Rethinking Climate Governance: From Global Agreements to Local Initiatives
The early 2000s witnessed a strong emphasis on interstate climate negotiations, but this perspective has since evolved to include a broader array of players, such as cities and non-governmental organizations. This shift has fostered a complex climate governance architecture that interweaves various stakeholders, norms, and discourses. The structure of this global system remains a topic of discussion, particularly following the perceived shortcomings of events like the 2009 COP15 in Copenhagen.
The question of whether a single, global agreement or a more fragmented, polycentric approach is more effective has been debated, especially after COP15’s challenges (Ostrom, 2010). This debate informed the Paris Agreement of 2015, which prioritizes nationally determined contributions to mitigate climate change and encourages cooperation among both state actors and non-party entities like cities. The current climate regime leans heavily on voluntary national pledges, making it essential to study the diverse factors that influence climate policymaking worldwide.
Recent scholarship underscores the importance of integrating intersectionality into climate justice discussions (Mikulewicz et al., 2023). Henry Shue (2019) has argued for the distinction between subsistence and luxury emissions, advocating that “even in an emergency one pawns the jewellery before selling the blankets” (p.259). This approach suggests a need to prioritize reducing luxury emissions while allowing room for subsistence emissions, thus incorporating intersectionality into climate justice.
Shue’s insights illuminate how the intersection of oppression and privilege affects climate impacts and solutions. Research indicates that marginalized groups, such as racially minoritized populations and Indigenous communities, are particularly vulnerable to climate-related health risks. Yet, while highlighting these vulnerabilities, it’s crucial to avoid portraying Indigenous peoples merely as victims or eco-heroes. Indigenous knowledge, as shown in Bangladesh’s case by Chowdhoree (2019), can be crucial for addressing climate challenges.
Another critical area of research is the role of climate imaginaries in shaping policies and public perceptions (Pattberg and Stripple, 2008; Klüh et al., 2024). Historical energy transitions, like gasoline-powered cars and nuclear power, were influenced by shared societal fantasies that facilitated investment and policy support, despite overlooking certain costs. Sovacool and Brossman (2013) highlighted the importance of these “imaginaries” in energy transitions, noting their role in shaping investment and policy decisions.
Imaginaries extend beyond ideas, influencing economic policies and media narratives (Levy & Spicer, 2013). Competing climate imaginaries, such as “fossil fuels forever” and “sustainable lifestyles,” gain traction based on their alignment with social and political interests. Media representation plays a pivotal role in promoting or challenging these imaginaries, which can affect public support for climate initiatives. Climate protests driven by shared imaginaries have been shown to influence political will, raising questions about how media coverage of activism impacts public and political responses.
Comparative studies offer valuable insights into climate policy effectiveness across different contexts. Research by William F. Lamb et al. (2021) found that, between 1970 and 2018, countries achieving greenhouse gas reductions did so mainly via the energy sector, while transport emissions remained stable or increased. This suggests the need for further exploration of barriers in the transport sector. Additionally, studies on emissions trading systems reveal knowledge gaps, such as stakeholder engagement and policy interactions, underscoring the importance of comparative analyses in developing comprehensive climate policies.
The integration of intersectionality into climate justice, the influence of climate imaginaries, and comparative studies in climate politics highlight the need for diverse perspectives in research. Addressing these areas can lead to a more nuanced understanding of climate politics, considering both structural inequalities and the dynamic nature of climate discourse.
Original Story at www.e-ir.info