Day 1 Update

First day of COP21 was a whirlwind of activity--from the statements made by heads of state, the fascinating opening side events, to the high level press conferences of new initiatives.  I will highlight a few of the most interesting and exciting events.

Opening Ceremonies and Statements by Heads of State

We began the day by watching the opening ceremonies and the first statements made by the leaders of many of the world's nations, broadcasted live into an observer room.  We were not able to enter the actual plenary halls where these statements were being made due to the heightened security and our limited level of clearance, but we followed each statement and development by webcast.

Obama's opening address was especially notable, due to its excessive length and the tenor he set for the US delegation.  Originally set for 3 minutes, Obama took his characteristically sweet time, with long dramatic pauses, to describe the need for action on climate change.  He said that the enemy of the negotiations was "cynicism" and the "broken old arguments" against action, urging the world to come to agreement, quoting Martin Luther King Jr., as "there is such a thing as being too late."

Third World Network: Key Issues for COP21

I then broke off to attend an official side event put on by the NGO Third World Network.  This panel discussed the key issues facing Lesser Developed Countries (LDCs)/Developing Countries during COP21, providing an overview of challenges that the LDCs face and their aspirations for negotiating.  

The head of the Chinese delegation, Su Wei, outlined the Chinese objectives for an agreement in Paris, one that enhances implementation and action, while being guided by the principles of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities (CBDR).  He emphasized that historical responsibility for emissions from developed countries creates the responsibility to lead efforts in mitigation and provide financial and technological support for LDCs in terms of adaptation and instances of loss and damages—thus implementing the principle of CBDR in negotiations and going forward to further agreements.  

An Indian representative, Mr. Rasheed (?), communicated optimism for the possibility of a strong agreement, but reiterated the need for action based upon the principles of the Convention, especially CBDR and the idea of climate justice.  He emphasized that developed countries (DCs) must lead, but that their financial contributions must be new and “over and above” current contributions, and that all all actions must be “amplified.” 

Juan Hoffmaister, a coordinator of the the G77 on Adaptation and Loss and Damage noted that while mitigation is an important component, all too often it comes at the expense of adaptation efforts.  He also criticized earlier efforts that implemented planning procedure but did little to actually offer active support to LDCs attempting to adapt to environmental crises.  He noted that a lack of recognition of the Loss and Damages clause, which expresses cooperation for countries with situations that they are unable to adapt to, was “contrary to the science.” He also expressed frustration with the process of accreditation within the UNFCCC.  He said that he felt “humiliated” by the process of reapplication every three years and that recognition from the UNFCCC is needed.  

Finally, Mariam Williams of the South Centre argued that climate finance is akin to climate justice, in that countries that have historically benefited from emissions that have caused the global climate crisis now must recompense those that are bearing the consequence. 

International Solar Alliance Launch

Finally, India, in partnership with France, announced the inauguration of the International Solar Alliance, a partnership of 120 countries that fosters investment and construction of solar energy projects across the world.  India plans to increase its solar power capacity from 4 gigawatts to 100 gigawatts by 2022, providing for 75 million Indian households.  Developed countries like France would provide financial support and facilitate the transfer of solar technology.

This event was technically only open to accredited members of the press, but I was able to get there early and sneak into the event.

The Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi, and the President of France, Francois Hollande, along with the Secretary General of the United Nations, Ban Ki-moon, all spoke at the launch event of this new organization.  Each spoke of the importance of these multilateral alliances that not only unite nations around energy and technology, but also unite governments and citizens in historic partnerships.  Clean energy initiatives are an element of climate justice by providing individuals with access to clean, and sustainable energy and work to meet sustainable development goals, according to the leaders.

Ban Ki-Moon

Francois Hollande

Narendra Modi

Pre-Conference Update

I've arrived in Paris and am sitting in our hotel overlooking Avenue Magenta, the fourth floor of one of those classic Parisian buildings with large windows and mini balconies.  I spent the night with my awesome relatives, Annick and Bob and their children, who graciously opened their home to me once again.  I was able to see their new house and town, Maison Lafitte.  It's a beautiful side of Paris that I would otherwise never experience.

Everyone is ready for COP21.  Many attendants dressed in green are giving advice to visitors of COP21, guiding them along the metro.  I picked up my badge yesterday, my first experience at le Bourget and with the heavy security.  I made the mistake of having water in my water bottle and was forced to drink it in front of them.  Security in general is tight and the air of Paris is very concerned.  Even my little cousin Kim constantly referred to the attacks.  Paris still is greatly troubled.

All in all, I'm excited and ready for the Conference to begin.  Stay tuned for more substantive updates.

