The debate about post-2012 global climate governance has been framed largely by proponents and opponents of the policy-making process established by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). In light of the proliferation of institutions governing some aspects of climate change, analysts have asked whether a centralized or a poly-centric climate governance architecture will be more effective, efficient, equitable, or viable.

While these are valid questions, they obscure the fact that global climate governance is already poly-centric, or rather, fragmented. This paper argues that the more pertinent questions are how to sensibly link the different elements of global climate governance, and what the role of the UNFCCC could be in this regard.

The authors examine these two questions for three aspects of global climate governance: international climate technology initiatives; emerging emissions trading systems; and unilateral trade measures.

The paper shows that there are strong arguments for coordination in all of these cases, and illustrates the possible role of the UNFCCC. It concludes, however, that possibilities for coordination will eventually be limited by underlying tensions that will plague any future climate governance architecture.

Read the paper (external link to Earth System Governance website)