Global governance

Last updated

Global governance refers to institutions that coordinate the behavior of transnational actors, facilitate cooperation, resolve disputes, and alleviate collective action problems. [1] [2] [3] Global governance broadly entails making, monitoring, and enforcing rules. [4] Within global governance, a variety of types of actors – not just states – exercise power. [4]

Contents

In contrast to the traditional meaning of governance, the term global governance is used to denote the regulation of interdependent relations in the absence of an overarching political authority. [5] The best example of this is the international system or relationships between independent states.

The concept of global governance began in the mid-19th century. [1] It became particularly prominent in the aftermath of World War I, and more so after the end of World War II. [1] Since World War II, the number of international organizations has increased substantially. [1] The number of actors (whether they be states, non-governmental organizations, firms, and epistemic communities) who are involved in governance relationships has also increased substantially. [1]

Various terms have been used for the dynamics of global governance, such as complex interdependence, international regimes, multilevel governance, global constitutionalism, and ordered anarchy. [6]

Definition

The term world governance is broadly used to designate all regulations intended for organization and centralization of human societies on a global scale. The Forum for a new World Governance defines world governance simply as "collective management of the planet". [7] Woodrow Wilson's League of Nations, the predecessor of the United Nations, was one of the first organizations to promote global governance. [8] [9] [10]

Traditionally, government has been associated with governing, or with political authority, institutions, and, ultimately, control. Governance denotes a process through which institutions coordinate and control independent social relations, and that have the ability to enforce their decisions. However, governance is also used to denote the regulation of interdependent relations in the absence of an overarching political authority, such as in the international system. [11] Some now speak of the development of global public policy. [12]

Adil Najam, a scholar on the subject at the Pardee School of Global Studies, Boston University has defined global governance simply as "the management of global processes in the absence of global government." [13] According to Thomas G. Weiss, director of the Ralph Bunche Institute for International Studies at the Graduate Center (CUNY) and editor (2000–05) of the journal Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organizations , "'Global governance'—which can be good, bad, or indifferent—refers to concrete cooperative problem-solving arrangements, many of which increasingly involve not only the United Nations of states but also 'other UNs,' namely international secretariats and other non-state actors." [14] In other words, global governance refers to the way in which global affairs are managed.

Global governance has also been defined as "the complex of formal and informal institutions, mechanisms, relationships, and processes between and among states, markets, citizens and organizations, both inter- and non-governmental, through which collective interests on the global plane are articulated, rights and obligations are established, and differences are mediated". [15]

The definition is flexible in scope, applying to general subjects such as global security and order or to specific documents and agreements such as the World Health Organization's Code on the Marketing of Breast Milk Substitutes. The definition applies whether the participation is bilateral (e.g. an agreement to regulate usage of a river flowing in two countries), function-specific (e.g. a commodity agreement), regional (e.g. the Treaty of Tlatelolco), or global (e.g. the Non-Proliferation Treaty). [16] These "cooperative problem-solving arrangements" may be formal, taking the shape of laws or formally constituted institutions for a variety of actors (such as state authorities, intergovernmental organizations (IGOs), non-governmental organizations (NGOs), private sector entities, other civil society actors, and individuals) to manage collective affairs. [17] They may also be informal (as in the case of practices or guidelines) or ad hoc entities (as in the case of coalitions). [18]

However, a single organization may take the nominal lead on an issue, for example the World Trade Organization (WTO) in world trade affairs. Therefore, global governance is thought to be an international process of consensus-forming which generates guidelines and agreements that affect national governments and international corporations. Examples of such consensus would include WTO policies on health issues.

Academic tool or discipline

In the light of the unclear meaning of the term "global governance" as a concept in international politics, [19] some authors have proposed defining it not in substantive, but in disciplinary and methodological terms. For these authors, global governance is better understood as an analytical concept or optic that provides a specific perspective on world politics different from that of conventional international relations [20] theory. Thomas G. Weiss and Rorden Wilkinson have even argued that global governance has the capacity to overcome some of the fragmentation of international relations as a discipline [21] particularly when understood as a set of questions about the governance of world orders. [22] Other authors conceptualized global governance as a field of practice in which diverse stakeholders, such as public, private, and supra-governmental actors can compete for influence about issues that are not bound to national boundaries. [23] This conceptualization allows to better understand the principles of exclusions of specific stakeholders from the negotiation field as some actors lack the economic, social, cultural and symbolic resources required to gain enough influence. [24]

History

While attempts of intergovernmental coordination of policy-making can be traced back to ancient times, comprehensive search for effective formats of international coordination and cooperation truly began after the end of the WWI. It was during that post-war period that some of the still existing international institutions (or their immediate predecessors) were founded. Among thinkers who made major contributions to the period discussions on the goals and forms of international governance and policy coordination were J.M. Keynes with his "The Economic Consequences of the Peace" and G. Cassel with his works on the post-war development of the global monetary system. [25]

The dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 marked the end of a long period of international history based on a policy of balance of powers. Since this historic event, the planet has entered a phase of geostrategic breakdown. The national-security model, for example, while still in place for most governments, is gradually giving way to an emerging collective conscience that extends beyond the restricted framework it represents. [26]

In its initial phase, world governance was able to draw on themes inherited from geopolitics and the theory of international relations, such as peace, defense, geostrategy, diplomatic relations, and trade relations. But as globalization progresses and the number of interdependencies increases, the global level is also highly relevant to a far wider range of subjects, such as climate change, environmental protection and sustainability in general.[ citation needed ]

In the 20th century, the risks associated with nuclear fission raised global awareness of environmental threats. The 1963 Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty prohibiting atmospheric nuclear testing marked the beginning of the globalization of environmental issues. Environmental law began to be modernized and coordinated with the Stockholm Conference (1972), backed up in 1980 by the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. [27] The Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer was signed and ratified in 1985. In 1987, 24 countries signed the Montreal Protocol which imposed the gradual withdrawal of CFCs.

