This article explores the logics mobilized by stakeholders involved in national climate governance to identify ways of conciliating them for sound governance. Based on the theoretical framework of institutional logics, the study offers an innovative perspective on climate governance and the management of green funds. Content analysis of the briefs submitted (N = 46) to a public hearing in Quebec (Canada) reveals three competing institutional logics: scientific governance, authority‐based governance, and participative governance. The results of this research have significant managerial and political implications for our understanding of the interactions between the different logics and for identifying ways to optimize climate governance. It also addresses essential but under‐researched aspects of national climate governance and green fund management.