In person icon Climate Clubs: A New Tool for Effective Climate Governance

Abstract

As global efforts to limit global warming to 1.5°C fall short (UNFCCC, 2023), attention turns to climate clubs to increase climate ambition (Nordhaus, 2015; Hovi et al., 2017; Unger et al., 2020; Falkner et al., 2021). Recent years witnessed a proliferation of club-like arrangements in climate governance, such as the Global Methane Pledge and the Climate Club, highlighting their popularity in both political processes and academic studies. Three types of climate clubs have been distinguished in the literature: First, “economic clubs” offer economic benefits to members and impose sanctions on non-members to curtail freeriding (Nordhaus, 2015; Hovi et al., 2017). Second, “bargaining clubs” refer to political dialogue forums intended to facilitate agreement among powerful states (Weischer et al., 2012; Falkner et al., 2021). Commonly mentioned examples are the G7 and G20. Third, “normative clubs” consist of groups of countries with a shared climate policy commitment (Falkner et al., 2021). Normative climate clubs, including the two examples mentioned above, encompass a growing number of cases that lack empirical assessment (Unger et al., 2020). At the same time, [c]onfusion regarding the nature of climate clubs” (Falkner et al., 2021, p.1) hinders debates about clubs’ role in and contribution to global climate governance. This panel addresses the dual gap of limited empirics and conceptual confusion, particularly on the economic and normative club variety. The first paper argues that clubs’ normative power deserves more attention, rather than measuring their performance and effectiveness solely in terms of emissions reductions. It examines why norms promoted by some climate clubs spread more than others in order to develop an analytical framework to assess climate clubs’ norm-setting power. The second paper in this panel dives into the gap between political expectations and the reality of clubs by discussing three challenges that arise in club implementation: (1) Efficacy, efficiency, and goal setting; (2) Membership: exclusiveness vs. inclusiveness; and (3) Ambition, implementation, and voluntariness. The third contributes the first-ever comprehensive mapping of normative climate clubs, an important empirical contribution. For a total of 39 cases, it visualized and discusses collected data in light of scholarly debates about clubs and (a) their relationship vis-á-vis climate negotiations, (b) membership size and composition, (c) sectoral focus, (d) member benefits, and (e) monitoring and reporting. Doing so increases our understanding of the practical role assumed by normative clubs in global climate politics. The panel has space for one/ two more paper/s and invites submissions that engage with economic or normative climate clubs in a conceptual or empirical manner.

Title	Details
Opposites Attract? Coalitions and Their Ambitions in the Clean Energy Ministerial	View Paper Details
Governing the Bioeconomy: The Global Bioenergy Partnership (GBEP) and Climate Club Effectiveness	View Paper Details
Normative Climate Clubs: Mapping and Discussing 39 Cases' Core Features	View Paper Details
Climate Club Politics - The Challenges of Making a Small Group Work on a Global Issue	View Paper Details
Climate Clubs: Drivers for Norm Success in Climate Action?	View Paper Details