Advanced

The Fragmentation of the Climate Governance Architecture

Zelli, Fariborz LU (2011) In Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change 2(2). p.255-270
Abstract
The term fragmentation implies that policy domains are marked by a patchwork of public and private institutions that differ in their character, constituencies, spatial scope, subject matter, and objectives. While the degree of fragmentation varies across issue areas and their respective architectures, global climate politics is characterized by an advanced state of institutional diversity. In recent years, scholars have increasingly addressed this emerging phenomenon of international relations. The article finds that the predominant focus of these studies has been on dyadic overlaps, i.e., interlinkages between two institutions, and less on the overarching level of entire architectures and their degree of fragmentation. This goes in... (More)
The term fragmentation implies that policy domains are marked by a patchwork of public and private institutions that differ in their character, constituencies, spatial scope, subject matter, and objectives. While the degree of fragmentation varies across issue areas and their respective architectures, global climate politics is characterized by an advanced state of institutional diversity. In recent years, scholars have increasingly addressed this emerging phenomenon of international relations. The article finds that the predominant focus of these studies has been on dyadic overlaps, i.e., interlinkages between two institutions, and less on the overarching level of entire architectures and their degree of fragmentation. This goes in particular for research on the global climate change architecture. Many studies have attended to the relationship between the United Nations climate regime and other institutions: multilateral technology partnerships, regimes regulating other environmental domains like ozone or biological diversity, and regimes from non-environmental issue areas like the world trade regime. However, a cross-cutting account of these overlaps which addresses the overall implications of institutional fragmentation on climate change is still missing. As possible areas for further research the article identifies: consequences of fragmentation (e.g., a new division of labor or increased inter-institutional conflict), fragmentation management and conditions of its effectiveness; theory-driven analyses on the reasons of fragmentation within and across policy domains. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
fragmentation, climate change, Governance, Global Governance, International organisations, institutions, complexity, Interplay, Kyoto Protocol, UNFCCC, climate governance
in
Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change
volume
2
issue
2
pages
255 - 270
publisher
John Wiley & Sons
external identifiers
  • scopus:79961240950
ISSN
1757-7799
DOI
10.1002/wcc.104
language
English
LU publication?
no
id
5af319f9-2ddf-4170-8727-353fe37db74a (old id 2374135)
date added to LUP
2012-03-20 15:36:33
date last changed
2019-07-07 04:25:10
@article{5af319f9-2ddf-4170-8727-353fe37db74a,
  abstract     = {The term fragmentation implies that policy domains are marked by a patchwork of public and private institutions that differ in their character, constituencies, spatial scope, subject matter, and objectives. While the degree of fragmentation varies across issue areas and their respective architectures, global climate politics is characterized by an advanced state of institutional diversity. In recent years, scholars have increasingly addressed this emerging phenomenon of international relations. The article finds that the predominant focus of these studies has been on dyadic overlaps, i.e., interlinkages between two institutions, and less on the overarching level of entire architectures and their degree of fragmentation. This goes in particular for research on the global climate change architecture. Many studies have attended to the relationship between the United Nations climate regime and other institutions: multilateral technology partnerships, regimes regulating other environmental domains like ozone or biological diversity, and regimes from non-environmental issue areas like the world trade regime. However, a cross-cutting account of these overlaps which addresses the overall implications of institutional fragmentation on climate change is still missing. As possible areas for further research the article identifies: consequences of fragmentation (e.g., a new division of labor or increased inter-institutional conflict), fragmentation management and conditions of its effectiveness; theory-driven analyses on the reasons of fragmentation within and across policy domains.},
  author       = {Zelli, Fariborz},
  issn         = {1757-7799},
  keyword      = {fragmentation,climate change,Governance,Global Governance,International organisations,institutions,complexity,Interplay,Kyoto Protocol,UNFCCC,climate governance},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {2},
  pages        = {255--270},
  publisher    = {John Wiley & Sons},
  series       = {Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change},
  title        = {The Fragmentation of the Climate Governance Architecture},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/wcc.104},
  volume       = {2},
  year         = {2011},
}