CLIMATE CLUBS AND THE UNFCCC complement, bypass or conflict?

Oscar Widerberg, FORES Frukostseminarium, Stockholm, 28 November 2013.

2

The global climate governance architecture

CBD

Montreal Protocol

UNFCCC

Trade institutions

(WTO)

Private climate initiative

Sub-national action

Bi-lateral initiatives

Other UN (e.g. UNSEC)

CLIMATE CLUBS

3

Examples of clubs

CLIMATE CLUBS

G20

Major Economies Forum (MEF)

Clean Energy Ministerial (CEM)

Energy+

Climate and Clean Air Coalition (CCAC)

LEDS Partnership

Global Bioenergy Partnership

Etc...

4

Research question

Are climate clubs conducive to the UNFCCC?

5

Research approach

17 Climate clubs*

5 Assessment criteria• Core norms

> Caps on GHG emissions> Common but differentiated responsibilities

• Participation of major emitters

• Goverance gaps

• Implementing UNFCCC agenda

Qualitative scoring

* from Weischer et al, 2012

6

The results

7

State clubs

Exclusive groups based on wealth and importance

Large potential to address climate issues

Risk of treating climate change as an ad hoc agenda item

Major Economies Forum (MEF) the most relevant and clearly conducive to the UNFCCC

No conflictive relation

• G8

• G20

• Major Economies Forum (MEF)

8

Energy clubs

Many energy clubs, similar goals• Spread renewable energy• Increase energy efficiency• Capacity building, information, analysis

Climate change is but one goal

Differences in how to what extent they align themselves with UNFCCC

No conflictive relations

• IEA Multilateral Technology Agreements

• REEEP

• REN 21

• Energy+

• CEM

• APP

9

Implementation clubs

Diverse group in terms of aim, members, affiliation with UNFCCC, capacity

Biofuels, CCS, Green economy, REDD+, Low Emission Development Strategies, Monitoring Reporting and Verificaiton

REDD+, LEDS, MRV strong links with the UNFCCC

CCAC promising bridging function?

No conflicting

• CSLF

• Global Bioenergy Partnership

• REDD+ Partnership

• Global Methane Partnership

• GGGI

• M-MRV

• LEDS GP

• CCAC

10

Lessons learned

1. While clubs aren’t challenging the current goverance architecture, some are more conducive to the UNFCCC than others

2. No conflict found, only contender could be the state clubs, however, these often treat climate as an ad hoc agenda item

3. General shift in narrative towards more flexibility (e.g. from ”targets and timetables” to ”pledge and review”)

4. The implications of the shift in narrative are highly uncertain

11

Policy implications

We are positive to clubs

Clubs can create ”enabling conditions” on a domestic level to reach international agreement

There is a UNFCCC paradox

12

Thanks!

oscar.widerberg@vu.nl