Intergovernmental Meetings Research Articles

Government participation in virtual negotiations: evidence from IPCC approval sessions

The Covid-19 pandemic challenged global governance in unprecedented ways by requiring intergovernmental meetings to be held online. For the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), this meant that the intergovernmental approval of the key findings of the Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) had to be conducted virtually. In this paper, we assess how the move away from face-to-face meetings affected country participation in IPCC approval sessions. Our findings demonstrate that virtual meetings increased the size of member governments’ delegations, but this did not necessarily translate into a greater number of interventions during the approval of the Summary for Policymakers (SPM) as time zone differences reduced engagement levels significantly—particularly for countries from the Pacific, East Asian, and Latin American regions whose delegations often found themselves in IPCC meetings late at night and early in the morning. These results offer initial, empirically robust evidence about what online meetings can and cannot achieve for promoting more inclusive global governance at a time when the IPCC and other organizations reflect on the future use of virtual and hybrid meeting formats.

The use of influential power in ocean governance

Ensuring inclusivity, especially the meaningful participation of diverse actors, is a key component of good governance. However, existing ocean governance frameworks have not yet achieved an equitable and fair playing field and are indeed often characterized by inequitable practices. In this perspective piece, we argue that one of the reasons for this lack of inclusion are the existing power frameworks and ways in which power is exercised within fora nominally intended to foster inclusion and cooperation. By focusing on four case studies of basic ocean governance processes, we explore how influential and interactive power is exercised in intergovernmental meetings, international conferences, and regional negotiations. These case studies demonstrate how specific exercises of power that undermine procedural inclusivity influence decision-making and the setting of agendas, and exclude important voices from ocean governance fora. This perspective piece contributes to the existing literature on power by highlighting how power is exercised within fundamental aspects of ocean governance. This paper merely scratches the surface, and more actions and research are needed to uncover and, more importantly, reverse deeply-rooted and self-perpetuating power structures in ocean governance.

Conferences of the Parties beyond international environmental law: How COPs influence the content and implementation of their parent treaties

AbstractConferences of the Parties (COPs) are intergovernmental meetings established by treaties to review and promote the implementation of their provisions. The literature on COPs is limited and almost exclusively based on multilateral environmental agreements. The article departs from this scholarship to show that COPs are now present in different areas of international law and to discuss some of the ways in which these bodies influence the conventions that establish them. In particular, it considers how COPs affect the content and the implementation of their parent treaties. The article focuses on the bodies established by four treaties selected as case studies: the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control; the Convention for the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions; the Convention on Cluster Munitions; and the United Nations Convention against Corruption. Based on the examination of the normative decisions adopted by these organs, the article argues that COPs’ activities (i) specify and develop the content of their parent treaties by setting procedural and substantive standards that states parties must meet to comply with their obligations; and (ii) support the implementation of their parent treaties by seeking to strengthen their social and political position, facilitating the adoption of measures by states parties. COPs pursue this second goal by building momentum in favour of the implementation of their treaties, stigmatizing their adversaries, and connecting their conventions with established international legal narratives.

Evaluating the roles and reach of philanthropic foundations in sustainability efforts for tuna

AbstractTuna fisheries provide over 5 million tonnes of seafood annually to the global market but have historically raised conservation concerns due to weak management measures and impacts on non‐target wildlife. The focus of the first environmental awareness campaigns in seafood focused on dolphin bycatch in tuna fisheries in the 1980s. Since then, the sustainable seafood movement has evolved considerably, with philanthropic foundations playing a key role as agenda‐setters and funders of work carried out by non‐governmental organizations (NGOs). Here, we used tuna as a case study and investigated how three US foundations and associated NGOs have affected tuna fisheries reform through two primary pathways: advocacy for improved fishery management at intergovernmental meetings, and engagement with fishing companies in fishery improvement projects (FIPs). We found a total of USD 28.65 million was allocated to tuna‐related work from 2013 to 2021. While each foundation had different funding profiles, 65% of all grant funds were directed to two key priority areas: market leverage and RFMO advocacy. Further, almost 60% of all funding was allocated to only three NGOs, all of which are central actors at RFMO meetings, and which are collectively engaged in over 85% of all tuna FIPs (by volume). We reflect on how this concentrated funding relates to the overarching sustainable seafood agenda of these foundations and provide recommendations to ensure financial support and objectives remain transparent and do not perpetuate inequities between tuna fishing countries.

