Content deleted Content added
→Bottom-up approach: cbam |
→Minilateralism: needs more cites |
||
Line 34:
== Minilateralism ==
Minilateralism (groupings with select state membership) does falls only loosely into the category of the bottom-up framework as it is against integrating nongovernmental actors and governmental actors in approaching the problem.{{Citation needed|date=July 2021}} Aside from this main difference, minilateralism encourages the smallest possible break from the current top-down UNFCCC-led approach where the UNFCCC is still employed but other intergovernmental bodies are also incorporated.<ref name=":5">{{Cite journal|last1=Hjerpe|first1=Mattias|last2=Nasiritousi|first2=Naghmeh|date=2015-06-15|title=Views on alternative forums for effectively tackling climate change|journal=Nature Climate Change|language=en|volume=5|issue=9|pages=864–867|doi=10.1038/nclimate2684|issn=1758-6798|url=http://liu.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:855124/FULLTEXT01}}</ref> Possible intergovernmental bodies to be utilized include the OECD, the G20, or other international leading bodies that could address the issue further. This encourages the UNFCCC to not completely stop working on addressing the issue from a top-down approach, but in the interim these other bodies are important in furthering the cause.{{Citation needed|date=July 2021}} Multilateralism opens up the opportunity for international cooperation initiatives, where the UNFCCC could be supplemented by other multinational organizations that work towards climate change.<ref name=":5" /> This does not account for the free rider problem that the bottom-up approach with sanctions approach accounts for, and instead encourages those who are willing to make change do as much as possible.<ref name=":5" /> This then puts the burden on those who are willing to make change, and can create an example of what should be done, but offers no penalties for those who do not follow suit.{{Citation needed|date=July 2021}}
== Failure of governance ==
| |||