Methods

Global governance can be roughly divided into four stages: [28] : 14–16 

  1. agenda-setting (or global goal-setting [29] );
  2. policymaking,
  3. implementation and enforcement, and
  4. evaluation, monitoring, and adjudication.

Global goal-setting

A "new central approach in global governance" is global goal-setting. [29] The Sustainable Development Goals (to be achieved during the years 2015 to 2030) are one example of global goal setting. Previously, another attempt at "global governance by goal-setting" were the Millennium Development Goals from the year 2000 to 2015. [29] Earlier examples of global goal-setting include the "Plan of Action of the 1990 World Summit for Children" or the "first Development Decade that dates as far back as 1961". [29] Such governance relies on goals that are not legally binding, leave much national leeway, and do not come with strong institutional arrangements. [30]

Indicator for Target 18.8 of SDG 16: Share of voting rights in international organizations, for Least Developed Countries (LDCs), as of 2022 Share-voting-rights-international-organizations.png
Indicator for Target 18.8 of SDG 16: Share of voting rights in international organizations, for Least Developed Countries (LDCs), as of 2022

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) were "expected to have a major impact on the United Nations system" which is a key actor within the global governance concept. [29] However, the SDGs have broadly failed to integrate global policies and to bring international organizations together. By and large, the SDGs have not become a shared set of connecting goals, and their uptake in global governance remains limited. [32]

The UN Sustainable Development Goal 16 on "peace, justice and strong institutions" has a target and indicator regarding global governance (to be achieved by 2030). The wording of this Target 16.8 is: "Broaden and strengthen the participation of developing countries in the institutions of global governance." [33] The target has a single indicator which is the "Proportion of members and voting rights of developing countries in international organizations". [34]

Research published in 2023 has shown that the SDGs have not lived up to expectations that they would help integrate the system of global governance. The SDGs are not taken up by a large enough group of international organizations, and organizations continue to cherry-pick SDGs that best fit their interest. In particular, international organizations often cherry-pick SDG 8 (on decent work and economic growth), SDG 9 (on industry and innovation), and SDG 12 (on consumption and production). [32]

International bureaucracies

International bureaucracies (in the form of intergovernmental treaty secretariats) exert autonomous influence in various domains of global affairs. An example of an intergovernmental treaty secretariat is the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Scholars are finding that international bureaucracies can be actors with considerable agency and can have important tasks in contemporary global policy-making. [35] They rely on soft modes of governance to affect global and domestic policy-making due to their lack of coercive power compared to state actors that can enforce legally binding rules. [35]

International bureaucracies can work as orchestrators that interact with non-state actors, such as civil society groups, non-profit entities, or the private sector to encourage national governments to agree on a more ambitious response to collective action problems in the realm of global environmental politics. [35] Orchestration can be understood as an indirect mode of governance whereby a given actor (e.g. international organizations or national governments) mobilizes one or more intermediaries to take influence on a certain target group.

As of 2022, there is a general trend towards the involvement of non-state actors into global policy-making. [35] For example, new alliances are being formed between intergovernmental treaty secretariats and non-state actors.

Global sustainability governance is marked by a highly fragmented system of distinct clusters of international organizations, along with states and other actors. [36]

Others

World authorities including international organizations and corporations achieve deference to their agenda through different means. Authority can derive from institutional status, expertise, moral authority, capacity, or perceived competence. [28] : 9–14 

Global environmental governance

The most pressing transboundary environmental challenges include climate change, biodiversity loss, and land degradation. [37] [35] Solving these problems now warrants coordination across a variety of institutions featuring many actors and encompassing different levels and scales of governance. [37] The field of global environmental governance has been characterized as “one of the institutionally most dynamic areas in world politics regarding the number of international institutions and actors that have emerged over the past three decades”. [35]

Following the growth of international environmental institutions from the 1970s, intergovernmental and transnational environmental governance has rapidly proliferated over the last few decades. As a result of this proliferation, domains of institutional competence increasingly overlap. This compounds the fragmentation and institutional complexity of global environmental governance, but also creates opportunities for productive interactions among institutions. [37]

The United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) coordinates the environmental activity of countries in the UN. For example, UNEP has played a vital role as a coordinator and catalyzer for an array of multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs). [37] UNEP was envisioned to take up a leading role in more centralized global environmental governance. However, UNEP has been widely considered as a weak international organization, as many institutional arrangements concerned with regulating environmental matters have become increasingly independent of UNEP over the past decades, resembling a very loosely and sometimes poorly coordinated network. Moreover, some opponents have doubted the effectiveness of a centralized overarching institutional framework to govern global environmental governance and law. [37]

The International Institute for Sustainable Development proposed a reform agenda for global environmental governance (GEG) in 2006. They formulated five goals that "can be the basis of a shared global vision for the global environmental governance system": [38] : 72  leadership, knowledge ("science should be the authoritative basis of sound environmental policy"), coherence (see also policy coherence for development), performance, mainstreaming ("incorporate environmental concerns and actions within other areas of international policy and action, and particularly so in the context of sustainable development").

