Malaysia's complex multi-level climate governance between institutionalization and non-state actor interventions

2021 ◽  
pp. 91-111
Author(s):  
Irina Safitri Zen ◽  
Zeeda Fatimah Mohamad
Keyword(s):  
Climate Governance ◽  
State Actor ◽  
Multi Level

scholarly journals Multi-level climate governance and the role of the subnational level

2015 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 235-245 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kirsten Jörgensen ◽  
Anu Jogesh ◽  
Arabinda Mishra
Keyword(s):  
Climate Governance ◽  
Multi Level

scholarly journals Understanding the Paradoxes of Multilevel Governing: Climate Change Policy in the European Union

2012 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 43-66 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Jordan ◽  
Harro van Asselt ◽  
Frans Berkhout ◽  
Dave Huitema ◽  
Tim Rayner
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
European Union ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Climate Governance ◽  
Paradoxical Situation ◽  
Change Policy ◽  
Leading Position ◽  
Multi Level ◽  
The Eu

The European Union (EU) has sought to lead the world in the adoption of ambitious climate change mitigation targets and policies. In an attempt to characterize and broadly explain the resulting pattern of EU climate governance, scholars have employed the term “multi-level reinforcement.” This term does help to account for the paradoxical situation whereby the EU seeks to lead by example but is itself a relatively leaderless system of governance. Drawing on a much fuller empirical account of the evolution of EU climate governance, this article finds that the term captures some but not all aspects of the EU's approach. It identifies four other paradoxical features of the EU's approach and assesses the extent to which they exhibit “multi-level reinforcement.” It concludes by looking forward and examining the extent to which all five features are expected to enable and/or constrain the EU's ability to maintain a leading position in climate governance.

Indigenous and Traditional Knowledge in the IPCC reports: a Systematic Comparative Analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annegret Kuhn
Keyword(s):  
Traditional Knowledge ◽  
Qualitative Content Analysis ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Second Step ◽  
Epistemic Authority ◽  
Climate Governance ◽  
Multi Level ◽  
The Empirical Analysis ◽  
Governance Arrangements ◽  
Over Time

<p>We recently witness an increasing inclusion of so-called indigenous or traditional knowledge (ITK) in multi-level climate governance arrangements. Some scholars ascribe this development a high potential for fostering legitimacy and effectivity of global climate governance. However, there are also more critical voices, considering the existing political inclusion of ITK deficient or inadequate. In view of the ongoing controversial discussion, this paper critically studies the scope and modalities of ITK inclusion with reference to one of the crucial sources of epistemic authority within global climate governance – the IPCC. The empirical analysis conducts a systematic quantitative and qualitative content analysis of IPCC Assessment Reports and Special Reports from 1995 to 2019. It studies the different conceptualizations of ITK over time, as well as dominant legitimation narratives arguing for the inclusion of ITK in climate governance. In a second step, consequences for the legitimacy of the IPCC as epistemic authority and global climate governance arrangements more in general are deduced and discussed.  </p>

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document