Also, here is a great link for a background into the text of the agreement that is being negotiated: http://www.carbonbrief.org/interactive-the-paris-climate-deal

Resource Guide

Lucas Giese

Climate Studies

Resource Guide

11/11/15

Annotated Bibliography

Acronyms:
IO--International organization
NGO--Nongovernmental organization
ENGO--Environmental nongovernmental organization

Barnett, Michael N., and Martha Finnemore. "The Politics, Power, and Pathologies of International Organizations." International Organization 53, no. 4 (September 1999): 699-732. 

Barnett and Finnemore, using a constructivist approach, describe the characteristics of IOs and the narratives that are used to define them, ultimately characterizing IOs within a framework that offers explanation for phenomena that doesn’t comport with traditional explanations.  Countering the economic and realist narratives that describe IOs within the context of and under the legitimacy of actors—nation states—to determine their activities and interests, they complicate the notions of IO structure by arguing that IOs are semiautonomous institutions that have a degree of self interest and autonomy based off of Weber’s theories of bureaucracy.  This analysis gives an overview of IOs, the institutions that NGOs act within, and can offer insight into the development of the nature of NGOs.  

Böhmelt, Tobias, and Carola Betzold. "The impact of environmental interest groups in international negotiations: Do ENGOs induce stronger environmental commitments?." International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law & Economics 13, no. 2 (May 2013): 127-151.

Böhmelt and Betzold investigate the impact of ENGOs within the context of international organizations and negotiations, taking a quantitative approach that sought to empirically find correlation between NGO participation and state commitment to environmental agreements.  They attempt to fill the gap in the literature that quantifies the influence of ENGOs, whereas much of previous scholarly work focuses on the qualitative aspects of ENGO strategy and tactics.  They test a number of hypotheses, including the effect of ENGO access to negotiations, the effect of the number of ENGOs participating, as well as the relationship between access possibilities and the number of ENGOs.  This analysis, while admittedly not definitive because of limitation in data and the assumptions made about the homogeneity of ENGOs, does offer an option for quantifying the role of ENGOs. 

Dombrowski, Kathrin.  “Filling the gap? An analysis of non-governmental organizations responses to participation and representation deficits in global climate governance.” International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 10 (4) (2010). pp. 397-416.

           

Dombrowski analyzes the constitution and the role of NGOs within climate change international organizations, discussing the assumptions made about NGO participation and the norms and institutional structures that result from these assumptions.  NGOs in global governance are assumed to be representative of marginalized communities that may not be adequately represented by their respective states, thus increasing the democratic legitimacy of these international organizations.  Dombrowski also raises questions on the assumption of NGOs representative nature, wondering how NGOs behave as delegates and representatives and if they actually represent the people the claim to represent.  This article raises a number of interesting questions that could be investigated further. 

Ford, Lucy H. "Challenging Global Environmental Governance: Social Movement Agency and Global Civil Society." Global Environmental Politics 3, no. 2 (May 2003): 120.

Ford characterizes civil society participation through NGOs and environmental social movements in response to the hierarchical structure of global environmental politics.  She argues from a critical perspective that global governance is a hegemonic institution that incorporates some institutionalized NGOs within itself, while marginalizing other civil society groups outside of the hegemonic institutions.  This critique establishes the dichotomy between “insider” and “outsider” NGOs with differentiated position and influence within IOs. 

Giorgetti, Chiara.  “The Role of Nongovernmental Organizations in the Climate Change Negotiations.” 9 Colo. J. Int'l Envtl. L. & Pol'y 115 (1998).

Giorgetti describes the origins and purpose of nongovernmental organizations within in climate change negotiations, as well as discussing the advantages and disadvantages that NGOs hold within international institutions.  She also charts the historical development of NGOs and the official language that solidifies their role within international organizations.  Her analysis, written in 1998 after the first wave of climate change summits during the 1990’s, captures the rise of environmental organizations within civil society and offers a preliminary outline for their study.

Gough, Clair, and Simon Shackley. "The Respectable Politics of Climate Change: The Epistemic Communities and NGOs." International Affairs 77, no. 2 (April 2001).

Gough and Shackley describe the role of NGOs within international organizations and negotiations surrounding climate change, arguing that NGOs have increasingly become incorporated into the epistemic communities of these IOs.  They describe the three groups of participating NGOs in climate negotiations and three activities in which they participate in the process.  They argue that some NGOs have become institutionalized within the epistemic community of IOs and therefor their narratives, activities, and tactic are established within the realm of what they term “respectable politics,” a recognized set of norms and code of conduct. 

Hadden, Jennifer. "Explaining Variation in Transnational Climate Change Activism: The Role of Inter-Movement Spillover." Global Environmental Politics 14, no. 2 (May 2014): 7-25.

