Motherly oil industry: Governing the desire for climate action through petro-feminine spatial imaginaries

Multi‐level Climate Governance: The global system and selected sub‐systems

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.

What role does trust play in global climate governance? For decades, claims of mistrust and distrust have dominated climate change policy arenas: doubts about climate change science and disagreements over rights and responsibilities related to mitigation, adaptation, loss, and damages undermine trust, impeding progress toward effective global climate action. And although frequently invoked in explanations of weak or failed climate action, there is limited research exploring the role oftrustas a distinct concept in global climate governance. Here we seek to address this gap by developing a relational framework that focuses attention on how trust dynamics shape cooperation in four types of relationships: reliance, reciprocity, responsibility, and recognition. Applying this framework to the UNFCCC, we consider how efforts like expanded participation impact the relational landscape in global climate governance. We focus in particular on Indigenous Peoples and non‐state actors to demonstrate how the UNFCCC's efforts to address its legitimacy and credibility problems have neither adequately considered trust nor created opportunities to develop the transformative relationships needed for more effective climate governance. We suggest that greater attention to trust can help scholars and practitioners better understand how relational phenomena shape the landscape of governance possibilities.This article is categorized under:Policy and Governance > Multilevel and Transnational Climate Change Governance

Integrating global energy and climate governance: The changing role of the International Energy Agency

type="graphical" xml:id="gpol12155-abs-0002"> The European Union needs to close ranks in order to stand its ground in our globalised world.

This forum article outlines a research agenda focused on linkages between the UNFCCC and other governance arrangements that also address climate change. We take as our point of departure the recognition that the UNFCCC is no longer the sole site of global climate change governance, and thus the types of linkage across what we call the global climate governance landscape including as a central node the UNFCCC are important for thinking through how improved global responses to climate change may be pursued. The forum identifies two specific types of linkage: division-of-labor linkages and catalytic linkages. We illustrate these with some examples and raise questions we believe would be useful to pursue in future research.

Editorial: Governing the EU's climate and energy transition through the 2030 Framework

Does increased participation of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) improve the democratic quality at intergovernmental organizations (IGOs)? Multilateral institutions and global governance mechanisms have emerged during the past few decades to tackle global challenges, such as climate change. However, policy making institutions such as IGOs are often viewed as lacking democratic legitimacy. The decision- making process remains tied to nation-states represented often by non-elected delegates, yet the decisions affect people who do not have a say in the process. One remedy proposed by global governance scholars to close such democratic deficit is to include a variety of stakeholders such as non-governmental actors. I challenge the conventional wisdom that assumes the democratic potential of these actors, and unpack the “blackbox” of NGOs to assess their internal politics.To assess their role in global governance, we need to understand the substantive participation and patterns of interaction among the NGOs at the governance institutions. I construct a multilevel theoretical framework from a social network perspective to understand their participation and interaction. The theoretical framework is based on transnational social movement theory and social network theory.I draw on the example of women’s groups working at the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) annual conferences. Employing both quantitative statistical analysis and network analysis, I demonstrate an evident increase in women’s groups that participate substantively at the UNFCCC. How- ever, the growth is accompanied by inequality in participation. Not all groups that attend the UNFCCC participate in collective advocacy or network actively. The variation is associated with the capacity and social embeddedness of a given organization. Furthermore, the community working on women’s issues has become fragmented over- time. The fragmentation is a result of NGOs’ different strategies and understandings of their role in global climate governance. The institutional context of UNFCCC has also contributed to the fragmentation. Overall, these civil society actors contribute to the democratization of the UNFCCC process by adding new voices, establishing new issue linkages, and raising awareness for women’s rights and gender equality. At the same time, however, the internal inequality and the power imbalance could further exacerbate the democratic deficit in the global climate governance process.I have independently collected data on over 800 actors at the UN climate conferences. I have also conducted semi-structured, in-depth interviews with civil society representatives at the UN climate change summits in 2017 and 2018. The findings contribute to the understanding of democratic legitimacy in global governance of large-scale, transnational challenges by analyzing both macro-level network relation- ships among actors and the micro-level mechanisms among network members.

