Browse
Submit Data
Databases
API
Help

Dataset Information

20 Views

0 Connections

0 Citations

0 Reanalyses

0 Downloads

Omics score: 0

Global climate governance: rising trend of translateral cooperation.

ABSTRACT: The transformation from the Kyoto Protocol to the Paris Agreement has been analyzed by international relations scholars, international law, and transnational governance theory. The international relations literature looks at the climate regime from a perspective of power distribution, state interests, institutions, and multilateral negotiations. International law theory focuses on legal analysis and design of international climate agreements. The transnational governance literature examines the participation of transnational actors at different levels of governance. However, each of these theories overlooks a bilateral trend of cooperation in a multilateral setting that arises as part of the construction or reconstruction of the international regime. Why do national and subnational public actors in global climate governance cooperate bilaterally when multilateral cooperation already exists? What type of bilateral cooperative agreements do these actors prefer, and why? Using qualitative methods, combining content analysis subsequent interviews, this research empirically demonstrates the role and importance of bilateral transatlantic cooperation and informal agreements between national and subnational actors in global climate governance. Using the EU-US case study, this research identifies a diagonal dimension of interaction between states and transnational actors. It introduces and defines the terms "translateral cooperation" and "translateral agreements" in the new climate regime.

Supplementary information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10784-022-09575-6.

SUBMITTER: Stranadko N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8956455 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Json Xml

Similar Datasets

Rising Educational Participation and the Trend to Later Childbearing.

Project description: Not available

| S-EPMC5767733 | biostudies-literature

Coalition-structured governance improves cooperation to provide public goods.

Project description:While the benefits of common and public goods are shared, they tend to be scarce when contributions are provided voluntarily. Failure to cooperate in the provision or preservation of these goods is fundamental to sustainability challenges, ranging from local fisheries to global climate change. In the real world, such cooperative dilemmas occur in multiple interactions with complex strategic interests and frequently without full information. We argue that voluntary cooperation enabled across overlapping coalitions (akin to polycentricity) not only facilitates a higher generation of non-excludable public goods, but it may also allow evolution toward a more cooperative, stable, and inclusive approach to governance. Contrary to any previous study, we show that these merits of multi-coalition governance are far more general than the singular examples occurring in the literature, and they are robust under diverse conditions of excludability, congestion of the non-excludable public good, and arbitrary shapes of the return-to-contribution function. We first confirm the intuition that a single coalition without enforcement and with players pursuing their self-interest without knowledge of returns to contribution is prone to cooperative failure. Next, we demonstrate that the same pessimistic model but with a multi-coalition structure of governance experiences relatively higher cooperation by enabling recognition of marginal gains of cooperation in the game at stake. In the absence of enforcement, public-goods regimes that evolve through a proliferation of voluntary cooperative forums can maintain and increase cooperation more successfully than singular, inclusive regimes.

| S-EPMC7280206 | biostudies-literature

History, Structure and Agency in Global Health Governance Comment on "Global Health Governance Challenges 2016 - Are We Ready?"

Project description:Ilona Kickbusch's thought provoking editorial is criticized in this commentary, partly because she fails to refer to previous critical work on the global conditions and policies that sustain inequality, poverty, poor health and damage to the biosphere and, as a result, she misreads global power and elides consideration of the fundamental historical structures of political and material power that shape agency in global health governance. We also doubt that global health can be improved through structures and processes of multilateralism that are premised on the continued reproduction of the ecologically myopic and socially unsustainable market civilization model of capitalist development that currently prevails in the world economy. This model drives net financial flows from poor to rich countries and from the poor to the affluent and super wealthy individuals. By contrast, we suggest that significant progress in global health requires a profound and socially just restructuring of global power, greater global solidarity and the "development of sustainability."

| S-EPMC5384987 | biostudies-other

Sustainably developing global blue carbon for climate change mitigation and economic benefits through international cooperation.