Intergovernmental Relations in the UK: Time for a Radical Overhaul?

Brexit and the coronavirus pandemic have put relationships between the UK government and its devolved counterparts under growing strain. Tensions generated by both of these developments have exposed the inadequacies of the existing, under‐developed system for bringing governments together in the UK. The limitations of the current system include the ad hoc nature of intergovernmental meetings, and their consultative rather than decision‐making character. Drawing upon an analysis of how intergovernmental relationships are structured in five other countries, the authors offer a number of suggestions for the reconfiguration of the UK model. They explore different ways of enabling joint decision making by its governments, and argue against the assumption that England can be represented adequately by the UK administration. Without a serious attempt to address this dysfunctional part of the UK’s territorial constitution, there is every prospect that relations between these different governments will continue to deteriorate.

The evolution of the Caribbean Marine Protected Area Management Network and Forum (CaMPAM): 20 years of the Regional Multidimensional Program for Strengthening MPA Practitioners

In 1997, the United Nations Environment’s Caribbean Environment Program (UNEP-CEP) convened a meeting of 50 MPA managers from which CaMPAM was born. Since then, CaMPAM has adaptively evolved into a comprehensive regional program that aims at strengthening Caribbean marine protected areas at the site and national level through a variety of mechanisms. CaMPAM’s original focus was to provide training, information sharing, and communications. Shortly after, grants awarding for learning exchanges and for implementing small projects started. Partnerships were established with interested organizations. Some collaborators became mentors and served as instructors and activities' coordinators.These tools allowed the capacity building program to address the MPA changing needs. These needs have been captured through site visits, consultations with scientists and managers, surveys, evaluations of courses and the entre program, CaMPAM project reports, specific requests of donors, the intergovernmental meetings of UNEP-CEP’s Cartagena Convention’s Specially Protected Areas and Wildlife (SPAW) Protocol, etc. and have shaped the program. In the spirit of having a balance between the region’s needs and the role of CaMPAM as the SPAW MPA capacity building tool, in 2016 the UNEP-CEP commissioned the review of CaMPAM program in order to make it more relevant and useful. This paper co-autored by the CaMPAM founder, its coordinator, the main collaborator, and the expert commissioned to assess CaMPAM performance describes the activities implemented in 1997-2017 and the latest assessment of the program.

Geopolitics as a migration governance strategy: European Union bilateral relations with Southern Mediterranean countries

ABSTRACTThe significance of regional consultative processes in the field of migration is well documented. Their popularity for states is typically explained by the opportunity they provide for largely non-binding discussions around sensitive, sovereignty-laden issues such as border control. Since the mid-1990s, a variety of intergovernmental meetings have been sponsored by the EU with the aim of discussing migration with neighbouring countries. European policy frameworks have specifically excluded the countries to the South from the possibility of membership, yet they are now absolutely crucial to the realisation of the EU's migration ambitions. Since the 1999 Tampere European Council relations with these states have been managed through a discourse of ‘partnership’, emphasising the regional ‘Euro-Mediterranean’ character of this relationship. This paper analyses EU relations with Southern Mediterranean states as a specific attempt to construct a geopolitical region—the Euro-Mediterranean area—from and through migration management strategies. It concludes that the development of policy in this area results from a huge number of poorly focused and sometimes contradictory initiatives that collectively make up a far more haphazard approach than the common externalisation critique suggests. This haphazard approach helps to explain the range of unintended consequences of this policy but may also lead to its limited successes.

