Liliana B. Andonova

Transnational Climate Governance

In this article we examine the emergence and implications of transnational climate-change governance. We argue that although the study of transnational relations has recently been renewed alongside a burgeoning interest in issues of global governance, the nature of transnational governance has to date received less attention. We contend that transnational governance occurs when networks operating in the transnational political sphere authoritatively steer constituents toward public goals. In order to stimulate a more systematic study of the diversity and significance of this phenomenon, the article develops a typology based on the actors involved and their authoritypublic, private, or hybridand the primary governance functions performed in order to steer network constituentsinformation-sharing, capacity building and implementation, or rule-setting. A comparative discussion of transnational governance networks for climate change illustrates each category and the value of the typology in assessing the multiple mechanisms through which transnational governance occurs. In conclusion, we suggest that our typology provides a useful starting point for future research and reflect on the implications for the study of global affairs.

Governing climate change transnationally: Assessing the evidence from a database of sixty initiatives

With this paper we present an analysis of sixty transnational governance initiatives and assess the implications for our understanding of the roles of public and private actors, the legitimacy of governance ‘beyond’ the state, and the North–South dimensions of governing climate change. In the first part of the paper we examine the notion of transnational governance and its applicability in the climate change arena, reflecting on the history and emergence of transnational governance initiatives in this issue area and key areas of debate. In the second part of the paper we present the findings from the database and its analysis. Focusing on three core issues, the roles of public and private actors in governing transnationally, the functions that such initiatives perform, and the ways in which accountability for governing global environmental issues might be achieved, we suggest that significant distinctions are emerging in the universe of transnational climate governance which may have considerable implications for the governing of global environmental issues. In conclusion, we reflect on these findings and the subsequent consequences for the governance of climate change.

Public-Private Partnerships for the Earth: Politics and Patterns of Hybrid Authority in the Multilateral System

The article examines the politics and patterns of public-private partnerships for the environment in the multilateral system. It argues that two kinds of dynamics have contributed to the hybridization of environmental authority at the global level. On one hand, the fragmentation of environmental regimes and the parallel growth of non-state actors have resulted in structural pressures and opportunities for public-private collaboration. More significantly, however, international organizations have responded to the pluralization of global environmental politics selectively and acted as entrepreneurs of collaborative governance. The analysis uses a principal-agent perspective of international organizations to specify the conditions for organizational entrepreneurship of public-private partnerships. The theoretical propositions inform the comparative analysis of three meta partnership programs in the multilateral system: the Small Grants Program, the Prototype Carbon Fund, and the environmental portfolio of the United Nations Fund for International Partnerships. The study demonstrates that public-private partnerships represent neither a radical powershift from established institutions, nor are partnerships a marginal governance fad. The three partnership programs examined here emerged out of the mandates and expertise of their lead organizations and partners, but established and diffused new niches of environmental governance, particularly around community-based biodiversity management and climate-change related technology diffusion.

Boomerangs to Partnerships? Explaining State Participation in Transnational Partnerships for Sustainability:

This article examines under what conditions states engage in transnational public–private partnerships for the environment. While there is hardly a disagreement in the literature on the rise of transnational actors and new modes of collaborative governance, their interaction with and impact on state institutions remain debated and insufficiently illuminated by empirical research. Some scholars of globalization interpret transnational partnerships as evidence of state insufficiency and retreat, others emphasize the continued primacy of state power in manipulating old and new institutional arenas, still other scholars anticipate the “rearticulation” of the state to partake in new governance. This study is one of the first to examine theoretically and empirically, using a sample of some 230 partnerships, how domestic capacity, the constituencies of transnational actors, as well as international donors and institutions shape the variable rearticulation of the state to partake in partnerships. A comparative case study of Brazil and Russia provides further detail on the political dynamics that enable or constrain state-society collaborations for the environment.

The climate regime and domestic politics: the case of Russia

The literature on climate cooperation focuses primarily on intergovernmental institutions and national policies. Few studies have examined the ‘second image reversed’ question: what is the impact of the international climate regime on domestic politics? This article examines the impact of the Kyoto Protocol on climate politics in Russia. Russia is an important case study both from a theoretical and policy perspective. Analytically, the case provides an opportunity to assess alternative theories of regime impact, given Russias early scepticism about climate change and insistence on unrestrained economic growth. The study finds that the Kyoto Protocol influenced political interests in Russia first and foremost through the redistribution of resources and potential payoffs, but also through more subtle mechanisms such as capacity building and the diffusion of economic assessments. The result was a realignment of powerful domestic interests in a direction that has supported the main institutions of the climate regime and pushed for its implementation. Documenting the domestic political impacts of the Kyoto Protocol has policy implications for the conditions under which Russia and other large emerging markets focused on growth might undertake obligations to strengthen climate cooperation.

