Lessons learnt from international environmental agreements for the Stockholm + 50 Conference: celebrating 20 Years of INEA

Gupta, Joyeeta; Vegelin, Courtney; Pouw, Nicky

doi:10.1007/s10784-022-09570-x

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Since 1972 when the role of governments and other actors in relation to addressing environmental problems was first acknowledged, global commitments defined collective ambitions and actions like the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development in 1992 and the 2030 Agenda in 2015. Meanwhile, since 1857 over 700 multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) have been adopted (Gupta et al, 2022; Kim and Bosselmann, 2013; Mitchell, 2003). Recent global assessments indicate that, despite all these commitments and agreements, national and international policy processes have not been sufficient to stop unsustainable resource management at a global scale (Gupta et al, 2022; UN Environment, 2021, 2019; UNEP, 2021).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Meanwhile, since 1857 over 700 multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) have been adopted (Gupta et al, 2022; Kim and Bosselmann, 2013; Mitchell, 2003). Recent global assessments indicate that, despite all these commitments and agreements, national and international policy processes have not been sufficient to stop unsustainable resource management at a global scale (Gupta et al, 2022; UN Environment, 2021, 2019; UNEP, 2021).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nevertheless, MEAs have achieved a great deal at global and regional levels, such as the protection of the stratospheric ozone layer and the transboundary air pollution reduction in the pan-European region and reduced the speed with which environmental degradation is proceeding. They are therefore important instruments to steer policy processes towards more sustainability (Kanie, 2018) and are an essential tool for addressing challenges at transboundary and global levels (Gupta et al, 2022). The implementation of MEAs is challenging and often limited or weak: are they rigid legal agreements?…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Water Convention, a multilateral environmental agreement as community of practice

Timmerman,

Bernardini,

Kauppi

et al. 2023

Aquatic Ecosystem Health &Amp; Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multilateral Environmental Agreements are important international instruments for achieving sustainable development. Nevertheless, their implementation is often not easy and integration with scientific knowledge during implementation can be troublesome. The 1992 Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes (Water Convention) has developed a way of implementing its’ program of work that can best be described as a Community of Practice that combines scientific developments with practical implications. This approach has attracted much attention from practitioners in the field of water management and has been highly successful in many practical applications of its principles. This paper will describe how the Water Convention operates and will argue why this can be termed a Community of Practice. Different examples will be presented to underscore how the Water Convention through this approach has been able to attain progress towards its goals.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Water Convention, a multilateral environmental agreement as community of practice

Timmerman,

Bernardini,

Kauppi

et al. 2023

Aquatic Ecosystem Health &Amp; Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Governments are therefore being asked to commit to a major policy change without knowing its cost -an issue we refer to as the "blank cheque" problem. Financial and economic costs are one of the major points of debate and disagreement at international environmental summits [4][5][6] , including the Conferences of Parties (COPs) of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). In the absence of concrete information, this debate will revolve around imagined costs and losses, which can cause conflicts that are difficult to resolve and impede progress on policy.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Costs and economic impacts of expanding marine protected area systems to 30%

Waldron

Heneghan

Steenbeek

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

International proposals for marine biodiversity seek to expand marine protected area (MPA) coverage from 8% to 30%, known as 30x30. Quadrupling MPA coverage implies considerably higher MPA system costs and governments need early knowledge of these to inform debate. Ambitious MPA expansion also implies large potential losses or "opportunity costs" for fishers, putting pressure on governments to compromise and permit some fishing inside protected areas (a mixed high/low protection system). Crafting a balanced compromise needs to be informed by model projections of future fisheries outcomes under different protection regimes, climate change scenarios and behavioural adaptations. Here, we develop the first models for management costs at national MPA-system scale. We create scenarios of 30x30 at different compromises around protection strictness. We then examine how both MPA costs and opportunity costs vary with strictness, by simultaneously applying our management cost models and two Marine Ecosystem Models. We find that a no-take (high protection) MPA system could cost just $2 billion/year for the developing world and ~$8 billion overall, but would also create opportunity costs several times larger. A compromise mix of high and medium protection would have much higher MPA costs (e.g. $4.5 billion for the developing world) but much lower opportunity costs, to the point of fisheries actually benefiting in the future. Since lower protection also compromises on biodiversity goals, our results show the trade-offs that political decisions need to consider beyond COP15. More generally, the unusually large opportunity costs show how marine contexts generate very different economic issues from terrestrial ones, by attempting to protect a common pool resource area that envisages no automatic market compensation for income lost to conservation.

show abstract

Supply-side climate policy and fossil fuels in developing countries: a neo-Gramscian perspective

Heras

2024

Int Environ Agreements

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines the perspectives of low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) on climate change mitigation and fossil fuel supply within the UN framework convention on climate change (UNFCCC). Achieving the temperature targets of the Paris Agreement requires leaving fossil fuels underground (LFFU), which presents challenges for LMICs due to their significant fossil fuel reserves. This dilemma raises equity concerns as these countries must balance climate action with their Right to Development (RtD). Against this background, through a content analysis of documents submitted to the UNFCCC and triangulation with ownership structures of extraction projects, this paper explores how ten LMICs define their roles in addressing climate change and LFFU, with a focus on mitigation policies and the energy sector. Drawing on Gramscian concepts such as hegemony, common sense, historical bloc, war of position, passive revolution, and trasformismo, this paper presents a non-exhaustive neo-Gramscian perspective for the analysis of supply-side climate policy in developing countries. The analysis reveals that LMICs’ development paths have been characterized by fossil fuel expansion, energy addition, and carbon lock-in, grounded on energy security reasons, export dependencies, or equity and responsibility. From these findings, the paper argues that the global energy transition can be interpreted as a passive revolution: the fossil historical bloc, through the interdependencies between states, national oil companies, and fossil capital, maintains its hegemonic position by aligning material, organizational, and discursive resources around fossil fuels, with the RtD serving as a discursive tool to perpetuate fossil dominance in energy systems, agreeing to the legitimate demands for development. One of the trasformist tactics deployed is the bridge narrative of gas, which accommodates and neutralizes the challenge posed by renewables. Nonetheless, there are opportunities for Southern leadership to contest the bloc with potential counter-hegemony. This paper contributes to the ongoing debate on supply-side mitigation policies and distributive justice issues in the North–South context, focusing on the need and potential for an inclusive and just energy transformation. There are avenues of research to analyse how the challengers’ war of position will bear fruit in coalition building and the establishment of a new, just, and inclusive common sense.

show abstract

Lessons learnt from international environmental agreements for the Stockholm + 50 Conference: celebrating 20 Years of INEA

Cited by 5 publications

References 18 publications

The Water Convention, a multilateral environmental agreement as community of practice

The Water Convention, a multilateral environmental agreement as community of practice

Costs and economic impacts of expanding marine protected area systems to 30%

Supply-side climate policy and fossil fuels in developing countries: a neo-Gramscian perspective

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About