Open or closed meetings? Explaining nonstate actor involvement in the international climate change negotiations

When do states allow nonstate actors (NSAs) to observe negotiations at intergovernmental meetings? Previous studies have identified the need for states to close negotiations when the issues under discussion are sensitive. This paper argues that sensitivity alone cannot adequately explain the dynamic of closing down negotiations to observers. Questions that have received little attention in the literature include which issues are considered sensitive and how the decision is made to move the negotiations behind closed doors. This paper examines the practices of NSA involvement in climate diplomacy from three analytical perspectives: functional efficiency, political dynamics, and historical institutionalism. Based on interviews and UNFCCC documents, this paper suggests that to understand the issue of openness in negotiations, institutional factors and the politics of NSA involvement need to be better scrutinized. The paper shows that each perspective has particular advantages when analyzing different dimensions of the negotiations, with implications of how we understand the role of NSAs in global environmental governance.

The Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services: opportunities for the social sciences

A decision taken at the 65th United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) in 2010 gave the green light to the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) to convene a plenary meeting to establish an Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) in 2011. A plenary intergovernmental meeting will be held in 2011 to negotiate the modalities and program of work for the IPBES. This paper provides a brief overview of what the IPBES is and what it is expected to deliver drawing on from the earlier intergovernmental meetings. The main thrust of the paper is on making a case for the strong participation by the social sciences and humanities communities in IPBES from the very beginning. The paper provides some initial thinking of ways and means of framing strategic questions drawing from the social sciences and humanities that IPBES should address which reflect more closely the demands of society.

The WHO Pandemic Influenza Preparedness Framework

AFTER YEARS OF NEGOTIATIONS, THE WORLD HEALTH Organization (WHO) reached agreement on a pandemic influenza preparedness (PIP) framework for the sharing of influenza viruses and access to vaccines and other benefits in April 2011. The framework addresses a troubling controversy—should lowand middleincome countries share influenza virus specimens with WHO without assurances that benefits derived from sharing will be equitably distributed? During the avian influenza A(H5N1) outbreaks in late 2006, Indonesia refused to share virus specimens with WHO, claiming it was unfair to give pharmaceutical companies access. Industry would use viruses to patent vaccines and antiviral medications that Indonesia could not afford. Indonesia asserted sovereignty over viruses isolated within its territory, grounded on the Convention on Biological Diversity. Indonesia also argued that the 2005 International Health Regulations did not require states to share H5N1 viruses. The international community feared that Indonesia’s refusal to share would impede surveillance and response, particularly because Asia was the epicenter of the global H5N1 outbreak. Serious health and political repercussions could result if states failed to cooperate when confronting a common threat. In May 2007, WHO member states commenced negotiations on virus and benefit sharing to strengthen influenza surveillance and response. Negotiations in intergovernmental meetings and an open-ended working group proved difficult—the problems were complex and states had divergent interests, particularly on intellectual property rights. The 2009 influenza A(H1N1) pandemic deepened developing-country mistrust because vaccines were not equitably shared. In October 2010, Convention on Biological Diversity parties reasserted state sovereignty over biological materials within their territories. Finally, after nearly 4 years of arduous negotiations, WHO’s director-general announced the WHO pandemic framework on April 16, and the World Health Assembly approved it in May. PIP Framework

1. Nature Conservation: Natural Lands and Biological Diversity

This report summarizes developments under the CBD in 2011. It starts with an overview of inter-governmental meetings and other activities held under the regime, analyzes selected issues of relevance to international environmental lawyers, and concludes with an outlook for 2012 (for more information, see the report on Indigenous Peoples in this volume). In 2011, the CBD parties started tackling questions related to the implementation of the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from Their Utilization (Nagoya Protocol) at the first meeting of the protocol’s Intergovernmental Committee, which was held on 5-10 June in Montreal, Canada. The committee was established by the tenth Conference of the Parties (COP-10) in October 2010 to undertake the preparations necessary for the first meeting of the governing body to the protocol. A mere few months from the last-minute adoption...

