Climate clubs and the UNFCCC Oscar Widerberg

591 views

Published on

Presentation based on the report Climate Change Clubs and the UNFCCC. The report may be downloadede here: http://fores.se/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/ClimateClubsAndTheUNFCCC-FORES-Study-2013-3.pdf

Published in: News & Politics, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
591
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
15
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • So this
  • Climate clubs and the UNFCCC Oscar Widerberg

    1. 1. CLIMATE CLUBS AND THE UNFCCC complement, bypass or conflict? Oscar Widerberg, FORES Frukostseminarium, Stockholm, 28 November 2013.
    2. 2. The global climate governance architecture Bi-lateral initiatives Private climate initiative UNFCCC CBD Montreal Protocol CLIMATE CLUBS Other UN (e.g. UNSEC) Sub-national action Trade institutions (WTO) 2
    3. 3. Examples of clubs  G20  Major Economies Forum (MEF)  Clean Energy Ministerial (CEM)  Energy+ CLIMATE CLUBS  Climate and Clean Air Coalition (CCAC)  LEDS Partnership  Global Bioenergy Partnership  Etc... 3
    4. 4. Research question Are climate clubs conducive to the UNFCCC? 4
    5. 5. Research approach  17 Climate clubs*  5 Assessment criteria • Core norms > Caps on GHG emissions > Common but differentiated responsibilities • Participation of major emitters • Goverance gaps • Implementing UNFCCC agenda  Qualitative scoring * from Weischer et al, 2012 5
    6. 6. The results 6
    7. 7. State clubs  Exclusive groups based on wealth and • G8 importance • G20  Large potential to address climate issues • Major Economies Forum (MEF)  Risk of treating climate change as an ad hoc agenda item  Major Economies Forum (MEF) the most relevant and clearly conducive to the UNFCCC  No conflictive relation 7
    8. 8. Energy clubs  Many energy clubs, similar goals • IEA Multilateral Technology Agreements • REEEP • Spread renewable energy • Increase energy efficiency • Capacity building, information, analysis • REN 21  Climate change is but one goal • Energy+  Differences in how to what extent they align • CEM • APP themselves with UNFCCC  No conflictive relations 8
    9. 9. Implementation clubs  Diverse group in terms of aim, members, • CSLF • Global Bioenergy Partnership • REDD+ Partnership • Global Methane Partnership • GGGI affiliation with UNFCCC, capacity  Biofuels, CCS, Green economy, REDD+, Low Emission Development Strategies, Monitoring Reporting and Verificaiton  REDD+, LEDS, MRV strong links with the UNFCCC • M-MRV  CCAC promising bridging function? • LEDS GP  No conflicting • CCAC 9
    10. 10. Lessons learned 1. While clubs aren’t challenging the current goverance architecture, some are more conducive to the UNFCCC than others 2. No conflict found, only contender could be the state clubs, however, these often treat climate as an ad hoc agenda item 3. General shift in narrative towards more flexibility (e.g. from ”targets and timetables” to ”pledge and review”) 4. The implications of the shift in narrative are highly uncertain 10
    11. 11. Policy implications  We are positive to clubs  Clubs can create ”enabling conditions” on a domestic level to reach international agreement  There is a UNFCCC paradox 11
    12. 12. Thanks! oscar.widerberg@vu.nl 12

    ×