Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Supporting NAMAs through the Green Climate Fund: Governance capacities and challenges Mathias Friman, Prabhat Upadhyaya and Björn-Ola Linnér 16-01-14,

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Supporting NAMAs through the Green Climate Fund: Governance capacities and challenges Mathias Friman, Prabhat Upadhyaya and Björn-Ola Linnér 16-01-14,"— Presentation transcript:

1 Supporting NAMAs through the Green Climate Fund: Governance capacities and challenges Mathias Friman, Prabhat Upadhyaya and Björn-Ola Linnér , Stockholm

2 International Environmental Law Effectiveness depends on: Formal status, level of legitimacy – Traditionally hard or soft divide. Judged on – Obligation (bindingness); Precision (unambiguous definition); Delegation (authorization given to third party) Shifting from Binary to a continuum approach – The formal character of law matters less – For ex: Kyoto Protocol flexible mechanisms regulated by means of decisions than the treaty text itself Green Climate Fund (GCF): – Defined through soft law, yet set up for specific tasks

3 Governance and Capacities Governance: The organization of collective action – Performative capacity (Arts and Goverde 2006): Actual performance – Indicative capacity: The potential in effectively governing “Whether... we can expect a ‘capacity to govern’”? (La Rovere et al. 2002, p. 3) Governance capacity depends on – Formal laws – Mandate granted to the institutions – But also on soft law

4 Governance challenges No sovereignty with global community; Dispute settlement procedures weak Governance challenge for GCF with relation to NAMAs: – Need to establish legitimacy – Manage varied expectations on supporting Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs) – Can’t be expected to function in order to affect individual state behavior Legitimacy among states – Crucial for internationally defined legal obligations – Depends on procedurally just manner

5 Governance Challenges GCF Board – Expected to respect sovereign rights of countries – Need common criteria for selecting NAMAs Obligation and precision functions – Joint obligation to long term finance exists; precision missing – NAMA proposals voluntarily in nature – Need to ensure the precision of obligations Legality of Board decisions difficult to enforce, GCF’s legitimacy crucial

6 GCF’s Governance capacities Deals with delegation of decision making powers to GCF and their precision GCF defined through a COP decision (Soft Law): – States obligations’ non-enforceable; High flexibility An operating entity to the Convention’s Financial Mechanism (Art 11, UNFCCC) (Hard Law) Legal status of GCF unclear; Free floating – Legal personalities and privileges granted through GCF’s Governing Instrument

7 GCF’s Governance capacities GCF meets characteristics of an Independent Intergovernmental Organization (IGO): – Founded on International agreement – Organ with a will of its own – Established under international law Granted full responsibility of funding decisions – Own independent Secretariat; own budget – Decision on using COP as arbitrator of last resort pending Indicative Governance Capacity, delegation of powers to GCF and Independence from COP: High

8 GCF relation to COP Functions under guidance of and conforms to COP – Arrangements can only be changed by consent of both the COP and the GCF – Theoretical constraint More than just an organ of COP; an example of “inclusive minilateralism” Eckersley (2012) – GCF Board has greater say on funding decisions – GCF Board decisions need not be acceptable to all COP parties: high flexibility

9 Conclusions GCF granted high governance capacity and independence Challenge of designing GCF to balance varied expectations for NAMA support remains A strong shell, but threat of being empty remains


Download ppt "Supporting NAMAs through the Green Climate Fund: Governance capacities and challenges Mathias Friman, Prabhat Upadhyaya and Björn-Ola Linnér 16-01-14,"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google