Political scientists have said that structural changes in global environmental governance are urgently needed both within and outside United Nations (UN) institutions, including fully fledged international organizations, specialized bodies and programs, as well as secretariats of international environmental agreements. [35] Three examples of intergovernmental treaty secretariats include the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (climate secretariat), the Convention on Biological Diversity (biodiversity secretariat), and the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (desertification secretariat) and non-state actors. These secretariats can reach out to non-state actors in order to pursue distinct policy goals. [35]

International bureaucracies might mitigate political gridlock by rallying support from transnational and sub-national actors or turning to non-state actors in order to mobilize advocacy, create demonstration effects, or otherwise nudge national governments towards more ambitious international agreements. [35]

International conventions and agreements

The International Environmental Agreement Database Project currently comprises almost 1300 multilateral agreements and over 2200 bilateral agreements (see also list of international environmental agreements). [35]

The main three multilateral conventions, also known as Rio Conventions (because they were agreed at the Earth Summit held in Rio de Janeiro in June 1992), are as follows:

  1. Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) (1992–1993): aims to conserve biodiversity. Related agreements include the Cartagena Protocol on biosafety.
  2. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC) (1992–1994): aims to stabilize concentrations of greenhouse gases at a level that would stabilize the climate system without threatening food production, and enabling the pursuit of sustainable economic development; it incorporates the Kyoto Protocol.
  3. United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) (1994–1996): aims to combat desertification and mitigate the effects of drought and desertification, in developing countries (Though initially the convention was primarily meant for Africa).

Further conventions:

Until now, the formulation of environmental policies at the international level has been divided by theme, sector or territory, resulting in treaties that overlap or clash. International attempts to coordinate environment institutions, include the Inter-Agency Coordination Committee and the Commission for Sustainable Development, but these institutions are not powerful enough to effectively incorporate the three aspects of sustainable development. [39]

Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs), or international environmental agreements, are agreements between several countries that apply internationally or regionally and concern a variety of environmental questions. As of 2013 over 500 Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs), including 45 of global scope involve at least 72 signatory countries. [40] [41] Further agreements cover regional environmental problems. Each agreement has a specific mission and objectives ratified by multiple states.

Proposals for a World Environment Organization (WEO)

Scholars have discussed the formation of an overarching institutional framework as a means to improve institutional interaction, more effectively address transboundary environmental problems, and advance sustainable development. Some have advocated for a new, overarching World Environment Organization (WEO). Others have instead argued for modifying existing decision-making procedures and institutional boundaries in order to enhance their effectiveness instead of creating new—likely dysfunctional—overarching frameworks. [37]

Some analysts also argue that multiple institutions and some degree of overlap and duplication in policies is necessary to ensure maximum output from the system. [42] Others, however, claim that institutions have become too dispersed and lacking in coordination which can be damaging to their effectiveness in global environmental governance. [43] Whilst there are various arguments for and against a WEO, the key challenge, however, remains the same: how to develop a rational and effective framework that will protect the global environment efficiently.

The idea for the creation of a WEO was discussed since the year 2000. [44] [45] It received fresh attention in the light of disappointing outcomes from ‘environmental mega conferences’ [46] (e.g.Rio Summit and Earth Summit 2002). Proposals in this area have discussed the issue of how collective environmental action is possible. Many multilateral, environment-related agreements have been forged in the past 30 years, but their implementation remains difficult. [47]

Many proposals for the creation of a WEO have emerged from the trade and environment debate. [48] It has been argued that instead of creating a WEO to safeguard the environment, environmental issues should be directly incorporated into the World Trade Organization (WTO). [49] The WTO has "had success in integrating trade agreements and opening up markets because it is able to apply legal pressure to nation states and resolve disputes". [48]

Aspects of Global North and Global South

Relations between the Global North and Global South have been impacted by a history of colonialism, during which Northern colonial powers contributed to environmental degradation of natural resources in the South. [50] This dynamic continues to influence international relations and is the basis for what some historians recognize as the "North-South divide." [51] Scholars argue that this divide has created hurdles in the international lawmaking process regarding the environment. Scholars have noted that unindustrialized countries in the Global South sometimes are disconnected from environmentalism and perceive environmental governance to be a "luxury" priority for the Global North. [51] Also, environmental governance priorities in the Global North have been at odds with the desire to focus on economic development in the Global South. [52]

Some analysts propose a shift towards "non-state" actors for the development of environmental governance. [53] Environmental politics researcher Karin Bäckstrand claims this will increase transparency, accountability, and legitimacy. [53] In some cases, scholars have noted that environmental governance in the Global North has had adverse consequences on the environment in the Global South. [54] Environmental and economic priorities in the Global North do not always align with those in the Global South. [54] Tension between countries in the Global North and Global South has caused some academics to criticize global environmental governance for being too slow of a process to enact policy change. [55]

Global health governance

Where governance refers to institutional arrangements between state and non-state actors, global health governance refers to such institutional arrangements that have a direct and indirect impact on health. Prior to 2002, the term "global health governance" did not exist; it emerged as a description of cross-border initiatives (structures and processes) tackling global health. Global health governance (GHG) has come to replace an earlier term "international health governance" (IHG) which worked in a more state-centric system and era. [56] There is a call for a clearer definition and “conceptual clarity” for GHG due to its multiple meanings and varied uses. [57]

Global health governance foregrounds the interconnectivity that is needed between state and non-state actors. This interconnectivity differs from former global health systems in the greater role for non-state actors whose numbers are also increasing. Non-state actors are seen as vital at a time when state actors alone cannot address the many health challenges. Global health governance gives new roles for both non-state and state actors, in areas such as agenda setting, resource mobilization and allocation, and dispute settlement. [56] These changing roles have generated new kinds of partnerships such as the global campaign against the marketing of breast milk substitutes: collaboration between UNICEF, WHO, the International Baby Food Action Network, and other like-minded non-governmental organizations (NGOs) came together to address this issue. [56] Given the diversity found within the NGO community, specific NGOs can work in collaboration with state actors on specific issues, forming a more permanent yet fluid collaboration between the two. [58]

