Framework for the future? Exploring the possibility of majority voting in the climate negotiations

Abstract

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is struggling in its attempts to address the threat of anthropogenic climate change and create an effective international climate agreement. A substantial part of the problem is consensus decision-making within the Convention. Majority voting is a potential alternative which is already being discussed within the UNFCCC. A comparative analysis of consensus and majority voting suggests that majority voting is superior in terms of both efficiency and effectiveness by allowing for quicker decision-making and semi-global approaches to a climate agreement (termed here as ''Critical Mass Governance''). This paper aims to investigate how majority voting could be implemented in the UNFCCC and to consider politically feasible and effective approaches to voting arrangements for the Convention. There is a legal opportunity to introduce voting through adoption of the draft Rules of Procedure, but this faces political opposition. A type of Layered Majority Voting with larger majorities for financial and substantial matters is considered to be the optimal approach in balancing political feasibility and effectiveness. For now, voting is not politically feasible for the UNFCCC, but could be introduced into future bodies or treaties under the Convention.

Why do climate change negotiations stall? Scientific evidence and solutions for some structural problems

“…However, to adopt a decision, there has to be consensus on it. This system, which has its origin in UN rules of procedure (Kemp, 2015), was recognised as a problem very early (Vihma, 2015) and continues to be one of the biggest blocks, as it gives blocking countries undue weight.…”

“…We conclude that the existing opposing interests cannot be brought into line as long as a consensus decision-making procedure is in place. Country interests are too different for that -just take AOSIS and Saudi Arabia as examples (Kemp, 2015). In fact, Saudi Arabia has been a constant block in multiple sessions throughout the COPs, keeping an adamant position against any action against climate change (Depledge, 2008).…”

“…For example, this was demonstrated by the Mexican COP president, who declared the Cancun Agreements as adopted since the majority was for it, though there was no unanimity, only a widespread consensus. While countries could go to international courts, for example, the International Court of Justice, given such a decision, no country has in fact done so, not even Bolivia, which threatened to do so (Kemp, 2015).…”

The politics of multilateral environmental agreements lessons from 20 years of INEA

“…Regarding the implementation of the provisions of international regimes within the political systems of member states, the first thing to note is great variation among the members of MEAs in terms of political operating systems, socioeconomic development, and national culture (Carbonell & Allison, 2015 ; Gray, 2003 ; Najam, 2005 ; Schreurs, 2005 ; Tacconi et al, 2008 ; Zaharchenko & Goldenman, 2004 ). Consider the contrast between China and the USA.…”

Paris agreement in the light of the objectives and principles of the contemporary policy and environmental law

“…18, No. 3, 257-267;Kemp, L. (2015): "Framework for the future? Exploring the possibility of majority voting in theclimate negotiations",International Environmental Agreements, Published online 07 August, 2015, 1-23.…”