Pub Date : 2025-08-22DOI: 10.1016/j.esg.2025.100283
Andrea Schapper, Paul Cairney, Neil Crawford, Clemens Hoffmann, Hyeyoon Park, Hannes Stephan
New directions in just climate policymaking can emerge from the dialogue between critical climate justice and policy studies scholars. Current climate justice research presents a strong and coherent message about the scale and urgency of climatic challenges, historical responsibilities, colonialism, systemic inequalities, intersectionality and the role of recognitional, procedural, and distributional justice-driven solutions. However, it struggles to explain how to overcome profound gaps between aspiration and reality. In this Perspective, we bring insights from critical climate justice scholars and policy scholars into conversation. Policy theories help us explain gaps between high ambitions but low progress towards policymaking integration and policy coherence for climate justice. However, they focus largely on evidence from Western countries and struggle to harness wider international insights on policy innovation, with the potential to largely contribute to a doom spiral. We use the example of non-anthropocentric policymaking and planetary justice approaches to explore this dialogue on drivers and barriers to change.
{"title":"New directions in climate justice? A dialogue between critical climate justice and policy studies scholars","authors":"Andrea Schapper, Paul Cairney, Neil Crawford, Clemens Hoffmann, Hyeyoon Park, Hannes Stephan","doi":"10.1016/j.esg.2025.100283","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.esg.2025.100283","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>New directions in just climate policymaking can emerge from the dialogue between critical climate justice and policy studies scholars. Current climate justice research presents a strong and coherent message about the scale and urgency of climatic challenges, historical responsibilities, colonialism, systemic inequalities, intersectionality and the role of recognitional, procedural, and distributional justice-driven solutions. However, it struggles to explain how to overcome profound gaps between aspiration and reality. In this Perspective, we bring insights from critical climate justice scholars and policy scholars into conversation. Policy theories help us explain gaps between high ambitions but low progress towards policymaking integration and policy coherence for climate justice. However, they focus largely on evidence from Western countries and struggle to harness wider international insights on policy innovation, with the potential to largely contribute to a doom spiral. We use the example of non-anthropocentric policymaking and planetary justice approaches to explore this dialogue on drivers and barriers to change.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":33685,"journal":{"name":"Earth System Governance","volume":"26 ","pages":"Article 100283"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6,"publicationDate":"2025-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144886031","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-08-01DOI: 10.1016/j.esg.2025.100280
Nicole Curato , John S. Dryzek , David Levai , Claire Mellier , Melisa Ross , Rich Wilson
Building on the proof of concept that was the 2021 Global Assembly on the Climate and Ecological Crisis, we explore an expanded and even institutionalized role for effective and consequential citizen deliberation in global climate governance. Such an expanded role could not just strengthen citizen voices in negotiations, but also counter vested interests, promote civic learning, enhance the legitimacy of governance, foster global solidarity, and generate reflective input to galvanize policies.