The way that the media reports and comments on key events in the fragmented global climate governance landscape is one important route to strengthening public accountability of such governance. Editorials and other opinion pieces provide key contributions to the public sphere, but have been almost entirely neglected in media research on climate change. Another understudied aspect in such research is the reporting on the fragmentation of global climate governance across numerous forums. This article provides an exploratory approach to address these two research gaps. It presents a quantitative analysis of how often leading newspapers in seven countries (Finland, India, Laos, Norway, South Africa, UK and USA) wrote about 18 meetings in six different global climate governance forums between 2004–2009 and whether they provided commentaries about them. The study shows that media coverage (articles and opinion pieces) is limited or absent for many meetings that are not attended by heads of state, are the launch of a new process or do not have the convening power of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The pattern of coverage differs significantly among individual newspapers and there is no clear distinction between developed and developing country newspapers. The article concludes that overall news coverage, and editorial commentary in particular, of global climate meetings in the selected newspapers is too low and too patchy to significantly support domestic publics to hold their own (and indirectly other) governments accountable with regard to fragmented global climate governance.Policy relevanceThis study is instructive for the media and civil society, who should both act as accountholders of governments with regard to how they act in global climate governance and its implementation. Reporting and commentaries need to reflect the overarching process, not only sporadic coverage of high-level meetings, but also critical analysis of what is achieved. They should also take a broader scope in terms of the kinds of meetings and processes in global governance that they cover. Civil society should encourage the media to increase coverage along these lines, e.g. by adequate monitoring of government actions (or lack thereof) and share this with the media.

Global climate governance is an integral part of global governance. Its most prominent feature is to make the entities and means of tackling global warming diversified. At present, NGOs have a growing presence in global climate governance. Their status in UN climate change negotiations has been increasingly rising, the issues they pay attention to have attracted more attention from the international community, and they have more choices on how to hold activities. NGOs mainly serve global climate governance in three aspects: the diverse soft power that NGOs assume when they participate in global climate governance, the multiple modes that NGOs adopt when they participate in global climate governance, and the multiple roles that NGOs play when they participate in global climate governance. The reform of the global climate governance system is now at a historical turning point. China needs to continuously sharpen its capabilities and improve strategies to lead global climate governance, and strengthen and lead the construction of NGOs.KeywordsGlobal climate governanceNGOsParis Agreement

As one of the founding members of the United Nations, China has been actively promoting the process of global governance. In 2012, China proposed the concept of global governance of «a Community with a Shared Future for Mankind», aiming to promote the development of global governance system in a more fair and reasonable direction. The view on global climate governance is one of the five elements of the concept of «a Community with a Shared Future for Mankind». The theoretical and methodological underpinnings of this study are many approaches, theories, and methods from political science and related scientific fields, which give this work its interdisciplinary nature. Mainly geopolitical approach, method of comparison and method of comparison. In its long-term participation in global climate governance, China has formed a unique concept of global climate governance that focuses on win-win cooperation, fairness and reasonableness. China has made contributions to global public health governance. It helps enhance China’s voice and influence in the field of global climate governance. China’s view on global climate governance not only guides the practice of China’s participation in global climate governance, but also has great significance for the construction and future development of the current global climate governance mechanism. In the post-Paris Agreement era, it is possible for China to continue to promote and even lead the formulation and implementation of specific rules for the United Nations climate negotiations, and to make greater contributions to the construction of the global climate governance mechanism.

