Volltext-Downloads (blau) und Frontdoor-Views (grau)

Promises and risks of nonstate action in climate and sustainability governance

  • Sustainable Development Goals and the Paris Agreement stand as milestone diplomatic achievements. However, immense discrepancies between political commitments and governmental action remain. Combined national climate commitments fall far short of the Paris Agreement's 1.5/2°C targets. Similar political ambition gaps persist across various areas of sustainable development. Many therefore argue that actions by nonstate actors, such as businesses and investors, cities and regions, and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), are crucial. These voices have resonated across the United Nations (UN) system, leading to growing recognition, promotion, and mobilization of such actions in ever greater numbers. This article investigates optimisticSustainable Development Goals and the Paris Agreement stand as milestone diplomatic achievements. However, immense discrepancies between political commitments and governmental action remain. Combined national climate commitments fall far short of the Paris Agreement's 1.5/2°C targets. Similar political ambition gaps persist across various areas of sustainable development. Many therefore argue that actions by nonstate actors, such as businesses and investors, cities and regions, and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), are crucial. These voices have resonated across the United Nations (UN) system, leading to growing recognition, promotion, and mobilization of such actions in ever greater numbers. This article investigates optimistic arguments about nonstate engagement, namely: (a) "the more the better"; (b) "everybody wins"; (c) "everyone does their part"; and (d) "more brings more." However, these optimistic arguments may not be matched in practice due to governance risks. The current emphasis on quantifiable impacts may lead to the under-appreciation of variegated social, economic, and environmental impacts. Claims that everybody stands to benefit may easily be contradicted by outcomes that are not in line with priorities and needs in developing countries. Despite the seeming depoliticization of the role of nonstate actors in implementation, actions may still lead to politically contentious outcomes. Finally, nonstate climate and sustainability actions may not be self-reinforcing but may heavily depend on supporting mechanisms. The article concludes with governance risk-reduction strategies that can be combined to maximize nonstate potential in sustainable and climate-resilient transformations.show moreshow less

Export metadata

Additional Services

Share in Twitter    Search Google Scholar    frontdoor_oas
Metadaten
Document Type:Peer-Reviewed Article
Author:Sander Chan, Idil Boran, Harro von Asselt, Gabriela Iacobuta, Navam Niles, Katharine Rietig, Michelle Scobie, Jennifer S. Bansard, Deborah Delgado Pugley, Laurence L. Delina, Friederike Eichhorn, Paula Ellinger, Okechukwu Enechi, Thomas Hale, Lukas Hermwille, Thomas Hickmann, Matthias Honegger, Andrea Hurtado Epstein, Stephanie La Hoz Theuer, Robert Mizo, Yixian Sun, Patrick Toussaint, Geoffrey Wambugu
Year of Publication:2019
Language:English
Source Title (English):WIREs climate change
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.572
Division:Energie-, Verkehrs- und Klimapolitik
Dewey Decimal Classification:320 Politik
Licence:License LogoCreative Commons - CC BY - Namensnennung 4.0 International