This Title All WIREs
How to cite this WIREs title:
WIREs Clim Change
Impact Factor: 6.099

The fragmentation of the global climate governance architecture

Full article on Wiley Online Library:   HTML PDF

Can't access this content? Tell your librarian.

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. WIREs Clim Change 2011 2 255–270 DOI: 10.1002/wcc.104 This article is categorized under: Policy and Governance > Multilevel and Transnational Climate Change Governance

Spheres of institutional fragmentation in global climate governance. (Reprinted with permission from Ref 71, p. 270. Copyright 2010 Cambridge University Press)

[ Normal View | Magnified View ]

Related Articles

Is the Asia‐Pacific Partnership a viable alternative to Kyoto?
The Asia‐Pacific Partnership: implementation challenges and interplay with Kyoto
China's National Climate Change Program
Climate Change: A Question of Justice?
Climate Change: Planet Under Pressure

Browse by Topic

Policy and Governance > Multilevel and Transnational Climate Change Governance

Access to this WIREs title is by subscription only.

Recommend to Your
Librarian Now!

The latest WIREs articles in your inbox

Sign Up for Article Alerts