Conservation status of wild relatives of animals used for food

The Global Plan of Action for Animal Genetic Resources calls for action to conserve the wild species that are related to livestock. The global conservation status of wild species is monitored through the IUCN Red List. This shows that at present 21 percent of the world's 5 488 mammal species and 12 percent of its 9 990 bird species are threatened with extinction. In contrast, a greater proportion of wild relatives of the major mammal livestock species are at risk of extinction: 44 percent of sheep and goats, 50 percent of pigs and 83 percent of cattle. More wild relatives of the chicken are also at risk (25 percent) than bird species overall. These figures indicate the need to pay much more attention to the relationship between the conservation of biological diversity and human well-being. Therefore, there is an urgent need to coordinate responses to the loss of biodiversity and the reduction in variation that may prove vital for animal genetic resources in the future. Intergovernmental meetings being held this autumn offer the prospect of beginning this process.

The NW 253 Flight and the Global Framework of Aviation Security

The attempted bombing of Northwest Airlines flight 253 on Christmas day of 2009 has once again issued the ominous reminder that aviation is vulnerable and that there is a compelling need for a global security culture that recognizes and applies uniform global security standards. The first step toward achieving this objective is the realization by the aviation community of new and emerging threats to aviation and the need to share information. Since the event, several countries have imposed stringent security standards at airports and initiated inter-governmental meetings to discuss closer cooperation among States in the hope that such measures will effectively respond to the threat. Both International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and International Air Transport Association (IATA) took immediate measures after the event in issuing statements and called for a closer look by States at their security measures and a re-assessment of available responses to threats posed to aviation. It is now abundantly clear that collection and sharing of information, improvement of technology, and strengthening of security standards are critical in addressing the problem of unlawful interference with civil aviation. Other aspects such as curbing the financing of terrorism, taking a closer look at the responsibility of States, and increasing vigilance on a global scale are also significant considerations. This article takes a critical look at the issues at hand and makes some suggestions.

Development Agenda in World Intellectual Property Organizations (WIPO)

In an increasingly technology-driven world, the standard of protection provided by intellectual property (IP) rules is affecting development policies and human rights issues more than ever. Strict IP rules have had an adverse impact on the ability of many governments to fulfill their human rights obligations, of which obligations to ensure access to affordable medicines, education and adequate food. This trend towards higher IP protection has been stimulated by the adoption of the World Trade Organization (WTO) Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs), and the harmonization initiatives at the WIPO. A proposal for a development agenda for WIPO was first launched at the 2004 WIPO General Assembly. At that time, member states agreed to hold a series of inter-sessional intergovernmental meetings (IIMs) to examine proposals originally submitted by Brazil and Argentina as well as additional proposals of other member states. The 45 recommendations adopted by the General Assembly in 2007 are divided into six clusters, namely: Cluster A: Technical Assistance and Capacity Building; Cluster B: Norm-setting, Flexibilities, Public Policy and Public Domain; Cluster C: Technology Transfer, Information and Communication Technology (ICT) and Access to Knowledge; Cluster D: Assessments, Evaluation and Impact Studies; Cluster E: Institutional Matters Including Mandate and Governance; and Cluster F: Others. These include 19 recommendations for immediate implementation by WIPO and 26 for which the CDIP is required to develop a work program.

Editorial: Walk the Talk – Putting climate justice into action

So, why is the journal entitled climate justice and development rather than climate change and development? It is after all climate change that the many intergovernmental meetings, articles, in-depth media reporting, books, newspaper articles and blogs are talking about. We have scientific reports, technological solutions and a plethora of economic predictions rolling out the figures. The costs of global warming are dire. Governments, with scientific and expert economic backing, all pronounce that climate change is a threat to humanity and nature.We must take action or else the globe suffers the consequences. Corporations are entreated to change their ways, and emissions are to be controlled and traded. At a minimum, jet setters are asked to pay a bit more towards the cost of their flight to the atmosphere. Citizens are to take public transport and save CO2 emissions. No one can question it; we are in the grips of climate change. Indeed we are, but the issue is not about the amount of damage climate change will wreak on future economies and human prosperity. It is how we respond to it. It is clearly a matter for global concern and requires global action. So, is the answer to call a halt to the growing new super economies of China and India? Hold the US and Europe to ransom until they take responsibility for the global environment? Is the answer to put the Kyoto Protocol into action? Do we encourage corporations to go green? Or should we look at how to engineer carbon-eating trees? Or grow corn and convert it into biofuels? Is ethanol the solution? What about low cost solar energy solutions? Can we create a world economy based on biotechnology, where some low cost and environmentally benign technology backstops carbon emissions? These are just some of the economic and scientific proposals on the table. Several of these are addressed in the articles in this journal edition. But in many ways discussing these proposals, and how to implement them, including those in place such as carbon trading, miss the point. The response is not a technological one, or even an economic one, nor, despite all the pronouncements at high-level intergovernmental meetings, a policy one. The real issue is about what principles and what ethics with which we respond. In short, we are talking about taking political ecology and social justice seriously. We are talking about the injustice of making those people who have contributed the least to climate change to be the ones that pay, again the price of other peoples’ lifestyles.