Issues

Inclusiveness

One of the ambitions of global governance nowadays is to have a higher level of inclusiveness. This means a "commitment to bring in, and advance the interests of, those countries that fared worst in economic globalization, especially the least developed countries", as well as Small Island Developing States and landlocked developing countries. [29]

Fragmentation

Global governance for sustainability as a system of international institutions and organizations remains fragmented. Hundreds of international organizations are active in this field (for example, a study in 2022 analyzed 335 of them). [36] However, they are only sparsely connected and often compete for scarce resources while prioritizing their own mandates. There is a need for enhanced international cooperation to better address the interconnected global governance challenges such as health, trade, and the environment. Policy proposals and reform ideas include clustering institutions, managing regime interplay, embracing complexity, or centralizing global sustainability governance through strong coordinating authorities. [36]

Fragmentation is a main driver for institutional complexity within global environmental governance. It results from the proliferation of public and private institutions in a given policy area, which can have consequences for the effectiveness of interacting institutions due to overlapping mandates and jurisdictions. The regime complex of climate change, for example, is no longer governed exclusively by the UNFCCC as its institutional core, but also by institutions like the World Trade Organization (WTO), the UN Security Council, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and many others, which are not geared toward addressing climate change as their primary governance target. [37]

One of the negative consequences of fragmentation is the emergence of conflicting institutional centers within regime complexes. This can hamper the formation of legally binding, internationally accepted regulation. The UNFCCC and International Maritime Organization (IMO), for example, have both addressed the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions from international shipping without consensus among key actors on a common approach toward resolving the problem. [37]

The 17 Sustainable Development Goals, agreed by the United Nations in 2015, explicitly aimed at advancing policy coherence and institutional integration among the myriad of international institutions. However, research has shown that since the implementation of the SDGs, fragmentation among international organizations has not decreased. Instead, the formation of silos has increased around the 17 SDG issue areas as well as around the economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainable development. [36]

Examples

Climate governance

This section is an excerpt from Climate governance.[ edit ]

Climate governance is the diplomacy, mechanisms and response measures "aimed at steering social systems towards preventing, mitigating or adapting to the risks posed by climate change". [59] A definitive interpretation is complicated by the wide range of political and social science traditions (including comparative politics, political economy and multilevel governance) that are engaged in conceiving and analysing climate governance at different levels and across different arenas. In academia, climate governance has become the concern of geographers, anthropologists, economists and business studies scholars. [60]

Climate governance – that is, effective management of the global climate system – is thus of vital importance. However, building effective collective mechanisms to govern impacts on the climate system at the planetary level presents particular challenges, e.g. the complexity of the relevant science and the progressive refinement of scientific knowledge about our global climate and planetary systems, and the challenge of communicating this knowledge to the general public and to policy makers. There is also the urgency of addressing this issue; the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has underlined that the international community has a narrow window of opportunity to act to keep global temperature rise at safe levels. Modern international climate governance is organized around three pillars: mitigation, adaptation and means of implementation. Under each pillar are many issues and policies, illustrating the many ways climate change affects society. [61]

In the first decade of the 21st century, a paradox had arisen between rising awareness about the causes and consequences of climate change and an increasing concern that the issues that surround it represent an intractable problem. [62] Initially, climate change was approached as a global issue, and climate governance sought to address it on the international stage. This took the form of Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs), beginning with the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in 1992. With the exception of the Kyoto Protocol, international agreements between nations had been largely ineffective in achieving legally binding emissions cuts. [63] With the end of the Kyoto Protocol's first commitment period in 2012, between 2013 and 2015 there was no legally binding global climate regime. This inertia on the international political stage contributed to alternative political narratives that called for more flexible, cost effective and participatory approaches to addressing the multifarious problems of climate change. [64] These narratives relate to the increasing diversity of methods that are being developed and deployed across the field of climate governance. [63] [65]

Protecting the ozone layer

On 16 September 1987 the United Nations General Assembly signed the Montreal Protocol to address the declining ozone layer. Since that time, the use of chlorofluorocarbons (industrial refrigerants and aerosols) and farming fungicides such as methyl bromide has mostly been eliminated, although other damaging gases are still in use. [66]

See also

Related Research Articles

Sustainable development is an approach to growth and human development that aims to meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. The aim is to have a society where living conditions and resources meet human needs without undermining planetary integrity. Sustainable development aims to balance the needs of the economy, environment, and social well-being. The Brundtland Report in 1987 helped to make the concept of sustainable development better known.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United Nations Environment Programme</span> Agency of the United Nations focused on solving environmental issues

The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) is responsible for coordinating responses to environmental issues within the United Nations system. It was established by Maurice Strong, its first director, after the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment in Stockholm in June 1972. Its mandate is to provide leadership, deliver science and develop solutions on a wide range of issues, including climate change, the management of marine and terrestrial ecosystems, and green economic development. The organization also develops international environmental agreements; publishes and promotes environmental science and helps national governments achieve environmental targets.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Global Environment Facility</span> A multilateral environmental Foundation that protects the climate

The Global Environment Facility (GEF) is a multilateral environmental fund that provides grants and blended finance for projects related to biodiversity, climate change, international waters, land degradation, persistent organic pollutants (POPs), mercury, sustainable forest management, food security, and sustainable cities in developing countries and countries with economies in transition. It is the largest source of multilateral funding for biodiversity globally and distributes more than $1 billion a year on average to address inter-related environmental challenges.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United Nations Global Compact</span> Non-binding United Nations pact

The United Nations Global Compact is a non-binding United Nations pact to get businesses and firms worldwide to adopt sustainable and socially responsible policies, and to report on their implementation. The UN Global Compact is the world's largest corporate sustainability and corporate social responsibility initiative, with more than 20,000 corporate participants and other stakeholders in over 167 countries. The organization consists of a global agency, and local "networks" or agencies for each participating country. Under the Global Compact, companies are brought together with UN agencies, labour groups and civil society.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">International environmental agreement</span> Treaties and protocols protecting the environment

An international environmental agreement or sometimes environmental protocol, is a type of treaty binding in international law, allowing them to reach an environmental goal. In other words, it is "an intergovernmental document intended as legally binding with a primary stated purpose of preventing or managing human impacts on natural resources."