Project description:Blue carbon is the carbon storage in vegetated coastal ecosystems such as mangroves, salt marshes, and seagrass. It is gaining global attention as its role in climate change mitigation and local welfare growth. However, a global assessment on the long-term spatiotemporal sustainable development status of blue carbon has not been conducted, and the relations among blue carbon ecosystems, driving forces for climate change mitigation, and socioeconomic interventions for development capacity on a global scale are still unclear. Here, we constructed a blue carbon development index (BCDI), comprising three subsystems: driving force, resource endowment, and development capacity, to assess the sustainable development level of 136 coastal countries' blue carbon over 24 consecutive years and explore the relationship among subsystems. We further propose a cooperation model to explore the feasibility of global blue carbon cooperation and quantify benefit allocation to specific countries. The results showed an upward trend in BCDI scores with variations in regional performance over the past two decades, and we found a positive correlation between development capacity and blue carbon resource endowment. Based on the scenario simulations of global cooperation, we found that coastal countries could improve the global average BCDI score, add 2.96 Mt of annual carbon sequestration, and generate $136.34 million in 2030 under Global Deep Cooperation scenario compared with the Business-As-Usual scenario.

| S-EPMC10545692 | biostudies-literature

Changes in climate and land use have a larger direct impact than rising CO2 on global river runoff trends.

Project description:The significant worldwide increase in observed river runoff has been tentatively attributed to the stomatal "antitranspirant" response of plants to rising atmospheric CO(2) [Gedney N, Cox PM, Betts RA, Boucher O, Huntingford C, Stott PA (2006) Nature 439: 835-838]. However, CO(2) also is a plant fertilizer. When allowing for the increase in foliage area that results from increasing atmospheric CO(2) levels in a global vegetation model, we find a decrease in global runoff from 1901 to 1999. This finding highlights the importance of vegetation structure feedback on the water balance of the land surface. Therefore, the elevated atmospheric CO(2) concentration does not explain the estimated increase in global runoff over the last century. In contrast, we find that changes in mean climate, as well as its variability, do contribute to the global runoff increase. Using historic land-use data, we show that land-use change plays an additional important role in controlling regional runoff values, particularly in the tropics. Land-use change has been strongest in tropical regions, and its contribution is substantially larger than that of climate change. On average, land-use change has increased global runoff by 0.08 mm/year(2) and accounts for approximately 50% of the reconstructed global runoff trend over the last century. Therefore, we emphasize the importance of land-cover change in forecasting future freshwater availability and climate.

| S-EPMC1978487 | biostudies-literature

Global Health Governance Challenges 2016 - Are We Ready?

Project description:The year 2016 could turn out to be a turning point for global health, new political realities and global insecurities will test governance and financing mechanisms in relation to both people and planet. But most importantly political factors such as the global power shift and "the rise of the rest" will define the future of global health. A new mix of health inequity and security challenges has emerged and the 2015 humanitarian and health crises have shown the limits of existing systems. The global health as well as the humanitarian system will have to prove their capacity to respond and reform. The challenge ahead is deeply political, especially for the rising political actors. They are confronted with the consequences of a model of development that has neglected sustainability and equity, and was built on their exploitation. Some direction has been given by the path breaking international conferences in 2015. Especially the agreement on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the Paris agreement on climate change will shape action. Conceptually, we will need a different understanding of global health and its ultimate goals - the health of people can no longer be seen separate from the health of the planet and wealth measured by parameters of growth will no longer ensure health.

| S-EPMC4885725 | biostudies-other

Power in global governance: an expanded typology from global health.

Project description:The exercise of power permeates global governance processes, making power a critical concept for understanding, explaining, and influencing the intersection of global governance and health. This article briefly presents and discusses three well-established conceptualizations of power-Dahl's, Bourdieu's, and Barnett and Duvall's-from different disciplines, finding that each is important for understanding global governance but none is sufficient. The conceptualization of power itself needs to be expanded to include the multiple ways in which one actor can influence the thinking or actions of others. I further argue that global governance processes exhibit features of complex adaptive systems, the analysis of which requires taking into account multiple types of power. Building on established frameworks, the article then offers an expanded typology of eight kinds of power: physical, economic, structural, institutional, moral, discursive, expert, and network. The typology is derived from and illustrated by examples from global health, but may be applicable to global governance more broadly. Finally, one seemingly contradictory - and cautiously optimistic - conclusion emerges from this typology: multiple types of power can mutually reinforce tremendous power disparities in global health; but at the same time, such disparities are not necessarily absolute or immutable. Further research on the complex interaction of multiple types of power is needed for a better understanding of global governance and health.

| S-EPMC6881906 | biostudies-literature

Global health diplomacy-reconstructing power and governance.

