Identifying Multiple Accountabilities in Global Environmental Governance

Kramarz, Teresa; Park, Susan

doi:10.7551/mitpress/11709.003.0005

Cited by 57 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…While to whom is accountability owned and who is held to account are important questions, Kramarz and Park (2019) emphasise that there are two layers of accountability. The first layer considers the normative priority of governance, which defines who the accountability holders are and to which primary purpose they can hold power wielders to account (Table 1).…”

Section: Analytical Framework: Multiple Accountabilities In Sustainab...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Here, we study “whether accountability holders are transparent, provide justification and reasoning, include monitoring and evaluation procedures, and are compliant with their aims in relations to the execution of specific interventions (i.e. whether actors do what they are supposed to do)” (Kramarz & Park, 2019). In my analysis below, I will focus on the implementation stage of the agreed‐upon global goals and hence, the second layer of accountability.…”

Section: Analytical Framework: Multiple Accountabilities In Sustainab...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Outputs, or standards that further demonstrate this execution, are legislation, treaties, conventions, protocols, enforcement and monitoring. Available sanctions include legal action through the courts, fines and loss of trust (see Table 2) (Kramarz & Park, 2019).…”

Section: Analytical Framework: Multiple Accountabilities In Sustainab...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition to public accountability systems, Kramarz and Park (2019) further consider private and voluntary systems. The primary purpose of private systems is to profitably generate goods and services at a quantity, quality and price that consumers demand.…”

Section: Analytical Framework: Multiple Accountabilities In Sustainab...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, I apply the analytical framework to this stage along all three logics of accountability (public, private, voluntary) for Agenda 2030 and its institutional setting. Methodologically, I proceed by answering questions on the inputs, output and sanctions, compiled by Kramarz and Park (2019; Table 2).…”

Section: Analytical Framework: Multiple Accountabilities In Sustainab...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Missing the SDGs: Political accountability for insufficient environmental action

Partzsch

2023

Global Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) demonstrate an integration of development and environmental agendas. However, none of the environmental sub‐targets, which were due by 2020, were accomplished. Global governance through goal setting requires functioning mechanisms of accountability. Based on a theoretical framework that differentiates between public, private and voluntary logic of accountability, the article illustratively explores accountability mechanisms concerning the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. This allows to discuss the untapped potential for holding power wielders, such as governments, private companies, and norm champions, accountable. While the SDGs were adopted within public governance institutions, there are regulative means of accountability available that follow private and voluntary logic. Acknowledging this hybrid character of accountability in the implementation stage, the article concludes that there is a need for additional research to explore dimensions of non‐public accountability for goals agreed upon by the international community. SDG indicators should be mandatory for corporate reporting, and civil society organisations should report more comprehensively on the spread of environmental norms in global development.

show abstract

Section: Analytical Framework: Multiple Accountabilities In Sustainab...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Analytical Framework: Multiple Accountabilities In Sustainab...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Analytical Framework: Multiple Accountabilities In Sustainab...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Analytical Framework: Multiple Accountabilities In Sustainab...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Analytical Framework: Multiple Accountabilities In Sustainab...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Missing the SDGs: Political accountability for insufficient environmental action

Partzsch

2023

Global Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Theorising the climate change accountability of Persian Gulf petrostates

Mason

2023

Env Pol Gov

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For states with political economies largely dependent on oil and natural gas rents, there seems to be little scope for accountability practices that answer for, and curb, fossil fuel production contributing to anthropogenic climate change. Critically engaging with rentier state theory, I examine the climate change accountability of Persian Gulf petrostates according to state responsibility norms under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). For both domestic and international actions undertaken by these countries, there is no meaningful climate answerability for responsible actions—that they recognise and/or commit to the phasing down of their oil and natural gas production. There are differences in their emission reduction goals, under the Paris Agreement, that map onto variations in the stability and structure of their political economies, notably between the ‘super‐rentier’ states (UAE, Kuwait and Qatar) and their rentier neighbours (Saudi Arabia and Oman). However, all make ritualistic, long‐term commitments to ‘clean‐carbon’ (net zero‐emission) futures with no plans to reduce hydrocarbon exports. I argue that international climate change obligations should include a responsibility on states to reduce GHG emissions (at source) arising from their domestic‐ and foreign ownership of operational oil and gas fields. State energy companies in the Persian Gulf and elsewhere are key actors in fossil fuel extraction, yet remain insulated, through their corporate identities, from state responsibility norms. Treating state ownership of fossil fuels as a legitimate target of international climate regulation would broaden state accountability for climate change harm.

show abstract

Governance gaps and accountability traps in renewables extractivism

Park,

Kramarz,

Johnson

2024

Env Pol Gov

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The global uptake of renewable technology is both a dramatic and insufficient contribution to achieving a 1.5–2° world. However, urgently decarbonizing energy use and systems by shifting to renewables relies on intensifying global supply chains, beginning with the extraction of “critical” minerals, an industry that has a long history of generating significant social and ecological harms. This paper examines the nature of transnational governance initiatives that have emerged to regulate what has been called “renewables extractivism.” We develop a novel database of 44 transnational initiatives for governing minerals for onshore wind, solar PV, and lithium‐ion batteries, which are driving renewable energy uptake. The database reveals “governance gaps” that refer to an absence of rules for many critical minerals and “accountability traps” where actors are held responsible for processes, standards, and sanctions that reflect their own normative logics, rather than the needs of affected communities and ecosystems. Current initiatives are designed in a way that measures, evaluates, and (very rarely) sanctions governance outcomes primarily in relation to supply chain security and energy access, as opposed to mitigating the social and environmental harms of resource extraction. The result is a transnational governance architecture that operates primarily (and systematically) with minimal scrutiny, transparency, and accountability. For stakeholders directly affected by the latest mining boom cycle, the absence of effective and legitimate accountability mechanisms reinforces a pattern of uneven development that shifts the most destructive forms of extraction to the social and ecological margins of the global commodity frontier.

show abstract

Identifying Multiple Accountabilities in Global Environmental Governance

Cited by 57 publications

References 0 publications

Missing the SDGs: Political accountability for insufficient environmental action

Missing the SDGs: Political accountability for insufficient environmental action

Theorising the climate change accountability of Persian Gulf petrostates

Governance gaps and accountability traps in renewables extractivism

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About