Proposals for the creation of a United Nations Environmental Organization (UNEO) have come as some question the efficacy of the current United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) at dealing with the scope of global environmental issues. Created to act as an anchor institution in the system of Global Environmental Governance (GEG), it has failed to meet those demands. The UNEP has been hindered by its title as a Programme as opposed to a specialized agency like the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) or the World Health Organization (WHO), in addition to a lack of voluntary funding, and a location removed from the centers of political power, in Nairobi, Kenya. These factors have led to widespread calls for UNEP reform, and following the publication of Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC in February 2007, a "Paris Call for Action" read out by French President Chirac and supported by 46 countries, called for the UNEP to be replaced by a new and more powerful United Nations Environment Organization, to be modelled on the World Health Organization. The 52 countries included the European Union nations, but notably did not include the United States and BRIC, the top five emitters of greenhouse gases.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">International organization</span> Organization established by treaty between governments

An international organization, also known as an intergovernmental organization or an international institution, is an organization that is established by a treaty or other type of instrument governed by international law and possesses its own legal personality, such as the United Nations, the World Health Organization, International Union for Conservation of Nature, and BRICS. International organizations are composed of primarily member states, but may also include other entities, such as other international organizations, firms, and nongovernmental organizations. Additionally, entities may hold observer status.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Earth System Governance Project</span> Social science research programme

The Earth System Governance Project is a research network that builds on the work from about a dozen research centers and hundreds of researchers studying earth system governance. It is a long-term, interdisciplinary social science research alliance. Its origins are an international program called the International Human Dimensions Programme on Global Environmental Change. The ESG Project started in January 2009. Over time, it has evolved into a broader research alliance that builds on an international network of research centers, lead faculty and research fellows. It is now the largest social science research network in the area of governance and global environmental change.

Environmental governance (EG) consists of a system of laws, norms, rules, policies and practices that dictate how the board members of an environment related regulatory body should manage and oversee the affairs of any environment related regulatory body which is responsible for ensuring sustainability (sustainable development) and manage all human activities—political, social and economic. Environmental governance includes government, business and civil society, and emphasizes whole system management. To capture this diverse range of elements, environmental governance often employs alternative systems of governance, for example watershed-based management.

Climate governance is the diplomacy, mechanisms and response measures "aimed at steering social systems towards preventing, mitigating or adapting to the risks posed by climate change". A definitive interpretation is complicated by the wide range of political and social science traditions that are engaged in conceiving and analysing climate governance at different levels and across different arenas. In academia, climate governance has become the concern of geographers, anthropologists, economists and business studies scholars.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">UNU-CRIS</span> Institute in Belgium

The United Nations University Institute on Comparative Regional Integration Studies (UNU-CRIS) is a Research and Training Institute of the United Nations University (UNU). Based in Bruges, Belgium since 2001, UNU-CRIS fosters a better understanding of the processes of regional integration and cooperation and their implications in a changing world order. UNU-CRIS specialises in the comparative study of regional integration, monitoring and assessing regional integration worldwide and in the study of interactions between regional organisations and global institutions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Earth system governance</span> Field of scholarly inquiry in the social sciences

Earth system governance is a broad area of scholarly inquiry that builds on earlier notions of environmental policy and nature conservation, but puts these into the broader context of human-induced transformations of the entire earth system. The integrative paradigm of earth system governance (ESG) has evolved into an active research area that brings together a variety of disciplines including political science, sociology, economics, ecology, policy studies, geography, sustainability science, and law.

The term ‘hybrid institution’ is not yet well-established or clearly defined in academic literature. German and Keller possibly introduced the term in 2009, describing it as "an institutional arrangement governing the interdependencies among discrete property holders and regimes". Abbot and Faude have suggested more recently that most areas in world politics today are governed "neither by individual institutions nor by regime complexes composed of formal interstate institutions. Rather, they are governed by “hybrid institutional complexes” comprising heterogeneous interstate, infra-state, public–private and private transnational institutions, formal and informal." Whether they are anything more than euphemisms for public-private partnerships, which are nothing new, is yet to be firmly established.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">International Institute for Sustainable Development</span> Think tank in Canada and Switzerland

The International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) is an independent think tank founded in 1990 working to shape and inform international policy on sustainable development governance. The institute has three offices in Canada - Winnipeg, Ottawa, and Toronto, and one office in Geneva, Switzerland. It has over 150 staff and associates working in over 30 countries.

