Critical Mass Governance: Reforming Environmental Multilateralism to Fit the New World Order

1. Critical Mass Governance: Reforming Environmental Multilateralism to Fit the New World Order Luke Kemp, PhD Candidate Panel:Prof. Janette Lindesay (Panel Chair)Dr. Karen HusseyDr. Rob Dyball

2. The Failings of Multilateralism • A lack of leadership. • A lack of ‘fit’. • What happened to the ‘Global Deal’? • A tale of two protocols….

3. Legal zombies:the worst kind of living dead

4. United we Stand, Divided we Stall • The US Ratification Straitjacket. • Directional Leadership. • A world without a Hegemon.

6. A Multipolar World • Rise of the BRICs. • A change in norms and rules. • A shift to consensus. • Specific reciprocity and ‘the global package’.

7. The Alternatives • Retreat to the Region! • Muddle through with Multilateralism. • Minilateralism: “an idea whose time has come”(Dryzek 2012)

8. Research Questions 1. How can the issue of US ratification and/or participation be effectively addressed within an effective international architecture for environmental governance? 2. How can effective environmental governance without the United States (or other recalcitrant states) be enabled though; major international institutions, decision making processes, and an operational legal treaty.

9. Thesis Structure • Introduction. • Article 1- Realpolitik and reform (UNEP). • Article 2- Voting in the UNFCCC. • Article 3- Weighted voting in MEAs. • Article 4- A 2015 Agreement Without the US • Conclusion

10. Methods • Participant observation (Rio+20, COP18, COP19 and numerous others). • Interviewees with key, informed stakeholders. • Literature review.

11. Methodolgoy • Systems thinking- influence diagrams. • Political feasibility- output legitimacy. • Scenario building. • Hegemonic projects (Elkers et al 2009).

12. Realpolitik and Reform • The Debate over a World Environment Organisation (WEO). • Function- to implement or not to implement? • Form- Whither the WEO?

14. The UNEP Conundrum: Failure to the Failures

15. Scenarios for UNEP after Rio • Incremental upgrade (and hope). • UNEP Unknown • A Critical Mass WEO • A Critical Mass WSDO

16. Framework for the Future • Consensus, rule-beating and failure. • Voting as a consensus-builder. • Is globalism necessary?

18. Implementing Voting • Blockers and pushers. • To amend or not to amend? • Adopt the Rules of Procedure?

19. Institutional Dimensions

20. Scenarios for Decision Making Change

21. Consensus as a Fix that Fails

22. Giving Environmental Negotiations Weight • The alternatives to multilateralism: • Regionalism isn’t ready. • ‘Minilateralism’= a false interpretation.

23. Common but Differentiated Voting • Mitigation and Population and vulnerability. • Leadership, democracy and legitimacy. • A contagion for MEAs?

24. Common but Differentiated Voting

25. With or Without (the) US • US participation: the elephant in the plenary. • Treaties and executive agreements. • Options for: • Ratification. • Non-ratification.

26. A Toolbox for Paris • Pledge and review? • Measures against non-parties • Penalties. • Incentives. • From the bottom-up?

27. A Critical Mass Movement Opt-Out Protocols REDD+ • THE CORE • - Pledges • - Review Process • Financing • Adaptation • Consensual • Legally Binding? Market Based Mechanisms Loss and Damages Research and Development Short-term Pollutants

28. Strong and Weak CMG • Strong CMG:- Avoids US participation. - EU and Chinese leadership. • Weak CMG: - Fragmented approach with voting. - Unblock the issues, build momentum. - Avoids US ratification.

29. The Common Threads • Moving without the US (sort of). • Breaking interlinked consensus. • A dynamic view of international agreements. • Politically feasible at all levels.

30. A New Multilateralism • Minilateral speed, multilateral frame. • Coalitions of the willing. • From Hegemon to Hegemons. • Participation= most dynamic.

31. As the World Changes

32. Questions….