{"title":"Where next for global climate deliberation: From proof of concept to a role in transformation","authors":"Nicole Curato , John S. Dryzek , David Levai , Claire Mellier , Melisa Ross , Rich Wilson","doi":"10.1016/j.esg.2025.100280","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.esg.2025.100280","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Building on the proof of concept that was the 2021 Global Assembly on the Climate and Ecological Crisis, we explore an expanded and even institutionalized role for effective and consequential citizen deliberation in global climate governance. Such an expanded role could not just strengthen citizen voices in negotiations, but also counter vested interests, promote civic learning, enhance the legitimacy of governance, foster global solidarity, and generate reflective input to galvanize policies.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":33685,"journal":{"name":"Earth System Governance","volume":"25 ","pages":"Article 100280"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144739104","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-08-01DOI: 10.1016/j.esg.2025.100257
Annabelle Workman , Kathryn J. Bowen
{"title":"Exploring ‘planetary health’ in the context of Earth System Governance: Editorial","authors":"Annabelle Workman , Kathryn J. Bowen","doi":"10.1016/j.esg.2025.100257","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.esg.2025.100257","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":33685,"journal":{"name":"Earth System Governance","volume":"25 ","pages":"Article 100257"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144890510","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-07-26DOI: 10.1016/j.esg.2025.100278
María Jose Sanz , Ana Karla Perea Blazquez
The crucial role of land-based activities in climate change mitigation and adaptation has gained recognition under the Paris Agreement, including through the commitments outlined in Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). While technical assessments highlight the mitigation potential of the land sector, this potential is constrained by several challenges, particularly competing demands across development, social, environmental and climate objectives. International governance structures for land use often fail to address these multiple objectives, which makes it challenging to ensure sound arbitrages among them. This paper evaluates the current international governance landscape in the Agriculture, Forestry, and Other Land Use (AFOLU) sector, analysing governance functions that address barriers to climate change mitigation globally and assessing the extent to which these functions are met. Our findings indicate that while existing governance frameworks address barriers through guidance, rule-setting, transparency and accountability, support for implementation, and knowledge dissemination, gaps remain, particularly in guidance and signalling, transparency and rules and standards. Other key gaps identified are the insufficiency of the funds mobilised so far, the limitations of global assessments, and the duplicity of efforts and disconnection across different initiatives. Closing these governance gaps is essential to enable effective global governance in the AFOLU sector and unlock its mitigation potential. We propose potential solutions to bridge these gaps.
{"title":"Analysis of international climate change governance for the agriculture, forest and land use sector: Gaps and recommendations for future improvement","authors":"María Jose Sanz , Ana Karla Perea Blazquez","doi":"10.1016/j.esg.2025.100278","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.esg.2025.100278","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The crucial role of land-based activities in climate change mitigation and adaptation has gained recognition under the Paris Agreement, including through the commitments outlined in Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). While technical assessments highlight the mitigation potential of the land sector, this potential is constrained by several challenges, particularly competing demands across development, social, environmental and climate objectives. International governance structures for land use often fail to address these multiple objectives, which makes it challenging to ensure sound arbitrages among them. This paper evaluates the current international governance landscape in the Agriculture, Forestry, and Other Land Use (AFOLU) sector, analysing governance functions that address barriers to climate change mitigation globally and assessing the extent to which these functions are met. Our findings indicate that while existing governance frameworks address barriers through guidance, rule-setting, transparency and accountability, support for implementation, and knowledge dissemination, gaps remain, particularly in guidance and signalling, transparency and rules and standards. Other key gaps identified are the insufficiency of the funds mobilised so far, the limitations of global assessments, and the duplicity of efforts and disconnection across different initiatives. Closing these governance gaps is essential to enable effective global governance in the AFOLU sector and unlock its mitigation potential. We propose potential solutions to bridge these gaps.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":33685,"journal":{"name":"Earth System Governance","volume":"25 ","pages":"Article 100278"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2025-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144704848","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-07-23DOI: 10.1016/j.esg.2025.100277
Lisa Hiwasaki
Processes within global sustainability governance are fragmented despite calls for greater synergies. Although “leave no one behind” is a universal value of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, evidence of concrete efforts to decrease inequalities, especially between countries in the Global South and North, are limited. In order to understand the impacts of fragmented global sustainability governance on inequality reduction and equitable development, I conducted text analysis of the 2030 Agenda's Sustainable Development Goals, the Paris Agreement on climate change, and the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction, and reviewed literature on the convergences and gaps among them. I found that first, although the three global agreements acknowledge the need to realise equality and equity, the use of these terms are sparing in the texts, and when they do appear, they are defined inconsistently and operationalized imprecisely across these global processes. Second, while numerous linkages exist among the three agreements, sustainability challenges that directly relate to equality and equity outcomes are the ones with the least convergences identified, and have the least number of activities implemented, research done, and data collected. Such fragmented and inconsistent implementation and monitoring of progress towards sustainable development are detrimental to equitable development, and negatively affect marginalised groups—especially in the Global South—for whom impacts of disasters, climate change, and maldevelopment are felt most acutely. At more than halfway in the implementation of these global processes, it is important now more than ever to strengthen efforts towards their integration by prioritising equality and equity.