Openness and the Environment in Central and Eastern Europe: Can Trade and Foreign Investment Stimulate Better Environmental Management in Enterprises?:

The article uses firm-level data to test the hypothesis that the opening of central and east European economies to international trade and capital provides an impetus for environmental improvements in industrial enterprises. The analysis reveals that although export-oriented firms adopt clean technologies faster, foreign investment is not necessarily associated with higher rates of clean-technology adoption. Moreover, even the significance of trade in promoting cleaner technology can be overshadowed by domestic factors such as regulatory enforcement. Multinational enterprises introduce more readily formal environmental management practices that respond to public pressures. These findings challenge claims that international capital and trade are likely to be the leading stimulus for clean-technology diffusion in transition countries. The analysis contributes to the political economy literature by testing the linkage between openness and firm-level environmental strategies and specifying conditions for a positive relationship between markets and environmental performance.

Continuity and change in Russia's climate negotiations position and strategy

The positions and strategies of Russia in the international climate negotiations are examined. The shift towards a more integrated negotiation strategy and its use of rhetoric at the Copenhagen meeting reflected both a change in Russias domestic elite and its bureaucratic politics, and a desire to appear to be a responsible global power. However, climate change is still an issue of only limited public salience, which allows Russia some leeway in formulating its negotiating positions. Indeed, Russia is still unpredictable in the negotiations and its primary concern remains advancing unconstrained economic growth. Russias recent decision to abandon, along with Canada and Japan, the ‘Kyoto-2’ track of negotiations shows that its role in future climate negotiations depends on broadening developing country participation and the positions of the members of the Umbrella Group (most notably, the US) and China. The analysis thus lends support to negotiation theories that emphasize the two-level interplay between international and domestic politics and the relevance of contingent strategies and coalitions in shaping policy options.

The Comparative Politics of Transnational Climate Governance

ABSTRACT We live in an era of remarkable transformations in how governance is supplied at the global level, as traditional means of intergovernmental institutions are being joined by a growing diversity of transnational arrangements. Yet, at present, we still have only a superficial understanding of what causes actors to adhere to transnational rules, norms, and initiatives once they appear, and especially what role domestic political, economic and social variables play in their decision making. Focusing on climate change as an issue exemplifying the tendency for complex governance interplay, this special issue provides a comparative political economy perspective on the increasing but uneven uptake of transnational climate governance (TCG). This article articulates a conceptual framework for the analysis, highlighting the interplay between transnational and domestic politics and how such interactions shape the incentives, opportunities, and modalities of participation in transnational initiatives. An original data set of participation in transnational governance initiatives is introduced to capture the significance of the phenomenon and to provide a common basis to systematically address, for the first time, questions about the cross-national patterns of involvement we find across different arenas and types of TCG, be they networks of sub- or nonstate actors, private rules, or hybrid arrangements.

Transnational Networks and Paths to EU Environmental Compliance: Evidence from New Member States

This article examines transnational environmental networks as an important and thus far under-studied mechanism that can influence the pathways toward compliance with European Union (EU) legislation in new Member States. The argument stipulates that transnational networks, on balance, increase the capacity and political leverage of Central and Eastern European states and societal actors to activate management and enforcement paths to compliance with EU environmental norms. The theoretical framework specifies the network assets and the mechanisms through which they can support the two paths to compliance. In the empirical section, this framework is used to examine the impact of transnational environmental networks on the compliance with EU biodiversity directives in two of the most recent Member States: Bulgaria and Romania.

From Rio to Rio and Beyond Innovation in Global Environmental Governance

The 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro unleashed new energy in environmental governance, engaging actors beyond the state and across scales, from local to global, from communities to large transnational networks. In this paper we argue that this expanded pluralism has contributed to a remarkable array of governance experimentation and innovations for the environment. The impact and legacy of Rio thus goes far beyond the formal agreements that emerged in 1992. We explore why Rio had this effect by examining the context within which Rio took place and the dynamics that it served to catalyze. We close by discussing the need to generate processes that lead to coordinated innovations. Such a reorganization of the global governance space could start a new legacy of collective wondering and multiple pathways to a greener future.