Center for Climate Science and Policy Research

Linköping, Sweden

Center for Climate Science and Policy Research

Linköping, Sweden
SEARCH FILTERS
Time filter
Source Type

Hjerpe M.,Center for Climate Science and Policy Research | Hjerpe M.,Linköping University | Nasiritousi N.,Center for Climate Science and Policy Research | Nasiritousi N.,Linköping University
Nature Climate Change | Year: 2015

This year (2015) marks the 21st formal anniversary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and in December a new climate treaty is expected to be reached. Yet, the UNFCCC has not been successful in setting the world on a path to meet a target to prevent temperatures rising by more than 2 °C above pre-industrial levels. Meanwhile, other forums, such as the G20 and subnational forums, have increasingly become sites of climate change initiatives. There has, however, so far been no systematic evaluation of what forums climate change policymakers and practitioners perceive to be needed to effectively tackle climate change. Drawing on survey data from two recent UNFCCC Conference of the Parties (COP), we show that there exists an overall preference for state-led, multilateral forums. However, preferences starkly diverge between respondents from different geographical regions and no clear alternative to the UNFCCC emerges. Our results highlight difficulties in coordinating global climate policy in a highly fragmented governance landscape. © 2015 Macmillan Publishers Limited.


Upadhyaya P.,Center for Climate Science and Policy Research
Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning | Year: 2016

Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs) were proposed as a policy framework that could provide middle ground for meeting both the development and mitigation objectives in developing countries. While South Africa engaged actively with the NAMA terminology in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change negotiations, its engagement at the domestic level has been rather lacklustre. This presents an interesting paradox. The paper studies the interplay of international norms embodied in NAMAs with South Africa's domestic policy process. Disengagement and contestation around NAMAs in South Africa is played out at three stages: decision-making stage where the symptoms surrounding this contestation first emerge; policy formulation stage where NAMAs have to not only align with the National Development Plan but also compete with a predilection for domestically familiar terminology of flagships under the national climate policy; and finally the broader agenda-setting stage of policy process, where NAMAs have to prove useful in not only pursuing the developmental state agenda but also in tackling the underlying material factors that represent country's economic dependency on fossil fuels. NAMAs faced combined resistance from ideas and interests in various degrees at all these stages resulting in their disengagement. © 2016 Taylor & Francis

Loading Center for Climate Science and Policy Research collaborators
Loading Center for Climate Science and Policy Research collaborators