The study argues about inevitable social responsibilities and challenges faced by the oil companies. Smog in the inner cities, oil spillage, chemical disposal, climate changes, environmental pollution, local recruitment and toxic wastes are mammoth challenges for oil and gas companies to face. Oil industry has to respond to the environmental issues in general and climate changes in particular, because the ultimate goal of the business is to maximize the profit and also contribute to the social welfare of the community. The research paper contains different motivational theories in order to persuade the oil companies to consider their social obligation towards the nation. Two dimensions of the social responsibilities are hereby submitted. First, development of environment friendly strategies. Second, allocating financial resources for community development to establish schools, medical and other welfare units for the society in order to contribute to sustainable economic development. Oil and gas companies have to devise ways and means for the benefit of the community from indigenous gas and oil projects. Introduction Companies consider corporate social responsibility as a voluntary act, not mandates by law, to work for the welfare of the community and share with them benefits extractd from their indigenous resources. Oil companies have to determine the welfare of its stakeholders on the priority basis in order to ensure healthy environment within the premises. Oil Industry is considered as the backbone of any economy as it extracts revenue from earth and can contribute huge revenue to Gross National Production (GNP). While working in any economy, oil companies either from domestic environment or international are required to fulfill their Corporate Social Responsibilities and prove themselves as good corporate citizens. From time to time, oil companies are blamed for not paying proper attention to the community in which they operate their business and generate revenues. Earlier, when people had no awareness of the Corporate Social Responsibilities, they didn't raise objections, but with the passage of time, when awareness developed among the masses, objections raised from every corner against lack of concern on the part of oil companies for the welfare of community. Two dimension of Social responsibility are very mandatory to submit here; 1. Development of Environment Friendly Strategies Oil companies should acknowledge their obligation towards the health of the community that should not be affected by the oil industry. Toxic and hazardous waste claims lives of so many people who are living in the surrounding. The dispose of toxic waste in the river Indus claimed so many lives in the Hyderabad and also created water problems in the district. Smog in the inner cities, oil spillage, chemical disposal, environmental pollution etc: are major concerns to face oil industry. Majority of respondents submitted that toxic wastes are not disposed of with the consent of the local community. Due to smog in the cities, many accidents occur specially in the morning time. At present, global warming is a serious subject of discussion among the community. Increasing global warming causes to melt the glaciers before the time and creates problems like water shortage, flood etc. oil industry is also blamed for creating environmental problems for the society. Oil industry should take precautionary measure to protect environment and safeguard the health of the community. A healthy sign in this connection is that majority of oil production and Service Companies are revamping their environmental strategies in order to lessen the risk of polluting the natural environment. Many companies are nowadays trying to establish waste management system in order to dispose of the waste safely and with the consent of local people. Increasing waste is alarming for oil companies as it creates severe environmental and health problems for the people. During the exploration and production of oil and gas, and the refining, manufacturing and marketing of products, company use a range of natural and manufactured materials which generate solid and liquid waste which adversely affect the environment and health of the people. Where the waste is unavoidable and cannot be reduced or reused, it must be disposed of properly. Many companies have waste system to assure disposal or recycling of wastes properly without causing losses for community.

In December 2018, the 24th Conference of the Parties (COP) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was held in Katowice, Poland, and reached a package of agreements. It provided a new opportunity for the promotion of global climate negotiations and new momentum for the transformation of global climate governance as well. The Katowice conference continued the tradition of the previous conferences in enhancing policy coordination and contribution among various actors. The success of the conference depends on scientific reports of climate disasters, coordinated efforts by major countries, and the contribution of various non-state actors. However, as an ongoing process, global climate governance is still faced by many difficulties, such as weak synergy, staggering development of global environmental governance, daunting challenges to least developed countries (LDCs) in climate actions, and lack of fairness, which need to be tackled through joint endeavor by both developed and developing countries. As the second largest economy and biggest greenhouse gas emitter, China’s future engagement in global climate governance will be focused on promoting green competitiveness, enhancing its institutional power in the governance process, and strengthening pragmatic multi-stakeholder climate diplomacy, so as to promote common understanding among countries and help with their policy coordination for climate actions.

The Baku Climate Conference (COP29) is intended to address the intensifying fragmentation of global climate governance by setting new collective quantified goals (NCQGs) for climate finance and discussing critical issues such as loss and damage funds. At the conference, significant divergences persisted among countries on core issues such as climate finance, energy transition, and carbon market mechanisms, as evidenced by the ongoing negotiations and challenges in reaching a consensus on new climate finance goals. This not only mirrors the intricacies of the global governance system but also highlights the longstanding conflicts of interest among different stakeholders. Despite the hurdles impeding multilateral cooperation, South–South cooperation and regional integration efforts are gaining traction. Regional initiatives continue to advance global climate action, albeit in a limited fashion. As a key actor in global climate governance, China has taken on a more significant role by actively leveraging multilateral frameworks to promote collaboration, as evidenced by its substantial contributions to reducing greenhouse gas emissions and advancing green finance initiatives. Multilateral cooperation has been a cornerstone of China’s approach to climate change, as evidenced by its unwavering commitment to providing support to other developing nations and its leadership in global climate action. China consistently plays a constructive role in global climate governance, providing practical solutions aimed at fostering deeper integration within the global governance framework. The future of global climate cooperation hinges on the development of a more stable, just, and efficient climate governance system, as exemplified by China’s commitment to carbon reduction and its efforts to foster a fair and reasonable global climate governance framework.

The influence of indigenous peoples in global climate governance