IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/ieaple/v17y2017i5d10.1007_s10784-016-9330-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A historical institutionalist view on merging LULUCF and REDD+ in a post-2020 climate agreement

Author

Listed:
  • Till Pistorius

    (Unique Forestry and Land Use GmbH)

  • Sabine Reinecke

    (University of Freiburg)

  • Astrid Carrapatoso

    (University of Freiburg)

Abstract

In the context of the UNFCCC negotiation process on a global climate agreement, policy makers are looking for approaches on how to significantly raise the mitigation ambition of all relevant sectors, including the land use sector. Aside of the formal negotiations some Parties to the UNFCCC have started an informal dialogue and discuss how to merge the fragmented accounting rules for mitigation relevant land use activities, in particular those concerning forest-sector emissions. Stressing that ‘history matters’, we use a historical institutionalist perspective to assess the institutional pathways of the different accounting rules for developed and developing countries, their mutual relationship, and in how far they are supportive or counterproductive for this endeavour. Our empirical analysis shows that Parties tend to use any modification phase in the negotiation process to water down already achieved agreements, and that negotiating modalities after targets have been agreed is not conducive either. In the efforts of specifying the Paris agreement, merging existing rules into a common accounting framework is likely to further compromise the exisiting weak rules and modalities, and potentially what negotiators consider as ‘environmental integrity’. With this, a formal negotiation of common rules for the accounting of the land use sector may yield an outcome below what has been achieved since the negotiations on a post-2020 agreement started in 2005. We conclude that politically acceptable approaches for the land use sector that also contribute to the overall objective of raising ambition should avoid reopening already agreed decisions on rules and modalities.

Suggested Citation

  • Till Pistorius & Sabine Reinecke & Astrid Carrapatoso, 2017. "A historical institutionalist view on merging LULUCF and REDD+ in a post-2020 climate agreement," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 17(5), pages 623-638, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:ieaple:v:17:y:2017:i:5:d:10.1007_s10784-016-9330-0
    DOI: 10.1007/s10784-016-9330-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10784-016-9330-0
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10784-016-9330-0?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bell, Stephen, 2011. "Do We Really Need a New ‘Constructivist Institutionalism’ to Explain Institutional Change?," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 41(4), pages 883-906, October.
    2. Sebastian Oberthür & Thomas Gehring, 2006. "Institutional Interaction in Global Environmental Governance: The Case of the Cartagena Protocol and the World Trade Organization," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 6(2), pages 1-31, May.
    3. Bohringer, Christoph & Vogt, Carsten, 2004. "The dismantling of a breakthrough: the Kyoto Protocol as symbolic policy," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 597-617, September.
    4. Fioretos, Orfeo, 2011. "Historical Institutionalism in International Relations," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 65(2), pages 367-399, April.
    5. Andrew Kerr Macintosh, 2012. "LULUCF in the post-2012 regime: fixing the problems of the past?," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(3), pages 341-355, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ga-Hyun Moon & Jong-Su Yim & Na-Hyun Moon, 2021. "Optimal Sampling Intensity in South Korea for a Land-Use Change Matrix Using Point Sampling," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-16, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ansink, Erik & Weikard, Hans-Peter & Withagen, Cees, 2019. "International environmental agreements with support," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 241-252.
    2. Peter Tangney & Claire Nettle & Beverley Clarke & Joshua Newman & Cassandra Star, 2021. "Climate security in the Indo-Pacific: a systematic review of governance challenges for enhancing regional climate resilience," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 167(3), pages 1-30, August.
    3. Zoltan GRUNHUT, 2020. "The ‘Expertisation’ of European Studies. A critical perspective on discursive institutionalism Abstract: The paper puts into perspective the conceptual evolution of European Studies and one of its lat," Eastern Journal of European Studies, Centre for European Studies, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, vol. 11, pages 252-272, June.
    4. Johan Eyckmans & Michael Finus, 2007. "Measures to enhance the success of global climate treaties," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 73-97, March.
    5. Dellink, Rob & Finus, Michael, 2012. "Uncertainty and climate treaties: Does ignorance pay?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 565-584.
    6. Kenneth W. Abbott & Benjamin Faude, 2022. "Hybrid institutional complexes in global governance," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 263-291, April.
    7. Joseph Anthony L. Reyes, 2021. "How Different Are the Nordics? Unravelling the Willingness to Make Economic Sacrifices for the Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-31, January.
    8. Melanie van Driel & Frank Biermann & Rakhyun E. Kim & Marjanneke J. Vijge, 2022. "International organisations as ‘custodians’ of the sustainable development goals? Fragmentation and coordination in sustainability governance," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 13(5), pages 669-682, November.
    9. Clemens Heuson & Wolfgang Peters & Reimund Schwarze & Anna-Katharina Topp, 2015. "Investment and Adaptation as Commitment Devices in Climate Politics," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 62(4), pages 769-790, December.
    10. Naseemullah, Adnan, 2023. "The political economy of national development: A research agenda after neoliberal reform?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    11. Laurent Warlouzet, 2016. "The Centralization of EU Competition Policy: Historical Institutionalist Dynamics from Cartel Monitoring to Merger Control (1956–91)," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(3), pages 725-741, May.
    12. Max Meulemann, 2017. "An Empirical Assessment Of Components Of Climate Architectures," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 8(04), pages 1-36, November.
    13. Patricio Valdivieso & Krister P. Andersson, 2018. "What Motivates Local Governments to Invest in Critical Infrastructure? Lessons from Chile," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-27, October.
    14. Sanderink, Lisa & Nasiritousi, Naghmeh, 2020. "How institutional interactions can strengthen effectiveness: The case of multi-stakeholder partnerships for renewable energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    15. Frank Biermann & Michele Betsill & Joyeeta Gupta & Norichika Kanie & Louis Lebel & Diana Liverman & Heike Schroeder & Bernd Siebenhüner & Ruben Zondervan, 2010. "Earth system governance: a research framework," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 10(4), pages 277-298, December.
    16. Lomax, Guy & Workman, Mark & Lenton, Timothy & Shah, Nilay, 2015. "Reframing the policy approach to greenhouse gas removal technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 125-136.
    17. Alfred Endres, 2008. "Ein Unmöglichkeitstheorem für die Klimapolitik?," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 9(3), pages 350-382, August.
    18. Buob, Seraina & Stephan, Gunter, 2011. "To mitigate or to adapt: How to confront global climate change," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 1-16, March.
    19. Andrew Lugg, 2024. "Re-contracting intergovernmental organizations: Membership change and the creation of linked intergovernmental organizations," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 545-577, September.
    20. Bednar-Friedl, Birgit & Farmer, Karl, 2010. "External balance, dynamic efficiency, and the welfare effects of unilateral and multilateral permit policies in interdependent economies," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 980-990, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:ieaple:v:17:y:2017:i:5:d:10.1007_s10784-016-9330-0. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.