Multistakeholder governance is a practice of governance that employs bringing multiple stakeholders together to participate in dialogue, decision making, and implementation of responses to jointly perceived problems. The principle behind such a structure is that if enough input is provided by multiple types of actors involved in a question, the eventual consensual decision gains more legitimacy, and can be more effectively implemented than a traditional state-based response. While the evolution of multistakeholder governance is occurring principally at the international level, public-private partnerships (PPPs) are domestic analogues.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sustainable Development Goals</span> United Nations goals for people for 2030

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are a collection of 17 global objectives established by the United Nations in 2015 as part of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. These goals aim to address a broad range of interconnected global challenges, including poverty eradication, environmental sustainability, social equity, and economic growth, under the guiding principle of "leaving no one behind." Designed to replace the Millennium Development Goals, the SDGs apply universally to all countries, irrespective of their development status, and seek to promote peace, prosperity, and the health of the planet.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sustainable Development Goal 13</span> UN goal to combat climate change

Sustainable Development Goal 13 is to limit and adapt to climate change. It is one of 17 Sustainable Development Goals established by the United Nations General Assembly in 2015. The official mission statement of this goal is to "Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts". SDG 13 and SDG 7 on clean energy are closely related and complementary.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sustainable Development Goal 10</span> UN Sustainable Development Goal

Sustainable Development Goal 10 is about reduced inequality and is one of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals established by the United Nations in 2015. The full title is: "Reduce inequality within and among countries".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Disability and climate change</span>

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the Paris Agreement, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) are connected through their common goals of addressing global challenges and promoting sustainable development through policies and international cooperation.

