Content deleted Content added
m minilateral excludeable fix |
m Open access bot: url-access updated in citation with #oabot. |
||
Line 21:
As a result of the historical precedent that international consensus and decision making can be accomplished under the threat of a global environmental issue, with the depletion of the ozone layer, there has been a tendency towards a top-down, consensus-based approach to addressing climate change through the [[United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change|UNFCCC]]. This approach is the dominant one where all world governments are engaged, which makes sense as the entire population of the world is affected by this issue. The top-down approach is that of strong central oversight by a majority of world governments in determining how various approaches to climate change mitigation should be implemented.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Sépibus|first1=Joëlle de|last2=Sterk|first2=Wolfgang|last3=Tuerk|first3=Andreas|date=2013-06-01|title=Top-down, bottom-up or in-between: how can a UNFCCC framework for market-based approaches ensure environmental integrity and market coherence?|journal=Greenhouse Gas Measurement and Management|volume=3|issue=1–02|pages=6–20|doi=10.1080/20430779.2013.798782|bibcode=2013GGMM....3....6D|s2cid=219598938|issn=2043-0779|url=https://boris.unibe.ch/90362/1/Top-down%2C%20bottom-up%20or%20in-between%2C%20how%20can%20a%20UNFCCC%20Framework%20for%20Market-based%20Approaches%20Ensure%20Environmental%20Integrity%20and%20Market%20Coherence.pdf}}</ref> This approach has been the largest route to tackling the goal of solving climate change, however the world is not on track to reach the under 2°C warming in average temperature that would help hundreds of millions of people.<ref name=":1" />
Thus, the top-down framework of only utilizing the UNFCCC consensus approach has been proposed to be ineffective, with counter proposals of bottom up governance and decreasing the emphasis of the UNFCCC.<ref name=":2">{{Cite journal|last=Cole|first=Daniel H.|date=2015-01-28|title=Advantages of a polycentric approach to climate change policy|journal=Nature Climate Change|language=en|volume=5|issue=2|pages=114–118|doi=10.1038/nclimate2490|bibcode=2015NatCC...5..114C|issn=1758-6798|url=https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/facpub/1415|url-access=subscription}}</ref><ref name=":3">{{Cite journal|last1=Sabel|first1=Charles F.|last2=Victor|first2=David G.|date=2017-09-01|title=Governing global problems under uncertainty: making bottom-up climate policy work|journal=Climatic Change|language=en|volume=144|issue=1|pages=15–27|doi=10.1007/s10584-015-1507-y|bibcode=2017ClCh..144...15S|s2cid=153561849|issn=1573-1480}}</ref><ref name=":4">{{Cite journal|last=Zefferman|first=Matthew R.|date=2018-01-01|title=Cultural multilevel selection suggests neither large or small cooperative agreements are likely to solve climate change without changing the game|journal=Sustainability Science|language=en|volume=13|issue=1|pages=109–118|doi=10.1007/s11625-017-0488-3|s2cid=158187220|issn=1862-4057}}</ref> There is a lack of consensus leading to various frameworks being proposed with varying levels of involvement of the UNFCCC and other intergovernmental actors, with proposed local-level approaches, emphasis on innovation and competition, enforcement mechanisms, and multilateral forums.
== Polycentric approach ==
| |||