TY - JOUR
T1 - Assessing the effectiveness of orchestrated climate action from five years of summits
AU - Chan, Sander
AU - Hale, Thomas
AU - Deneault, Andrew
AU - Shrivastava, Manish
AU - Mbeva, Kennedy
AU - Chengo, Victoria
AU - Atela, Joanes
N1 - Funding Information:
This research received support from Volkswagen Stiftung, grant no. A137201 (T.H, S.C, K.M. and V.C) and the Klimalog project at the German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS), funded by the Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) (A.D.). We thank J. Brehm, M. Garcia, M. Gütschow, B. Nimshani Khawe Thanthrige, M. Mohan, B. Nagasawa de Souza, S. Pfund, S. Posa, A. Teunissen, E. Tingwey and M. Whitney for their support in data collection and the continued development of C-CID.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022, The Author(s).
PY - 2022/7
Y1 - 2022/7
N2 - Action-oriented summits like the 2018 Global Climate Action Summit and 2019 UN Climate Action Summit, have become a major feature of global climate governance. Their emphasis on cooperative initiatives by a host of non-state and local actors creates high expectations, especially when, according to the IPCC, governments’ policies still set the world on course for a disastrous 2.7 °C warming. While earlier studies have cautioned against undue optimism, empirical evidence on summits and their ability to leverage transnational capacities has been scarce. Here using a dataset of 276 climate initiatives we show important differences in output performance, with no improvement among initiatives associated with more recent summits. A summit’s focus on certain themes and an emphasis on minimal requirements for institutional robustness, however, can positively influence the effectiveness of transnational engagement. These results make an empirical contribution towards understanding the increasingly transnational nature of climate governance.
AB - Action-oriented summits like the 2018 Global Climate Action Summit and 2019 UN Climate Action Summit, have become a major feature of global climate governance. Their emphasis on cooperative initiatives by a host of non-state and local actors creates high expectations, especially when, according to the IPCC, governments’ policies still set the world on course for a disastrous 2.7 °C warming. While earlier studies have cautioned against undue optimism, empirical evidence on summits and their ability to leverage transnational capacities has been scarce. Here using a dataset of 276 climate initiatives we show important differences in output performance, with no improvement among initiatives associated with more recent summits. A summit’s focus on certain themes and an emphasis on minimal requirements for institutional robustness, however, can positively influence the effectiveness of transnational engagement. These results make an empirical contribution towards understanding the increasingly transnational nature of climate governance.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85133721311&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1038/s41558-022-01405-6
DO - 10.1038/s41558-022-01405-6
M3 - Article
SN - 1758-678X
VL - 12
SP - 628
EP - 633
JO - Nature Climate Change
JF - Nature Climate Change
IS - 7
ER -