Frank Biermann is a German political scientist and professor at Utrecht University in the Netherlands. His research interests are in "global institutions and organisations in the sustainability domain". He was the founder in 2006 and first chair of the Earth System Governance Project. From 2018 until 2024 he directed a 2.5-million EUR research programme on the steering effects of the Sustainable Development Goals. This was funded through a European Research Council Advanced Grant.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 Barnett, Michael N.; Pevehouse, Jon C.W.; Raustiala, Kal (2021), Pevehouse, Jon C. W.; Raustiala, Kal; Barnett, Michael N. (eds.), "Introduction", Global Governance in a World of Change, Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–47, doi: 10.1017/9781108915199.001 , ISBN   978-1-108-90670-8, S2CID   244865423
  2. ↑ Young, Oran R. (1994). International Governance: Protecting the Environment in a Stateless Society. Cornell University Press. p. 54. ISBN   978-0-8014-8176-5.
  3. ↑ Barnett, Michael; Duvall, Raymond (2004), Barnett, Michael; Duvall, Raymond (eds.), Power in global governance, Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–32, ISBN   978-0-521-84024-8
  4. 1 2 Lake, David A (2021). "The organizational ecology of global governance". European Journal of International Relations. 27 (2): 345–368. doi:10.1177/1354066120959407. ISSN   1354-0661. S2CID   224930498.
  5. ↑ James N. Rosenau, "Toward an Ontology for Global Governance", in Martin Hewson and Thomas Sinclair, eds., Approaches to Global Governance Theory, SUNY Press, Albany, 1999.
  6. ↑ Alter, Karen J. (2022). "The promise and perils of theorizing international regime complexity in an evolving world". The Review of International Organizations. 17 (2): 375–396. doi:10.1007/s11558-021-09448-8. ISSN   1559-744X. S2CID   245870740.
  7. ↑ Forum for a New World Governance; Reasons for this Forum for a new World Governance
  8. ↑ International Organization and Global Governance. Routledge. 16 February 2018. ISBN   9781315301891.
  9. ↑ The Long Battle for Global Governance. Routledge. 8 January 2016. ISBN   9781317276883.
  10. ↑ Rethinking Global Governance. Bloomsbury. 16 February 2019. ISBN   9781137588623.
  11. ↑ James Rosenau, "Toward an Ontology for Global Governance", in Martin Hewson and Timothy J. Sinclair (eds.), Approaches to Global Governance Theory (Albany, NY: State University of New York, 1999).
  12. ↑ Stone, Diane (2008). "Global Public Policy, Transnational Policy Communities and their Networks" (PDF). Policy Studies Journal (Submitted manuscript). 36 (1): 19–38. doi:10.1111/j.1541-0072.2007.00251.x.
  13. ↑ Riazati, Saba (October 18, 2006). "A Closer Look: Professor Seeks Stronger U.N." The Daily Bruin . Retrieved October 17, 2012.
  14. ↑ The UN and Global Governance Archived 2007-08-21 at the Wayback Machine
  15. ↑ Thakur, Ramesh; Van Langenhove, Luk (2006). "Enhancing Global Governance through Regional Integration". Global Governance. 12 (3 July, September): 233–40. doi:10.1163/19426720-01203002.
  16. ↑ Finkelstein, Lawrence S. (September–December 1995). "What Is Global Governance?" (PDF). Global Governance. 1 (3). Lynne Rienner Publishers: 367–372. JSTOR   27800120. Archived from the original (PDF) on 15 April 2015.
  17. ↑ Pawel Zaleski Global Non-governmental Administrative System: Geosociology of the Third Sector, [in:] Gawin, Dariusz & Glinski, Piotr [ed.]: "Civil Society in the Making", IFiS Publishers, Warszawa 2006.
  18. ↑ Margaret P. Karns and Karen A. Mingst (2009). International Organizations: The Politics and Processes of Global Governance, 2nd ed. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers. p.  633. ISBN   978-1-58826-698-9.
  19. ↑ Thomas G. Weiss and Rorden Wilkinson (2014), "Rethinking Global Governance? Complexity, Authority, Power and Change", International Studies Quarterly, 58: 1, pp. 207-215
  20. ↑ K.Dingwerth and P.Pattberg, "Global Governance as a Perspective on World Politics", (2006) Global Governance vol. 12:198.
  21. ↑ Thomas G. Weiss and Rorden Wilkinson 920140, "Global Governance to the Rescue: Saving International Relations?", Global Governance, 20: 1, pp. 19-36
  22. ↑ Thomas G. Weiss and Rorden Wilkinson (2019), Rethinking Global Governance, Cambridge: Polity. ISBN   9781509527243
  23. ↑ Lissillour, Raphael; Bonet Fernandez, Dominique (2020). "The balance of power in the governance of the global maritime safety: the role of classification societies from a habitus perspective". Supply Chain Forum. 22 (3): 268–280. doi:10.1080/16258312.2020.1824533. S2CID   224945365.
  24. ↑ "3PL and maritime safety governance : from the perspective of Bourdieu's theory". Logistique & Management. 26: 214–228. 2018. doi:10.1080/12507970.2018.1527731. S2CID   158558184.
  25. ↑ Kadochnikov, Denis (2013). "Gustav Cassel's purchasing power parity doctrine in the context of his views on international economic policy coordination". European Journal of the History of Economic Thought. 20 (6): 1101–1121. doi:10.1080/09672567.2013.824999. S2CID   154383662.
  26. ↑ Blin, Arnaud; Marin, Gustavo; "Rethinking Global Governance" Archived 2012-05-30 at archive.today
  27. ↑ Di Mento, Josep; The Global Environment and International law, University of Texas Press; 2003; p 7.
  28. 1 2 Avant, Deborah D.; Finnemore, Martha; Sell, Susan K., eds. (2010). Who Governs the Globe? (1 ed.). Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/cbo9780511845369. ISBN   978-0-521-19891-2.
  29. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Biermann, Frank; Hickmann, Thomas; Sénit, Carole-Anne (2022), Biermann, Frank; Hickmann, Thomas; Sénit, Carole-Anne (eds.), "Assessing the Impact of Global Goals: Setting the Stage", The Political Impact of the Sustainable Development Goals (1 ed.), Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–21, doi:10.1017/9781009082945.002, ISBN   978-1-009-08294-5 , retrieved 2024-10-16
  30. ↑ de Jong, Eileen; Vijge, Marjanneke J. (2021). "From Millennium to Sustainable Development Goals: Evolving discourses and their reflection in policy coherence for development". Earth System Governance. 7: 100087. doi: 10.1016/j.esg.2020.100087 . CC-BY icon.svg Text was copied from this source, which is available under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
  31. ↑ Our World in Data team (2023) - “Promote just, peaceful and inclusive societies” Published online at OurWorldinData.org.
  32. 1 2 Bogers, Maya; Biermann, Frank; Kalfagianni, Agni; Kim, Rakhyun E. (2023). "The SDGs as integrating force in global governance? Challenges and opportunities". International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics. 23 (2): 157–164. doi: 10.1007/s10784-023-09607-9 . ISSN   1567-9764. CC-BY icon.svg Text was copied from this source, which is available under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
  33. ↑ United Nations (2017) Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 6 July 2017, Work of the Statistical Commission pertaining to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (A/RES/71/313)
  34. ↑ Ritchie, Roser, Mispy, Ortiz-Ospina. "Measuring progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals." (SDG 16) SDG-Tracker.org, website (2018) CC-BY icon.svg Text was copied from this source, which is available under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
  35. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Hickmann, Thomas; Elsässer, Joshua Philipp (2020). "New alliances in global environmental governance: how intergovernmental treaty secretariats interact with non-state actors to address transboundary environmental problems". International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics. 20 (3): 459–481. doi: 10.1007/s10784-020-09493-5 . ISSN   1567-9764. CC-BY icon.svg Text was copied from this source, which is available under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