{"title":"Leave no one behind: Prioritising equality and equity towards integration of global sustainability governance","authors":"Lisa Hiwasaki","doi":"10.1016/j.esg.2025.100277","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.esg.2025.100277","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Processes within global sustainability governance are fragmented despite calls for greater synergies. Although “leave no one behind” is a universal value of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, evidence of concrete efforts to decrease inequalities, especially between countries in the Global South and North, are limited. In order to understand the impacts of fragmented global sustainability governance on inequality reduction and equitable development, I conducted text analysis of the 2030 Agenda's Sustainable Development Goals, the Paris Agreement on climate change, and the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction, and reviewed literature on the convergences and gaps among them. I found that first, although the three global agreements acknowledge the need to realise equality and equity, the use of these terms are sparing in the texts, and when they do appear, they are defined inconsistently and operationalized imprecisely across these global processes. Second, while numerous linkages exist among the three agreements, sustainability challenges that directly relate to equality and equity outcomes are the ones with the least convergences identified, and have the least number of activities implemented, research done, and data collected. Such fragmented and inconsistent implementation and monitoring of progress towards sustainable development are detrimental to equitable development, and negatively affect marginalised groups—especially in the Global South—for whom impacts of disasters, climate change, and maldevelopment are felt most acutely. At more than halfway in the implementation of these global processes, it is important now more than ever to strengthen efforts towards their integration by prioritising equality and equity.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":33685,"journal":{"name":"Earth System Governance","volume":"25 ","pages":"Article 100277"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2025-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144685967","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-07-23DOI: 10.1016/j.esg.2025.100279
Karina Shyrokykh, Lisa Dellmuth
As climate change is becoming an ever more pressing global policy challenge, the linkages of climate change to other issue areas are diversifying. This article seeks to explain why some climate linkages are more likely to spread across international organizations (IOs) than others. Drawing on organizational and framing theories, we argue that the framing of climate linkages affects how such linkages disseminate across IOs. Distinguishing between three framings of climate change––technical, emotional and emergency––we develop and test novel hypotheses about the effects of framing climate linkages on their spread on social media. We use an original dataset on the dissemination of climate linkages on the social media platform Twitter (currently X) among eight IOs with a global mandate during the period 2008–2019. The results suggest that both the characteristics and the framing of climate linkages influence their spread across the studied IOs, as we find, in the context of the climate-development and climate-disaster risks linkages, that technical and emotional framings affect how linkages spread across several United Nations agencies. In all, we show the importance of the interplay between climate change linkages and the framings of these linkages for their spread across IOs.
{"title":"Climate change framings and linkages across international organizations","authors":"Karina Shyrokykh, Lisa Dellmuth","doi":"10.1016/j.esg.2025.100279","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.esg.2025.100279","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>As climate change is becoming an ever more pressing global policy challenge, the linkages of climate change to other issue areas are diversifying. This article seeks to explain why some climate linkages are more likely to spread across international organizations (IOs) than others. Drawing on organizational and framing theories, we argue that the framing of climate linkages affects how such linkages disseminate across IOs. Distinguishing between three framings of climate change––technical, emotional and emergency––we develop and test novel hypotheses about the effects of framing climate linkages on their spread on social media. We use an original dataset on the dissemination of climate linkages on the social media platform Twitter (currently X) among eight IOs with a global mandate during the period 2008–2019. The results suggest that both the characteristics and the framing of climate linkages influence their spread across the studied IOs, as we find, in the context of the climate-development and climate-disaster risks linkages, that technical and emotional framings affect how linkages spread across several United Nations agencies. In all, we show the importance of the interplay between climate change linkages and the framings of these linkages for their spread across IOs.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":33685,"journal":{"name":"Earth System Governance","volume":"25 ","pages":"Article 100279"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2025-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144685968","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-07-21DOI: 10.1016/j.esg.2025.100268
Justin Joseph , Anjan Kumar Sahu , Juha Vuori
Biodiversity conservation is one of the most contentious issues in the Global South, particularly political authority's methods and objectives of managing conservation. This paper studies how political authority deals with biodiversity conservation, and how different stakeholders respond to the conservation policy. In doing so, the study employs the securitization framework and blends it with the Three Streams Model to find out the political authority's securitization process (which is state-driven and top-down). Additionally, Narrative Policy Framework is employed to study the response of stakeholders (primarily local) to the securitization process. Thus, the central objective of the paper is to examine the securitization of the Western Ghats, especially with reference to Kerala, India. Based on the case study, the study finds that audiences in the Global South are capable of opposing securitization of biodiversity. In conjunction with functional actors, audience form assemblages and resist the deployment of extraordinary measures, thereby opposing securitization.