Hadden discusses the impact of merging civil society and activism groups, specifically the combination of environmental NGOs with global justice groups aimed at decreasing global inequality.  She uses the theory of “social movement spillover” to describe the diffusion of ideas and the sharing of resources between actors within social movements, and analyzes the effect of this phenomenon on the changes in tactics and results by ENGOs at COP19 in Copenhagen.  Her study serves as a guide for incorporating some level of quantitative analysis with qualitative description and evaluation.

Ohanyan, Anna. "Network Institutionalism and NGO Studies." International Studies Perspectives 13, no. 4 (November 2012): 366-389.

Ohanyan develops a framework for studying NGOs within international organizations and institutions, combining network theory with institutional theory to explain the positioning of NGOs within IOs.  This article offers an introduction to both network and institutional theory before establishing its own formulation and theory.  By incorporating elements of network theory into institutional theory, Ohanyan is able to account for the institutionalization of organizations that lack the social permanence and establishment that institutions posses, due to their embeddedness within networks of information and their production of public goods. This article offers an insightful sociological look into the structure of international organizations and actors within them, a great resource for further study and research. 

Raustiala, Kal. “States, NGOs, and international environmental institutions.” International Studies Quarterly 41 (December 1997): 719-740.

Raustiala offers an argument for NGO participation within international environmental institutions by employing regime theory and institutional analysis, contending that NGOs can strengthen primary actors in IOs, nation states, by filling in and bolstering states’ interests and abilities.  He assumes that states are the are the only legitimate actors within IOs, therefore concluding that any NGO contribution serve to augment state power and ability, despite the fact that some NGOs are critical of the state’s role.  This review is a traditional perspective in international relations theory that many other scholars have worked to counter. 

"Climate Initiative." Centre for Policy Research. August 31, 2015. Accessed November 12, 2015. http://cprindia.org/projects/climate-initiative.

The Centre for Policy Research offers analysis and reports from a number of reputable scholars in the scientific fields and public policy, as one of India’s oldest and most reputable think tanks.  They offer commentary and policy recommendations in the areas of environmental issues and climate change and are a great resource for understanding Indian perspectives on climate change.  They will be a good contact in COP21 as well.

India. Ministry for the Environment, Forest and Climate Change. Intended Nationally Determined Contribution.

India has submitted an “Intended Nationally Determined Contribution,” their proposed plan for reducing greenhouse gas emission and their expected stance in negotiations in COP21.  It also elucidates the Indian narrative and goals surrounding climate change mitigation and adaptation, highlighting areas of contention including development and poverty reduction in tandem with mitigation and adaptation and the implementation of the common but differentiated responsibility principle within an agreement. 

"UNFCCC Country Brief 2013: India." Climate Change Secretariat, October 2, 2015. http://newsroom.unfccc.int/media/420472/country-brief-india.pdf.

This is a summary of India’s environmental qualities and characteristics and their contributions to emissions and capacities for reduction.  It is a clear fact sheet for policy makers within the UN community and outside observers that gives quantitative data for use while constructing policy. 

United Nations Development Program. Climate Community. Climate Negotiations: Background for Beginners. Accessed November 11, 2015. http://www.undpcc.org/en/climate-negotiations/background-for-beginners.

           

The UNDP created a fact sheet that overviews climate negotiations in the past 20 years.  Starting with the original convergence of the UNFCCC, this description is a good timeline that can serve as a base of information that others’ claims can be compared to.  From this factsheet are also a number of useful links that further discuss the nature and outcomes of negotiations. 

"FAQs." Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change Government of India. Accessed November 11, 2015. http://envfor.nic.in/faqs.

This “Frequently Asked Questions” portion of the Indian Ministry of Environment, Forest, and Climate Change website is an exhaustive list that provides insight into Indian decision making in previous COPs.  It questions Indian motives and why certain intended outcomes were not reached and then offers the Indian explanation for why events occurred as they did.  While the actual author is unknown, this document, speaking for the entire ministry, is a unique compilation of many sources of information usually kept from the public eye.

"India." Multilateral Environmental Agreements Information and Knowledge Management. Accessed November 11, 2015. http://www.informea.org/countries/IN/summary.

A nonprofit database that collects information on international environmental agreements, INFORMEA has classified Indian behavior and responses to previous environmental negotiations.  Their clear and concise data and organization allows researchers to quickly draw definitively on the history of international climate negotiations.

Sharma, Sudhir. "Road To Paris." Climate Action Network South Asia. October 30, 2015. Accessed November 11, 2015. http://cansouthasia.net/.

The Climate Action Network South Asia is an umbrella NGO that is comprised of other localized NGOs within South Asia.  It is an aggregate actor in UNFCCC, joining with other CANs from across the globe.  It also serves as a register for other Indian NGOs and is a bridge from the international and national level to local issue based organizations.  They are a unique organization with international and transnational goals, but their delegated structure makes them especially influential within negotiations.