Devlet ve Devlet-dışı Aktörler arasında Küresel İklim Yönetişimi: Çekişme ve Yeniden Meşrulaştırma Dinamikleri

Abstract

Global climate governance is one of the most complex global governance systems that is also ridden with
 divergent interests of states and non-state actors. Since the 2000s, the authority of UN-led global climate
 governance has been contested by the states declining their mitigation targets of the Kyoto Protocol and by
 those that find the international climate negotiations inefficient to ramp up climate action. These divergent
 views of states resulted in the counter-institutionalization apparent in the proliferation of minilateral
 forums and hybrid coalitions of climate initiatives oftentimes bringing states and non-state actors together.
 These non-UNFCCC partnerships have functioned to be strategic actions that put pressure on the global
 climate governance system to re-legitimate itself. Meanwhile, transnational actors have also contested the
 same system demanding a deeper cooperation that will keep the temperature goal below 2 degrees. This
 study argues that with its new mode of governance named hybrid multilateralism, the Paris Agreement
 was actually an institutional adaptation to the contestations by states and non-state actors in the forms
 of counter-institutionalization and politicization. It also discusses the problematic sides of the functions
 that non-state actors are expected to provide in this new governance mode. This paper is composed of
 four parts: firstly, the theoretical background that feeds into the analysis of empirical data with regard to
 global climate governance will be presented. Secondly, beginning from the Rio Conference, milestone
 developments in global climate governance will be examined by taking the contestation by the states into
 consideration. In the third part, the process of the politicization of climate change in which transnational
 actors and specifically the climate change movement demanded more decisive climate action will be
 explicated. In the last part, the existing legitimacy deficits with regard to non-state actors in post-Paris
 climate governance will be elaborated.