Cities to the rescue? Assessing the performance of transnational municipal networks in global climate governance
In: International environmental agreements: politics, law and economics, Band 17, Heft 2, S. 229-246
ISSN: 1573-1553
4 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: International environmental agreements: politics, law and economics, Band 17, Heft 2, S. 229-246
ISSN: 1573-1553
In: Earth system governance, Band 10, S. 100121
ISSN: 2589-8116
This perspective identifies how recent advances contribute to re-evaluating and re-constructing global environmental negotiations as a research object by calling into question who constitutes an actor and what constitutes a site of agreement formation. Building on this scholarship, we offer the term agreement-making to facilitate further methodological and ethical reflection. The term agreement-making broadens the conceptualisation of the actors, sites and processes constitutive of global environmental agreements and brings to the fore how these are shaped by, reflect and have the potential to re-make or transform the intertwined global order of social, political and economic relations. Agreement-making situates research within these processes, and we suggest that enhancing the methodological diversity and practical utility is a potential avenue for challenging the reproduction of academic dominance. We highlight how COVID-19 requires further adapting research practices and offers an opportunity to question whether we need to be physically present to provide critical insight, analysis and support.
BASE
In: Chan , S , Boran , I , van Asselt , H , Iacobuta , G , Niles , N , Rietig , K , Scobie , M , Bansard , J S , Delgado Pugley , D , Delina , L L , Eichhorn , F , Ellinger , P , Enechi , O , Hale , T , Hermwille , L , Honegger , M , Hurtado Epstein , A , La Hoz Theuer , S , Mizo , R , Sun , Y , Toussaint , P & Wambugu , G 2019 , ' Promises and risks of nonstate action in climate and sustainability governance ' , Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change , vol. 10 , no. 3 , e572 , pp. 1-8 . https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.572
Sustainable Development Goals and the Paris Agreement stand as milestone diplomatic achievements. However, immense discrepancies between political commitments and governmental action remain. Combined national climate commitments fall far short of the Paris Agreement's 1.5/2°C targets. Similar political ambition gaps persist across various areas of sustainable development. Many therefore argue that actions by nonstate actors, such as businesses and investors, cities and regions, and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), are crucial. These voices have resonated across the United Nations (UN) system, leading to growing recognition, promotion, and mobilization of such actions in ever greater numbers. This article investigates optimistic arguments about nonstate engagement, namely: (a) "the more the better"; (b) "everybody wins"; (c) "everyone does their part"; and (d) "more brings more." However, these optimistic arguments may not be matched in practice due to governance risks. The current emphasis on quantifiable impacts may lead to the under-appreciation of variegated social, economic, and environmental impacts. Claims that everybody stands to benefit may easily be contradicted by outcomes that are not in line with priorities and needs in developing countries. Despite the seeming depoliticization of the role of nonstate actors in implementation, actions may still lead to politically contentious outcomes. Finally, nonstate climate and sustainability actions may not be self-reinforcing but may heavily depend on supporting mechanisms. The article concludes with governance risk-reduction strategies that can be combined to maximize nonstate potential in sustainable and climate-resilient transformations. This article is categorized under: Policy and Governance > Multilevel and Transnational Climate Change Governance.
BASE