{"title":"Securitization, three streams model and biodiversity in the Global South: A case study of Western Ghats of India","authors":"Justin Joseph , Anjan Kumar Sahu , Juha Vuori","doi":"10.1016/j.esg.2025.100268","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.esg.2025.100268","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Biodiversity conservation is one of the most contentious issues in the Global South, particularly political authority's methods and objectives of managing conservation. This paper studies how political authority deals with biodiversity conservation, and how different stakeholders respond to the conservation policy. In doing so, the study employs the securitization framework and blends it with the Three Streams Model to find out the political authority's securitization process (which is state-driven and top-down). Additionally, Narrative Policy Framework is employed to study the response of stakeholders (primarily local) to the securitization process. Thus, the central objective of the paper is to examine the securitization of the Western Ghats, especially with reference to Kerala, India. Based on the case study, the study finds that audiences in the Global South are capable of opposing securitization of biodiversity. In conjunction with functional actors, audience form assemblages and resist the deployment of extraordinary measures, thereby opposing securitization.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":33685,"journal":{"name":"Earth System Governance","volume":"25 ","pages":"Article 100268"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2025-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144672645","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-07-15DOI: 10.1016/j.esg.2025.100275
Elsa L. Dingkuhn , Lilian O'Sullivan , Caitlin A. Grady , Erik de Klerk , Rogier P.O. Schulte
Sustainable land-use governance is challenged by the complex interplay of local to global influences. This study combines two complementary approaches: a systematic review compiling a database of direct and diffuse contextual land-use drivers; and a cross-case analysis of three contrasting contexts: Ireland (regulated EU), Pennsylvania (market-driven US), and the Philippines (emerging economy) to uncover systemic interactions between drivers within and across cases.
Among direct drivers, regulatory approaches had the greatest impact, especially when synergistically combined with softer instruments. Market drivers highlight the need to engage supply-chain actors beyond farmers. Contextual factors outweighed direct drivers: farmers’ choices remain rooted in social contexts on which governance instruments depend for their effectiveness.
We demonstrate the need for greater policy coherence by addressing conflicting influences that hinder policy objectives, integrating socio-cultural and structural factors, and prioritising context-sensitive approaches. Amidst escalating ecological pressures, we provide recommendations and common governance principles applicable across diverse institutional settings.
{"title":"Land-use governance: The interplay of social, market, and policy drivers – A global systematic review","authors":"Elsa L. Dingkuhn , Lilian O'Sullivan , Caitlin A. Grady , Erik de Klerk , Rogier P.O. Schulte","doi":"10.1016/j.esg.2025.100275","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.esg.2025.100275","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Sustainable land-use governance is challenged by the complex interplay of local to global influences. This study combines two complementary approaches: a systematic review compiling a database of direct and diffuse contextual land-use drivers; and a cross-case analysis of three contrasting contexts: Ireland (regulated EU), Pennsylvania (market-driven US), and the Philippines (emerging economy) to uncover systemic interactions between drivers within and across cases.</div><div>Among direct drivers, regulatory approaches had the greatest impact, especially when synergistically combined with softer instruments. Market drivers highlight the need to engage supply-chain actors beyond farmers. Contextual factors outweighed direct drivers: farmers’ choices remain rooted in social contexts on which governance instruments depend for their effectiveness.</div><div>We demonstrate the need for greater policy coherence by addressing conflicting influences that hinder policy objectives, integrating socio-cultural and structural factors, and prioritising context-sensitive approaches. Amidst escalating ecological pressures, we provide recommendations and common governance principles applicable across diverse institutional settings.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":33685,"journal":{"name":"Earth System Governance","volume":"25 ","pages":"Article 100275"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2025-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144633033","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-07-10DOI: 10.1016/j.esg.2025.100276
Paulan Korenhof , Brett Metcalfe , Adam Henschke
Digital Twins (DTs) are data-driven real-time and multi-faceted representations of real-life physical systems or phenomena. Currently, DTs are developed for use in environmental governance, ranging from DTs of single crops to the planet Earth. By offering up-to-date dynamic simulations, DTs are anticipated to support decision-making in addressing key challenges like ecological degradation and climate change. However, DTs are not neutral tools: they are shaped by human assumptions and values, and bring about changes and power shifts in decision-making processes.