  36. 1 2 3 4 Bogers, Maya; Biermann, Frank; Kalfagianni, Agni; Kim, Rakhyun E.; Treep, Jelle; de Vos, Martine G. (2022). "The impact of the Sustainable Development Goals on a network of 276 international organizations". Global Environmental Change. 76: 102567. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2022.102567 . CC-BY icon.svg Text was copied from this source, which is available under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
  37. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Elsässer, Joshua Philipp; Hickmann, Thomas; Jinnah, Sikina; Oberthür, Sebastian; Van de Graaf, Thijs (2022). "Institutional interplay in global environmental governance: lessons learned and future research". International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics. 22 (2): 373–391. doi: 10.1007/s10784-022-09569-4 . ISSN   1567-9764. CC-BY icon.svg Text was copied from this source, which is available under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
  38. ↑ Najam, A., Papa, M. and Taiyab, N. Global Environmental Governance. A Reform Agenda; IISD; 2006.
  39. ↑ Kanie, Norichika; Haas, Peter M., eds. (2004). Emerging forces in environmental governance. Tokyo: United Nations Univ. Press. ISBN   978-92-808-1095-0.
  40. ↑ Inomata, Tadanori; Management Review of Environmental Governance within the United Nations System; United Nations; Joint Inspection Unit; Geneva; 2008.
  41. ↑ Taylor, Prue; Stroud, Lucy; Peteru, Clark (2013). Multilateral Environmental Agreement Negotiator's Handbook: Pacific Region 2013 (PDF). Samoa / New Zealand: Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme / New Zealand Centre for Environmental Law, University of Auckland. ISBN   978-982-04-0475-5.
  42. ↑ Najam, Adil; Runnalls, David; Halle, Mark (2007). "Environment and Globalization: Five Propositions" (PDF). International Institute for Sustainable Development . Retrieved 30 March 2018.
  43. ↑ Biermann, Frank (November 2011). "Transforming Governance and Institutions for Global Sustainability" (PDF). Earth System Governance Project.
  44. ↑ Biermann, Frank (2000). "The Case for a World Environment Organization". Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development. 42 (9): 22–31. doi:10.1080/00139150009605762. ISSN   0013-9157.
  45. ↑ Biermann, F., and Simonis, U.E., 1998. Eine Weltorganisation für Umwelt und Ent-wicklung: Ein Vorschlag [A world organization for environment and development: A proposal]. Universitas. Zeitschrift für interdisziplinäre Wissenschaft 53 (627), pp. 822–31.
  46. ↑ Seyfang, G. and Jordan, A., 2002. "Mega" Environmental Conferences: vehicles for effective, long term environmental planning?, in: S. Stokke, and O. Thommesen, (eds) Yearbook of International Cooperation on Environment and Development, Earthscan: London: 19–26
  47. ↑ Bakari, Mohamed El-Kamel. "Sustainable Development in a Global Context: A Success or a Nuisance?" New Global Studies 9.1 (2015): 27–56.
  48. 1 2 Biermann, F., 2001. The emerging debate on the need for a World Environmental Organization: a commentary. Global Environmental Politics, 1 pp. 45–55.
  49. ↑ von Moltke, K., 2001. The Organization of the Impossible. Global Environmental Politics 1 (1).
  50. ↑ Shepherd, Christopher; Palmer, Lisa (2015-01-01). "The Modern Origins of Traditional Agriculture: Colonial Policy, Swidden Development, and Environmental Degradation in Eastern Timor". Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde / Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences of Southeast Asia. 171 (2–3): 281–311. doi: 10.1163/22134379-17102005 . ISSN   0006-2294.
  51. 1 2 Alam, Shawkat; Atapattu, Sumudu; Gonzalez, Carmen G.; Razzaque, Jona, eds. (2015). International Environmental Law and the Global South. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/cbo9781107295414. ISBN   978-1-107-05569-8.
  52. ↑ Duffy, Rosaleen (April 2013). "Global Environmental Governance and North—South Dynamics: The Case of the Cites". Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy. 31 (2): 222–239. Bibcode:2013EnPlC..31..222D. doi:10.1068/c1105. ISSN   0263-774X. S2CID   154558633.
  53. 1 2 Bäckstrand, Karin (December 2006). "Democratizing Global Environmental Governance? Stakeholder Democracy after the World Summit on Sustainable Development". European Journal of International Relations. 12 (4): 467–498. doi:10.1177/1354066106069321. ISSN   1354-0661. S2CID   146248414.
  54. 1 2 Minneti, Jeffrey (2018-10-15). "Environmental Governance and the Global South". William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review. 43 (1): 83. ISSN   1091-9724.
  55. ↑ Winchester, N. (2009-01-01). "Emerging Global Environmental Governance". 16 Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies 7 (2009). 16 (1).
  56. 1 2 3 Dodgson, Richard; Lee, Kelley; Drager, Nick (2017-05-15), "Global Health Governance, A Conceptual Review", Global Health, Routledge, pp. 439–461, doi:10.4324/9781315254227-33, ISBN   9781315254227 , retrieved 2023-05-09
  57. ↑ Lee, Kelley; Kamradt-Scott, Adam (2014-04-28). "The multiple meanings of global health governance: a call for conceptual clarity". Globalization and Health. 10 (1): 28. doi: 10.1186/1744-8603-10-28 . ISSN   1744-8603. PMC   4036464 . PMID   24775919.
  58. ↑ Ibragimova, Irina (2022-01-01). "Governance for global health: the role of Nordic countries". International Journal of Health Governance. 27 (2): 150–179. Bibcode:2022IJHG...27..150I. doi:10.1108/IJHG-12-2021-0121. ISSN   2059-4631. S2CID   247368519.
  59. ↑ Jagers, S.C.; Stripple, J. (2003). "Climate Governance beyond the State". Global Governance. 9 (3): 385–400. doi:10.1163/19426720-00903009.
  60. ↑ Bulkeley, H. (2010). "Climate Policy and Governance: an editorial essay". Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change. 1 (3): 311–313. Bibcode:2010WIRCC...1..311B. doi:10.1002/wcc.1. S2CID   129109192.
  61. ↑ "Video #2 of 4: The Pillars of Climate Governance - Paris Knowledge Bridge: Unpacking International Climate Governance". enb.iisd.org. Retrieved 2022-10-20.
  62. ↑ Bulkeley,H., Newell, P. (2009). Governing Climate Change. New York: Routledge.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  63. 1 2 Andonova, L. B., Betsill, M. M. & Bulkeley, H (2009). "Transnational climate governance". Global Environmental Politics. 9 (2): 52–73. doi:10.1162/glep.2009.9.2.52. S2CID   57565967.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  64. ↑ Bäckstrand, K.; Lövbrand, E.; Pettenger, M. E. (2007). Climate governance beyond 2012: Competing discourses of green governmentality, ecological modernization and civic environmentalism in 'The Social Construction of Climate Change. Power, Knowledge, Norms, Discourses'. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing. pp. 123–149.
  65. ↑ Farah, Paolo Davide, Global Energy Governance, International Environmental Law and Regional Dimension (November 30, 2015). Paolo Davide FARAH & Piercarlo ROSSI, ENERGY: POLICY, LEGAL AND SOCIAL-ECONOMIC ISSUES UNDER THE DIMENSIONS OF SUSTAINABILITY AND SECURITY, World Scientific Reference on Globalisation in Eurasia and the Pacific Rim, Imperial College Press (London, UK) & World Scientific Publishing, Nov. 2015.
  66. ↑ Gareau, Brian J. From Precaution to Profit: Contemporary Challenges to Global Environmental Protection in the Montreal Protocol (2013, Yale University Press).
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.