Project description:Over the past two decades, global health diplomacy, foreign policy for health, and global health policy have changed substantially. Diplomacy is a constitutive part of the system of global health governance. COVID-19 hit the world when multilateral cooperation was subject to major challenges, and global health has since become integral to geopolitics. The importance of global health diplomacy, especially at WHO, in keeping countries jointly committed to improving health for everyone, has once again been shown. Through a systematic review, this Series paper explores how international relations concepts and theories have been applied to better understand the role of power in shaping positions, negotiations, and outcomes in global health diplomacy. We apply an international relations perspective to reflect on the effect that those concepts and theories have had on global health diplomacy over the past two decades. This Series paper argues that a more central role of international relations concepts and theories in analysing global health diplomacy would help develop a more nuanced understanding of global health policy making. However, the world has changed to an extent that was not envisioned in academic discourse. This shift calls for new international relations concepts and theories to inform global health diplomacy.

| S-EPMC9113726 | biostudies-literature

Business as Usual: A Lack of Institutional Innovation in Global Health Governance Comment on "Global Health Governance Challenges 2016 - Are We Ready?"

Project description:There were once again high expectations that a major global health event - the Ebola virus outbreak of 2014-2015 - would trigger meaningfully World Health Organization (WHO) reform and strengthen global health governance (GHG). Rather than a "turning point," however, the global community has gone back to business as usual. This has occurred against a backdrop of worldwide political turmoil, characterised by a growing rejection of existing political leaders and state-centric institutions. Debates about GHG so far have given insufficient attention to the need for institutional innovation. This entails rethinking the traditional bureaucratic model of postwar intergovernmental organizations which is disconnected from the transboundary, fast-paced nature of today's globalizing world.

| S-EPMC5337254 | biostudies-other

From Synergy to Complexity: The Trend Toward Integrated Value Chain and Landscape Governance.

Project description:This Editorial introduces a special issue that illustrates a trend toward integrated landscape approaches. Whereas two papers echo older "win-win" strategies based on the trade of non-timber forest products, ten papers reflect a shift from a product to landscape perspective. However, they differ from integrated landscape approaches in that they emanate from sectorial approaches driven primarily by aims such as forest restoration, sustainable commodity sourcing, natural resource management, or carbon emission reduction. The potential of such initiatives for integrated landscape governance and achieving landscape-level outcomes has hitherto been largely unaddressed in the literature on integrated landscape approaches. This special issue addresses this gap, with a focus on actor constellations and institutional arrangements emerging in the transition from sectorial to integrated approaches. This editorial discusses the trends arising from the papers, including the need for a commonly shared concern and sense of urgency; inclusive stakeholder engagement; accommodating and coordinating polycentric governance in landscapes beset with institutional fragmentation and jurisdictional mismatches; alignment with locally embedded initiatives and governance structures; and a framework to assess and monitor the performance of integrated multi-stakeholder approaches. We conclude that, despite a growing tendency toward integrated approaches at the landscape level, inherent landscape complexity renders persistent and significant challenges such as balancing multiple objectives, equitable inclusion of all relevant stakeholders, dealing with power and gender asymmetries, adaptive management based on participatory outcome monitoring, and moving beyond existing administrative, jurisdictional, and sectorial silos. Multi-stakeholder platforms and bridging organizations and individuals are seen as key in overcoming such challenges.

| S-EPMC5999153 | biostudies-literature

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

OmicsDI is an Elixir interoperability service. Learn more ›

Tweets

OmicsDI Databases

PRIDE
PeptideAtlas
MassIVE
JPOST Repository
Physiome Model Repository

EGA
EVA
ENA
LINCS
PAXDB
Cell Collective

MetaboLights
Metabolomics Workbench
MetabolomeExpress
GNPS
BioModels
FAIRDOMHub

ArrayExpress
dbGaP
ExpressionAtlas
GEO
NODE

Information

Databases
Help
API
Contact us
Code on GitHub
Terms of use
Submit Data