Governing the Bioeconomy: The Global Bioenergy Partnership (GBEP) and Climate Club Effectiveness

Despite over three decades of multilateral climate change negotiations, the sobering evidence presented by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is that global mitigation efforts fall short of the levels needed to limit the global temperature increase to well below 2°C. To overcome this impasse, a plethora of proposals have been put forward in recent years by scholars, environmentalists, and policymakers on how various forms of innovation in global climate governance, ranging from bottom-up policy approaches to multi-actor governance networks, might complement or supplement the climate change regime. Climate clubs have emerged as a possible strategy for enhancing political dialogue and strengthening climate strategies. Climate clubs are defined as any grouping that has fewer members than the UNFCCC, plus aims to promote climate-related activities outside the UNFCCC arena, like for example the promotion of renewable energy sources. In recent years, and especially since the failed 2009 Copenhagen climate conference, we have witnessed a surge in the number of climate clubs focused on dialogue and implementation. Theoretical work has explored, inter alia, the different forms of climate clubs and the various roles they (could) play in the context of international climate cooperation. In contrast to theoretical advancements, however, fewer scholars have assessed the empirical record of climate clubs. This paper utilizes the climate club concept as an analytical category to evaluate the role in global climate governance of the Global Bioenergy Partnership (GBEP), a government-driven international initiative established in May 2006 to promote the sustainable and efficient use of bioenergy and biomass, particularly in developing countries where biomass use is prevalent. GBEP has so far received scant attention in the academic literature, even though it is among the main multilateral bodies that have been set up to assist with bioenergy governance. The main finding of this paper is that GBEP plays an important yet underappreciated role in global bioenergy governance. Its contribution lies in raising awareness, capacity and network building, as well as enabling the orchestration of external actors and actions. Yet, fluctuating support from members and limited funding allocation have limited its political weight. This study contributes to the literature both empirically, as well as theoretically. First, by providing empirical insights into the important role played by climate clubs in environmental and energy governance, focusing on the specific case of GBEP and the useful lessons it has to offer for other initiatives in global climate and energy governance. Second, by presenting a framework of criteria against which to assess the contributions climate clubs to the development and function of the climate change regime. This framework synthesizes and extends the existing body of work on this topic and comprises of: (1) organizational architecture and culture; (2) governance functions; and (3) club benefits. Testing its generalizability to other cases of climate clubs could enhance understanding the different contributions climate clubs make to international climate policy.