Transforming governance and institutions for global sustainability: key insights from the Earth System Governance Project

Biermann, Frank; Abbott, Kenneth W.; Andresen, Steinar; Bäckstrand, Karin; Bernstein, Steven; Betsill, Michele M.; Bulkeley, Harriet; Cashore, Benjamin; Clapp, Jennifer; Folke, Carl; Gupta, Aarti; Gupta, Joyeeta; Haas, P.; Jordan, Andrew; Kanie, Norichika; Kluvánkova-Oravská, Tatiana; Lebel, Louis; Liverman, Diana; Meadowcroft, James; Mitchell, Ronald B.; Newell, Peter; Oberthür, Sebastian; Olsson, Lennart; Pattberg, Philipp; Sánchez-Rodríguez, Roberto; Schroeder, Heike; Underdal, Arild; Vieira, Susana Camargo; Vogel, Coleen; Young, Oran R.; Brock, Andrea; Zondervan, Ruben

doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2012.01.014

Cited by 229 publications

(93 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Of course, whether these goals can be achieved simultaneously depends on several other critical factors, including the effectiveness of governance systems from local to global levels, the fairness of market mechanisms in the globalised economy and appropriate formulation of local property rights [e.g. [30][31][32]. The economic and political mechanisms used to implement redistribution of resources or protection of critical biomes are also very important.…”

Section: Towards Global Sustainabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Planetary boundaries, equity and global sustainability: why wealthy countries could benefit from more equity

Steffen

Smith

2013

Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Towards Global Sustainabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Planetary boundaries, equity and global sustainability: why wealthy countries could benefit from more equity

Steffen

Smith

2013

Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Some potential options for redesigning the organizational framework of global governance institutions are theoretically available (Gosovic 1992, Keohane 1993, Esty 1994, Young et al 1996, Agarwal et al 1999, Gibson 1999, Biermann 2002, Gupta 2002, 2005, Oberthü 2002, von Moltke 2002, Young 2002, Pahl-Wostl et al 2008, Biermann et al 2012a. These include a hierarchical, integrated, sustainable development organization such as a possible World Sustainable Development Organization; a hierarchical single-issue body, such as a United Nations Environment Organization (UNEO); a high-level advisory group such as the Secretary-General's Advisory Body on Water and Sanitation; nonhierarchical focal points; coordination bodies; the strengthening of individual bodies; promoting coordination through the progressive development of international law, for example, through a law on sustainable development; regime clustering; decentralized network organizations; and a business-as-usual approach that allows multiple processes to arise, exist, compete, and function.…”

Section: Introduction and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing Global Coordination Mechanisms on Energy, Environment, and Water

Schubert¹,

Gupta²

2013

E&S

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Increasingly, coordination mechanisms are being created at the United Nations (UN) level to enhance systemwide synergies; however, there is relatively little scientific research on these bodies. Against this background, we compare the mandates, structures, and outputs of three UN coordination mechanisms, the UN Environment Management Group, UN-Energy, and UN-Water, to understand what features enhance their ability to coordinate. We conclude that there are three key design elements that possibly enhance the ability of such mechanisms to coordinate. However, although coordination mechanisms are the easiest to set up, because they create the least political upheaval and are relatively cheap, these very characteristics hinder their ability to actually steer the bodies in their sector in such a way that synergy is optimized, duplications and contradictions are reduced, and a common strategy is adopted. Such coordination bodies can contribute to agenda setting, knowledge sharing, providing a discussion forum, and bringing together stakeholders and experts.

show abstract

“…This point is especially significant, since -explicitly or implicitly -much social science work around energy Sustainability has the effect of substituting rumbustious, holistic, explicitly normative, autonomous engagements by marginal interests [252], with tranquil, neatly segregated and formally orchestrated procedures of "polycentric governance" [253] -for instance in 'global assessments' with narrow topical remits driven primarily by experts [254]. Where wider civil society is involved at all, it is mostly through engagement of 'invited' (usually elite) 'stakeholders' [255].…”

Section: Sustainability and Democracymentioning

confidence: 99%

Transforming Power: Social Science and the Politics of Energy Choices.

Stirling

2014

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tThis paper addresses key implications in momentous current global energy choices -both for social science and for society. Energy can be over-used as a lens for viewing social processes. But it is nonetheless of profound importance. Understanding possible 'sustainable energy' transformations requires attention to many tricky issues in social theory: around agency and structure and the interplay of power, contingency and practice. These factors are as much shaping of the knowledges and normativities supposedly driving transformation, as they are shaped by them. So, ideas and hopes about possible pathways for changeas well as notions of 'the transition' itself -can be deeply constituted by incumbent interests. The paper addresses these dynamics by considering contending forms of transformation centring on renewable energy, nuclear power and climate geoengineering. Several challenges are identified for social science. These apply especially where there are aims to help enable more democratic exercise of social agency. They enjoin responsibilities to 'open up' (rather than 'close down'), active political spaces for critical contention over alternative pathways. If due attention is to be given to marginalised interests, then a reflexive view must be taken of transformation. The paper ends with a series of concrete political lessons.

show abstract

Transforming governance and institutions for global sustainability: key insights from the Earth System Governance Project

Cited by 229 publications

References 52 publications

Planetary boundaries, equity and global sustainability: why wealthy countries could benefit from more equity

Planetary boundaries, equity and global sustainability: why wealthy countries could benefit from more equity

Comparing Global Coordination Mechanisms on Energy, Environment, and Water

Transforming Power: Social Science and the Politics of Energy Choices.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About