Climate-Change Pledges, Actions and Outcomes

We study countries’ compliance with the targets pledged in international climate-change agreements and the impact of those agreements and specific climate laws and policies on greenhouse-gas emissions and economic outcomes. To do so, we compile and codify data on international agreements and measures enacted at the national and sub-national levels. We find that compliance with targets has been mixed. Still, countries that signed the Kyoto Protocol or the Copenhagen Accord experienced significant reductions in emissions when compared to non-signatories. Having quantifiable targets led to further reductions. Effects from the Paris Agreement are not yet evident in the data. Carbon taxes and the introduction of emission-trading schemes led to material reductions in emissions. Other climate laws or policies do not appear to have had, individually, a material effect on emissions. The impact on GDP growth or inflation from most measures was largely insignificant. Overall, much more ambitious targets would be needed to offset the impact of economic and population growth on emissions and contain the expansion of the stock of gases.

7. Politics of climate change

‘Politics of climate change’ begins by looking at the history of the climate change negotiations, considering key milestones such as the Kyoto Protocol, the Copenhagen Accord, and the Paris Agreement. At the Paris climate meeting in 2015, world leaders agreed that global temperature increase should be kept below 2°C, with an aspirational target of 1.5°C. Despite this agreement, global carbon emissions have continued to rise every year. There are potential flaws in the approach of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). We should note the various carbon trading schemes and the UN’s REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) programme, which has been subsequently refined as REDD+. What needs to be achieved politically if climate change is to be mitigated?

Empty Institutions in Global Environmental Politics

Why are some institutions without any policy powers or output? This study documents the efforts by governments to create empty international institutions whose mandates deprive them of any capacity for policy formulation or implementation. Examples include the United Nations Forum on Forests, the Copenhagen Accord on Climate Change, and the UN Commission on Sustainable Development. Research is based on participation in twenty-one rounds of negotiations over ten years and interviews with diplomats, policymakers, and observers. The article introduces the concept of empty institutions, provides evidence from three empirical cases, theorizes their political functions, and discusses theoretical implications and policy ramifications. Empty institutions are deliberately designed not to deliver and serve two purposes. First, they are political tools for hiding failure at negotiations, by creating a public impression of policy progress. Second, empty institutions are “decoys” that distract public scrutiny and legitimize collective inaction, by filling the institutional space in a given issue area and by neutralizing pressures for genuine policy. Contrary to conventional academic wisdom, institutions can be raised as obstacles that preempt governance rather than facilitate it.

The Paris Agreement on Climate Change—Made in USA?

The 2015 Paris Agreement established a new logic for international climate governance: the pledge-and-review system. In 2009, the same idea had been proposed in the Copenhagen Accord, but was then forcefully rejected by the negotiation community. Explaining this turnaround, I analyze the role of the United States in the international climate negotiations, using Putnam’s two-level game framework and Snidal’s k-group theory. U.S. domestic politics imposed significant constraints on the terms of the Paris Agreement, contributing to the emergence of the new treaty architecture. Until 2015, U.S. negotiators were either unable or unwilling to bring the demands of political actors at the domestic and international levels in alignment. President Obama achieved this alignment in 2015 by creating international support for a treaty without legally binding obligations that could circumvent a Congressional ratification barrier. The latter required a surprising move: the proactive engagement of China despite the structural context of hegemonic transition.

Reshaping the Global Climate Change Regime through the Paris Agreement

The Paris Agreement on Climate Change which aimed at halting climate change and limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, remains the most important piece of international diplomacy in years, since the Kyoto Protocol of 1992 and the Copenhagen Accord (which endorsed the continuation of the Kyoto Protocol) 2009. The signing of the Paris Agreement underlies the fact that climate change remains one of the greatest challenges of our time and calls for a strong political will to urgently combat climate change in accordance with the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities. This article looks at Paris Agreement’s resolve to peak global greenhouse-gas emissions as soon as possible and also undertakes a cursory examination of the global climate regime. The article also examines how the problem of climate change has altered since the 2009 Copenhagen Accord and concludes by emphasizing the need to take the Paris Agreement forward in spirit.