Seeking Entry: Discursive Hooks and NGOs in Global Climate Politics
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12586 |
| Published date | 01 November 2018 |
| Author | Jen Iris Allan |
| Date | 01 November 2018 |
Seeking Entry: Discursive Hooks and NGOs in
Global Climate Politics
Jen Iris Allan
Carleton University
Abstract
Today’s global climate movement is substantial and diverse. In the mid-2000s, an influx of activists and organizations advanc-
ing social issues, such as gender, labor, justice, development and indigenous rights (to name a few) arrived at the UN climate
negotiations, fragmenting civil society. I argue that, in part, the rise of these ‘new’climate activists can be explained by the
ongoing negotiations for a legally binding treaty to replace the Kyoto Protocol, which added new issues that became ‘discur-
sive hooks’for NGOs’claims to belonging in the climate regime. Linking to a specific institution had two effects: it served as
an entry point to frame climate issues as social issues; and it helped NGOs carve a niche in climate policy in which they were
authorities. In the Paris regime, this history matters, as some NGOs will fare better under the new rules than others. First,
those established in institutions enshrined in the Paris Agreement will continue to have a foothold in the regime. Second,
those that built their authority on their expertise or their capacity to deliver mitigation results may find more opportunities
than those making moral claims.
Policy Implications
•NGOs new to climate politics should connect their issue to a specific rule rather than climate change more broadly to
raise the likelihood of their issue being taken up by negotiators.
•Non-state actors should highlight their expertise and capacity to implement climate-related policies to increase their
chances of influence.
•Treaty Secretariats should plan for an influx of NGOs that are new to that negotiation process when there is a renegotia-
tion of the rules, including negotiations for a new agreement.
•Non-state actors seeking to influence global climate policy could focus on: development of nationally determined contri-
butions (NDCs, at the national level); transparency framework; and global stocktake.
•NGOs currently working on forest-related issues should consider other areas of climate policy if they want to influence
UNFCCC policy and implementation.
Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are weaker actors in
global governance, with fewer resources and less access to
decision-making. Yet, evidence shows that David can indeed
influence, if not slay, the Goliath of the state in environmental
negotiations. In the climate regime, NGOs proved influential
(Betsill, 2002, 2008) even over the long haul (Downie, 2014).
Indeed, the primary motivation of NGOs attending the UN
Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is to
influence the negotiations (Hanegraaff, 2015), as some suc-
cessfully did in the Paris Agreement negotiations (Allan and
Hadden, 2017). NGOs are influential. The negotiations that
they try to influence are not always a natural outgrowth of
the causes they traditionally advance. Sometimes, NGOs try to
participate and influence negotiations for issues seemingly
removed from their usual repertoire.
Since the mid-2000s, climate activism has transformed.
Once comprised of rather homogenous sets of environmen-
tal NGOs and business groups, climate activists now repre-
sent a wide range of issues. While UNFCCC negotiations
inched along, the history of climate activism shows
substantial growth and diversification. This article suggests
that the trends of ongoing negotiations and expanding
NGO diversity are connected. I argue that negotiations
added new issues to the UN climate negotiations, which
served as ‘discursive hooks’for the claims of some social
NGOs. These hooks were emerging norms and rules that
social NGOs could use to advance their traditional issues
within the remit of climate politics. Using discursive hooks
served two purposes. First, connecting to an emerging rule
or norm allowed NGOs to claim that their issue is connected
to climate change and, therefore, must also be addressed.
Second, the strategy positioned the NGO as an authority in
an area of climate policy. Some social NGOs successfully
leveraged discursive hooks, while others failed to reframe
their issues in specific climate terms.
The rules of the game are again set to change. The Paris
Agreement reorganizes existing institutions into a cyclical
logic of pledge, review and pledge again, and creates a few
new institutions and marginalizes others. This system will
change the set of available discursive hooks, prompting a
©2018 University of Durham and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Global Policy (2018) 9:4 doi: 10.1111/1758-5899.12586
Global Policy Volume 9 . Issue 4 . November 2018
560
Special Section Article
To continue reading
Request your trial