In this article, we take in a bird's eye view to identify the different levels and manners in which DTs can reconfigure environmental governance. Building on Korenhof et al. (2021), we conceptualise DTs as cybernetic systems. We trace how these systems affect governance on the levels of information, communication, and control. We conclude that, when used in environmental governance, it is vital to take action to ensure the democratic legitimacy of DTs.
{"title":"Cyber-governance of the natural world the implications of digital twins in environmental governance","authors":"Paulan Korenhof , Brett Metcalfe , Adam Henschke","doi":"10.1016/j.esg.2025.100276","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.esg.2025.100276","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Digital Twins (DTs) are data-driven real-time and multi-faceted representations of real-life physical systems or phenomena. Currently, DTs are developed for use in environmental governance, ranging from DTs of single crops to the planet Earth. By offering up-to-date dynamic simulations, DTs are anticipated to support decision-making in addressing key challenges like ecological degradation and climate change. However, DTs are not neutral tools: they are shaped by human assumptions and values, and bring about changes and power shifts in decision-making processes.</div><div>In this article, we take in a bird's eye view to identify the different levels and manners in which DTs can reconfigure environmental governance. Building on Korenhof et al. (2021), we conceptualise DTs as cybernetic systems. We trace how these systems affect governance on the levels of information, communication, and control. We conclude that, when used in environmental governance, it is vital to take action to ensure the democratic legitimacy of DTs.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":33685,"journal":{"name":"Earth System Governance","volume":"25 ","pages":"Article 100276"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2025-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144588040","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-07-07DOI: 10.1016/j.esg.2025.100274
Heiner von Lüpke
This paper investigates the implications of implementing the Just Energy Transition Partnership (JETP) in South Africa by exploring the factors that are at work when donors and recipients interact with each other. It analyses the JETP using global cooperation theories on climate change and identify mutual trust, based on shared norms; and process legitimacy via institutionalisation as the factors which can promote cooperation between donors and recipients. The paper contributes to the literature on international climate finance by providing novel insights through the analysis of the South African JETP as a single case study. It shows that the JETP is in fact a transnational policy process that needs to be institutionalised and legitimised to improve shortcomings of established conditionality instruments. The results might also inform the design of other climate and development partnerships in sectors such as land use or industry, as challenges of transitions appear similar.
{"title":"The just energy transition partnership in South Africa: Identification and assessment of key factors driving international cooperation","authors":"Heiner von Lüpke","doi":"10.1016/j.esg.2025.100274","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.esg.2025.100274","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This paper investigates the implications of implementing the Just Energy Transition Partnership (JETP) in South Africa by exploring the factors that are at work when donors and recipients interact with each other. It analyses the JETP using global cooperation theories on climate change and identify mutual trust, based on shared norms; and process legitimacy via institutionalisation as the factors which can promote cooperation between donors and recipients. The paper contributes to the literature on international climate finance by providing novel insights through the analysis of the South African JETP as a single case study. It shows that the JETP is in fact a transnational policy process that needs to be institutionalised and legitimised to improve shortcomings of established conditionality instruments. The results might also inform the design of other climate and development partnerships in sectors such as land use or industry, as challenges of transitions appear similar.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":33685,"journal":{"name":"Earth System Governance","volume":"25 ","pages":"Article 100274"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2025-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144570452","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号