A geoscientist in the State Department

It must have been in a fit of idealism, à la Jimmy Stewart, that I applied to be a Jefferson Science Fellow (JSF) at the U.S. Department of State in the summer of 2004. The flyer was appealing, offering an opportunity to become “directly involved with the State Department, applying current knowledge of science and technology in support of the development of U.S. international policy. The Jefferson Science Fellowships enable academic scientists and engineers to act as consultants to the State Department on matters of science, technology, and engineering as they affect foreign policy.”My own science—elating to ozone depletion, climate change, and aviation environmental impacts—often has been at the science‐policy interface. As a result, I have attended governmental and intergovernmental meetings, particularly the international assessments on climate change and ozone depletion. I had even come to know the State Department team on climate negotiations, although I had never been inside the State Department. The appeal of working on the inside of negotiations within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change was strong—if only to find out what an ‘interlocutor’ was.

The Cardoso Report on the UN and Civil Society: Functionalism, Global Corporatism, or Global Democracy?

The Report of the Panel of Eminent Persons on United Nations-Civil Society Relations was published in June 2004. It strongly endorsed the case for wider participation of civil society in all aspects of the UN's work, both at the headquarters and at the country level. However, the Panel members displayed little understanding of the existing NGO consultative arrangements. Many of its recommendations were impolitic or impractical. The report was intellectually incoherent because it embodied three competing theoretical frameworks: functionalism, neocorporatism, and democratic pluralism. The functionalist emphasis on expertise and the neocorporatist emphasis on engaging stakeholders cannot offer criteria for participation on an all-embracing democratic basis. Reform is needed provide facilities and resources enhance participation by marginalized groups. KEYWORDS: nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), United Nations, global civil society, Cardoso Report, functionalism, neocorporatism, legitimacy, participation. ********** Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) have been important participants in the United Nations system since 1945. They have access intergovernmental meetings, present written statements, make speeches, and lobby for specific texts be adopted. For the first twenty-five years, fewer than 400 NGOs were registered with the UN, and at any particular meeting only a few of these were active, mainly behind the scenes. During the 1970s, a series of major UN conferences stimulated a tremendous growth in the number of NGOs, the range of issues addressed, the types of activities undertaken, the amount of media coverage, and the extent of influence achieved. Now more than 3,000 NGOs are registered as having consultative status, and many more have some involvement in UN policymaking. However, NGOs are still predominantly limited conferences and the subsidiary bodies of the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC). (1) They have no formal status within the General Assembly, the Security Council, or the international economic institutions. Many NGOs want their participation rights be extended these forums, but there is significant opposition this among the UN's member governments. A second problem is the imbalance within the NGO community at the UN between the numbers of individuals from North America and northern Europe and the lower numbers from other parts of the world, particularly from Africa. In this article, I analyze the conclusions of a review, known as the Cardoso Report, that was intended address these limitations the consultative arrangements and generate new ideas for civil society engagement with the UN. (2) There are three normative arguments for enhancing NGO participation in policymaking: the functionalist appeal for the use of expertise; the corporatist desire involve the affected interests; and the pluralist belief in democratic policymaking. The three arguments are all clearly present in the Cardoso Report, but confusion results because they are not compatible with each other. The first two approaches represent a threat the NGO participation rights that have been operating for the last sixty years at the United Nations. The only morally sound and politically feasible basis for legitimizing wider NGO participation in the UN system is the democratic claim for all voices be heard in global policy debates. The goals of extending ECOSOC participation rights other forums and of increased participation from civil society in developing countries will be analyzed below in this light. The Cardoso Panel on United Nations--Civil Society Relations The work of the Cardoso Panel must be seen as part of the reform process that Kofi Annan initiated as soon as he took office in January 1997. His first report launch the reforms called for the United Nations to engage civil society and make it a true partner in its work. (3) Progress was slow and many new ideas met with opposition. …

