Source: Boden, T.A., G. Marland, and R.J. Andres (2010). Global, Regional, and National Fossil-Fuel CO2
Emissions. Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, U.S. Department
of Energy, Oak Ridge, Tenn., U.S.A. doi 10.3334/CDIAC/00001_V2010.
http://epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/global.html
Emissions in most regions are rising and expected to continue to rise
Source: Climate Change 2007: Working Group III: Mitigation of Climate Change
https://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg3/en/figure-8-2.html
Warming is being observed in all regions
Source: Climate Change 2007: Working Group I: The Physical Science Basis
https://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/spmsspm-understanding-and.html
3 - Effectiveness
The question is not whether climate change governance
has been effective, but whether the emergence of
climate change governance as a regime complex has
been more effective than the alternatives
To assess this question requires a counterfactual: what
would have happened otherwise? A single unified
regime? No action at all?
Given the complexity of the issue and the range of
emission sources, expecting a single regime to govern
climate change is unrealistic
4 – Legitimacy
Legitimacy can be considered in at least three ways
Whether a governance system is perceived to be structured
in a way that justly distributes costs and benefits between
participants
Whether the system grants participants a meaningful
mechanism for expressing their views and preferences
Whether the system is effective at serving its purpose
The climate regime does best on the second criterion –
inclusion. It does poorly in relation to effectiveness, and
the fairness of the current approach is contested
4 – Legitimacy
There can be conflicts between the different constituents
of legitimacy
A highly democratic process might end up deadlocked,
reducing the effectiveness of the regime complex
An approach that is perceived to constrain development
opportunities may be rejected by one group of states, while
an approach that requires no substantive action from large
and fast-growing states may be questioned by others
A regime complex that expresses the aspiration of all states
for unending economic development will likely fail to
effectively curb climate change
Broad inclusion in climate fora can allow states determined
to delay action to advance their aim
Conclusions
In many ways, the global climate governance regime
represents the characteristics of a ‘regime complex’
While the regime complex has not been effective at
adequately curbing emissions, it is not clear that there
are alternative forms of governance that would work
better
By allowing states and other actors to engage with
climate change through multiple existing fora, a degree
of legitimacy has been conferred on global climate
governance. In some cases, legitimacy and effectiveness
have been at odds with one another