Much existing empirical research on polycentric climate governance (PCG) systems examines small-N examples. In response, we aim to advance studies of PCG by exploring, and reflecting on, the use of large-N data sets for analyzing PCG. We use Python (a programming language) to create a novel data set from the United Nations’ Global Climate Action Portal. This method allows us to quantify key variables for 12,568 businesses located in Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development countries: the number of businesses’ climate commitments, their progress toward meeting those commitments, and businesses’ memberships in “more polycentric” networks via transnational climate initiatives (TCIs). Our analysis of these data reveals that greater interconnectedness may strengthen climate policy performance, since businesses with memberships in TCIs more commonly achieved their commitments. Additional research using these data, and/or similar methods, could be conducted on climate governance and on other areas of international environmental governance, such as mining and oil production.

While climate change is often understood as a collective action and a market problem, we look at it as a problem of planning and coordination. Long-term planning is necessary to promote structural change, which will be required to keep the Paris Agreement's temperature goals. By encouraging states to develop a long-term climate strategy, the Paris Agreement invites countries to turn anticipatory governance into an international governance instrument. In this paper we explore how these strategies describe countries’ climate plans and what the perceptions of government officials are about the potential for realization of these strategies. Using mixed methods, we explore both 1) planning dimensions (actions, actors and policies described in the strategies) by applying a topic modeling analysis to 50 documents; and 2) perceptions of the content and challenges to their realization among domestic policy professionals of four major emitters. Our results show that the strategies lack a detailed discussion on how decarbonization pathways could be materialized and who has the responsibility for implementation of long-term targets. Moreover, rather than being a steering instrument, the strategies are dominated by scenario planning and there is also a lack of attention to political issues. Taken together, we contend that strategies are limited in the way they present the future possibilities of low emissions development. To make them more effective in steering long-term decarbonization, greater attention needs to be placed on potential conflicts, barriers and stumbling blocks that may arise along the way.

No Abstract Available

How do non-governmental organizations (NGOs) target governments for climate shaming? NGOs increasingly function as monitors of states climate performance and compliance with international climate treaties such as the Paris Agreement. Lacking formal sanctioning capacities, NGOs primarily rely on 'naming and shaming' to hold states accountable to their commitments in climate treaties and to ramp up their climate mitigation efforts. However, we know little about how and why NGOs engage in climate shaming. This article advances two arguments. First, we argue that NGO climate shaming is likely to be shaped by the international and national climate records of governments. Second, governments' climate actions can create contradicting expectations by both inviting and repelling NGO climate shaming. To test our arguments, we complied an original global data set on climate shaming events carried out by environmental NGOs. Our empirical analysis suggests that while NGOs are generally more likely to shame climate laggards, climate frontrunners may also be shamed if they engage in non-binding climate commitments. Key policy insights Climate laws and international climate treaties are central for our understanding of how NGOs target governments for climate shaming. NGOs are generally more likely to target climate laggards than frontrunners. Climate shaming is not only about whether but also how governments participate in global climate governance. Membership in climate institutions with non-binding commitments attracts NGO climate shaming. There is a risk that governments sign international climate treaties, without the intention to comply, in order to escape climate shaming.

For several decades, national environmental framework laws have come into existence to define its citizens’ environmental rights and duties, as well as express how the government will manage and protect the environment. However, previous research has not considered how a nation’s highest form of law promising environmental protection and management conveys its role or supports relevant parties. To fill this gap, we do a narrative analysis to see what themes emerged in 44 national environmental framework laws across the world. The main themes are (1) Rights and responsibilities of citizens and corporations, (2) Rights of the natural environment, (3) Environmental knowledge, (4) Governing the natural environment, and (5) External influences. Overall, we argue that the narratives we observed in the national environmental framework laws helps shape and reify the existing human domination of the natural environment for our own benefit and survival under the guise of protection.