The Prime Minister and the Core Executive: A Liberal Intergovernmentalist Reading of UK Defence Policy Formulation 1997–2000

This article explores the domestic formulation of UK European defence policy 1997–2000 through the intergovernmental meetings at Pörtschach and Saint Malo which set in train the development and codification of a common European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) in 2000, through a Liberal Intergovernmentalist (LI) framework. This research leads to five conclusions: first, that the Saint Malo initiative was a tactical shift of government policies rather than core preferences; second, that the prime minister centralised European defence policy-making within the core executive; third, that the prime minister was crucial to the development of the initiative; fourth, that the presentation of the initiative was made on lowest common denominator grounds; and, lastly, that the ‘successive limited comparisons' framework provides an effective corrective to LI's domestic policy formulation hypotheses.

Policy issues impacting on crop production in water-limiting environments

Policy issues have impacted on cropping since the earliest days of European colonial settlement. Following emigration to Australia, secure land titles were required, with the Torrens title system being progressively introduced from 1858. This provided the basis for landholders to be able to borrow to develop land. Closer settlement policies were adopted, underpinned by the development of transport infrastructure. The demand for education resulted in Agricultural Colleges in the colonies from the 1880s, with Departments of Agriculture soon afterwards. Federation of the colonies into the Commonwealth of Australia and the creation of the states resulted in a separation of powers, with the Commonwealth assuming responsibility for external powers including overseas marketing, import quarantine, health and quality standards of exports and credit and financial powers. Natural resource management matters and education were among those remaining with the states. Regular intergovernmental meetings were held to discuss research from 1927 and a broader range of agricultural issues from 1935. The Great Depression in the 1930s, poor commodity prices and serious land degradation led to government support for debt reconstruction and the introduction of soil conservation services. Realising the need for innovation to successfully compete on world markets, farmers, led by cereal growers, petitioned for the establishment of statutory research programs with joint grower/government funding from the 1950s. These have been remarkably successful, with the uptake of new technologies contributing to an average multifactor productivity growth of Australian grain farms by 3.3% per year between 1977–78 and 2001–02. With community and policy recognition of the need to conserve natural resources, the Commonwealth Government is playing an increasing role in this area. Farmers are required to meet standards for the use of agricultural chemicals and for occupational safety, welfare and environmental protection. The states have taken a conservative stand against the growing of genetically modified food crops in the name of protecting overseas markets. New water management regimes are coming into place with the separation of water titles from land. Market-based instruments are being introduced to encourage more sustainable production systems and saleable ecosystem services. Research and innovation along with complementary policy initiatives will continue to underpin farmers’ adaptive management skills to ensure dryland crop producers have sustainable production systems while remaining competitive in world markets.

THE RISE OF LIBYA AS A REGIONAL PLAYER

Extracted from text ... Since relations with the Arab League soured in the late 1990s, Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi has turned his attention toward build-ing strategic alliances in Africa. As a pariah state under United Nations' sanctions, Libya sought recognition and respectability in the arena of intergovernmental meetings of African leaders. Five years later, the extent of Libyan influ-ence within the African Union, NEPAD and the Regional Economic Communities (RECs) may be gauged against a history of less salu-tary military interventions and 'petro-dollar diplomacy' throughout the continent. To understand the role and impact of Gaddafi's Africa policy, it is first necessary to consider the internal dynamics of the country that has been ruled by decree for over three decades. Libya's history ..