From Regulator to Facilitator? The Evolving Role of the UNFCCC in Global Climate Governance Dr Harro van Asselt Stockholm Environment Institute [email protected]Dr Fariborz Zelli Lund University [email protected]Our Common Future under Climate Change Conference Paris, 9 July 2015
13
Embed
Van asselt h_20150709_1500_upmc_jussieu_-_amphi_herpin
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
From Regulator to Facilitator?
The Evolving Role of the UNFCCC in Global Climate Governance
Beyond regulation: The ‘forgotten’ roles of the UNFCCC
4
• Agenda-setting
• Keeping momentum
• Linking mitigation to ‘orphan issues’ (adaptation, technology)
• Facilitating learning
• Orchestrating action by other institutions
Orchestration in theory (1)
Orchestrator
Intermediary
Governance goal
Source: Abbott et al. 2015
Orchestration is:
• A strategy for managing institutional complexity
• Indirect
• Not hierarchical
Orchestration in theory (2)
UNFCCC (COP/Secretariat)
Other institutions
< 2 °C
• Who orchestrates?
• How could orchestration take place?
• What are the outcomes?
Modes of orchestration
Tracking
• Mapping existing initiatives
• Register
Benchmarking and assessing
• Set standards
• Assessing aggregate effects
Catalyzing
• Identifying governance gaps
• Funding new initiatives
Orchestration by the UNFCC: the story so far
Tracking
• Mapping existing initiatives and commitments
• Illustrating mitigation potential
• Registry (NAZCA portal)
Catalyzing
• Mandating action (e.g. ICAO/IMO)
• Enhancing visibility (e.g. Momentum for Change; Technical Expert Meetings)
The case of short-lived climate pollutants (SLCPs)
Black carbon
Tropospheric ozone
Methane HFCs
LRTAP Convention/ Gothenburg Protocol
Montreal Protocol ()
IMO
Climate and Clean Air Coalition
Arctic Council
Global Methane Initiative
UNFCCC
SLCPs – Why (not) orchestrate?
Arguments in favour
• Tackling SLCPs has climate mitigation benefits; how does it all add up?
• Avoid duplication of efforts and inconsistencies (e.g. black carbon reporting)
• Link funding to action
Arguments against
• Links with UNFCCC can politicize other venues and delay action on the ground
• May detract from action on CO2
Limitations of orchestration by UNFCCC
• Accountability mechanisms may attract but also deter action outside UNFCCC
• Not all actions and outcomes are quantifiable
• Intermediaries may be created out of dissatisfaction with UNFCCC
• Distraction from negotiations
• Resource limitations
=> Should UNFCCC try to orchestrate at all?
Conclusions
• Global climate governance is fragmented: the question is how to make best use of diversity
• Role of UNFCCC is increasingly shifting away from regulator to facilitator of action at national, subnational and transnational levels
• Orchestration may be useful mode of governance connecting UNFCCC and other international institutions and transnational governance arrangements, but its potential should not be overstated
Merci beaucoup! / Thank you! Further reading
Asselt H van (2014) The fragmentation of global climate governance. Edward Elgar.
Asselt, H van, F Zelli (2014) Connect the Dots: Managing the Fragmentation of Global Climate Governance. Environmental Economics and Policy Studies 16: 137-155.
Betsill, M et al. (2015). Building Productive Links between the UNFCCC and the Broader Climate Governance Landscape. Global Environmental Politics 15(2), 1-10.
Biermann, F et al. (2009). The Fragmentation of Global Governance Architectures. Global Environmental Politics 9: 14-40.
Moncel R, H van Asselt (2012) All hands on deck! Mobilizing climate change action beyond the UNFCCC. RECIEL 21:163-176.
Zelli, F, H van Asselt (2013) The Institutional Fragmentation of Global Environmental Governance – Cause, Consequences and Responses. Global Environmental Politics 13: 1-13.
Zelli, F (2011) The fragmentation of the global climate governance architecture. WIREs Climate Change 2: 255-270.