Research area: Adaptation and Resilience

Varieties of climate governance: the emergence and functioning of climate institutions

Introduction

How do states respond to the challenge of climate governance? The Paris Agreement has led to heightened interest in domestic climate policies, but attention to underlying national climate institutional architectures has lagged behind. This literature gap deserves to be addressed, because climate change brings considerable governance challenges. Drawing on a collection of country studies, this paper outlines a framework to explain the path-dependent emergence of climate institutions, based on the interplay of national political institutions,international drivers, and bureaucratic structures. The resultant institutional forms suggest four varieties of climate governance, based on the extent of political polarisation and the narrative around climate politics in the country. The functioning of existing climate institutions indicates they have so far played a modest role in addressing climate governance challenges, but also illustrates their importance in structuring climate politics and outcomes, suggesting a substantial agenda for future research.

Read more

Special Issue on ‘Varieties of Climate Governance’ in Environmental Politics (all articles)

Introduction

Discussions in climate governance have focused on national targets and climate policies. But a critical ingredient is relatively absent: climate institutions. Yet, formal institutions are essential if countries are to devise realistic low-carbon strategies, manage the complex politics of transitions, and coordinate across diverse ministries and actors. Drawing on cases spanning eight countries – four developed and four
developing – with an analytical overview, we examine the conditions under which climate institutions emerge, the forms they take, and the governance functions they serve.

Read more

The limits of opportunism: the uneven emergence of climate institutions in India

Introduction

India’s centrality to global mitigation efforts makes it an important point of inquiry in studies of climate governance. However, we understand little of how climate change has been institutionalized in India’s decision-making processes. We capture the emergence and decline of climate institutions over three decades, showing how political conditions have shaped institutional form. The politics of opportunism has animated institutional development. It resolves the tension between India’s global leadership ambitions and a deeply entrenched, equity focused narrative frame that rejects incurring large mitigation costs. Climate institutions have therefore been layered upon existing bodies and processes to create room for the organic, bottom-up growth of policies that meet development objectives while promoting mitigation. While this structure limits polarization around climate action, it also inhibits strategic intent, particularly because strong cross-governmental institutions have been unable to take root.

Read more

China and India in the Himalayan climate crisis

Summary

This article describes an unprecedented threat to large parts of India and China emanating from receding glaciers in the Himalaya. It posits that this threat will require these countries to redefine their security calculus by moving beyond military and economic fixations to incorporate an ecological dimension. It suggests four actions – two regional and two international – that could help them set the tone for cooperation in coming decades.

Some of these actions may seem unlikely against the backdrop of stark geopolitical competition today but this article points out that the building blocks for action have already been put in place: research networks for glacial science; regional electricity grids; international finance institutions jointly led by India and China; and joint negotiating positions that define international climate negotiations. The art of diplomacy will vest in transforming these incipient actions into transformative projects that not only define the bilateral relationship for the rest of the century, but make a dent in staving off the worst of a Himalayan disaster.

Read more

Evolution of Institutions for Climate Policy in India

Introduction

The growing focus on climate policy in India is not matched by an equivalent level of attention to institutions . Effective institutions are also needed for the design, coordination and implementation of policy. This paper examines the functioning of institutions, organised around three periods: pre-2007; 2007 to 2009 and 2010 to mid-2014. Several key themes emerge: First, the formation of climate institutions has often been ad hoc and is inadequately geared to India’s co-benefits based approach to climate policy. Second, there is a lack of continuity in institutions, once established. Third, coordination across government has been uneven and episodic. Fourth, while various efforts at knowledge generation have been attempted, they do not add up to a mechanism for sustained and consistent strategic thinking on climate change. Fifth, the overall capacity within government remains limited. Sixth, capacity shortfalls are exacerbated by closed structures of governance that only partially draw on external expertise.

Read more

State-led experimentation or centrally-motivated replication? A study of state action plans on climate change in India

Summary

In 2009, the Government of India asked all Indian states and Union Territories to prepare State Action Plans on Climate Change, making it one of the largest efforts at sub-national climate planning globally. Through an examination of state climate plans in five Indian states, the paper explores the implications of sub-national climate measures by examining two questions: First, how do state action plans on climate change link with India’s national and international climate efforts in the context of multi-level governance of climate change? Second, do these plans serve as laboratories of experimentation in addressing climate change? Through an empirically driven inductive analysis, the paper argues that because state climate plans, at least in the initial stages, followed a centrally driven, and sometimes ambiguous agenda, their scope and room to experiment was circumscribed. While they did initiate a process and a conversation, the scope and impact of the plans was limited because they tended to follow conventional bureaucratic planning processes and were limited by a central mandate. The plan process did create some space for local innovation, particularly by enterprising bureaucrats, but this was limited by both restricted space and time for innovation. As a result, the plans made only initial steps toward bringing climate-resilient sustainability to the forefront of state development planning. There is however scope for improvement as states and stakeholders begin examining the plans with a view to implement recommendations, finance projects and even consider fresh iterations.

Read more