Thursday, December 20, 2012

Call for Papers - ECPR-Panel on Fragmentation and Integration in Global Climate Governance; Bordeaux, 4-7 Sept 2013

7th ECPR General Conference
Sciences Po, Bordeaux
4th - 7th September 2013

Panel: Fragmentation and Integration in Global Climate Governance


Panel Chair:

Fariborz Zelli, Lund University


Panel Co-Chair:

Sylvia Karlsson-Vinkhuyzen, Wageningen University and Research Center



The term fragmentation implies that policy domains are marked by a patchwork of institutions that differ in their character, constituencies, spatial scope, subject matter and objectives. Scholars have addressed this emerging phenomenon, framing it also with alternative concepts like ‘regime complex’ or ‘polycentric governance’.

While the degree of fragmentation varies across issue areas, global climate governance is a particular case in point. Its architecture is characterided by an advanced state of institutional fragmentation, including not only the UN climate regime, but also, for instance, green energy and low-carbon technology partnerships, other environmental institutions like the biodiversity regime, and non-environmental institutions like the World Trade Organization and the G20. Moreover, transnational and public-private institutions, e.g. on carbon disclosure and voluntary markets, have significantly added to this institutional diversity over the last ten years.

This development notwithstanding, we also witness aspects of an opposite ambition towards more integration, seeking to safeguard the prevalence of the global climate regime. This concerns inter alia the concentration on an established set of bodies to provide greenhouse gas inventories, or the recurring resistance to letting institutions outside the UNFCCC develop norms, or even discuss norms, on climate change.

In light of these different trends, many of the existing studies focus on the question whether a centralised or a polycentric climate architecture is preferable. However, the panel wants to go beyond such normative or functionalist debates, seeking to address some of the more pertinent analytical questions. We therefore invite papers that provide innovative conceptual and theory-based insights into the following aspects: What are appropriate ways to map or characterise the institutional complexity of global climate governance? What are potential causes of fragmentation and integration? Which consequences does fragmentation have, e.g. for aspects like legitimacy and institutional effectiveness? What are its consequences for different types of actors? And what are suitable and realistic management options to achieve more integration?


Paper proposals  are highly welcome and can now be submitted (deadline of 1 February) through the ECPR website:


Saturday, December 8, 2012

Call for your contribution : Assessment of the climate change adaptation needs in the Hindu Kush Himalaya Region

Dear Colleagues,

Please find below a call for contribution to an online (and offline) survey on ‘climate change adaptation needs in the Hindu Kush Himalaya (HKH) Region’ organised in support of the Mountain Thematic Node of the Asia Pacific Adaptation Network (APAN). If you have any questions or suggestions, pls write to Mr. Ngamindra Dahal, Lead Researcher at

Your response to this survey by 15 December 2012 would be very much appreciated. To make your contributions  pls copy the survey portion below in your email or Word file, answer them as needed and send the completed from to Mr. Dahal.


Online survey on climate change adaptation needs in the Hindu Kush Himalaya (HKH) Region

Questionnaires for online survey

 About the Survey

The Hindu Kush Himalaya (HKH) is among the highly vulnerable region to climate change impacts. The HKH ecosystems support the livelihoods of more people than any other coherent ecosystem in the world. The NAPA reports of HKH countries depict a dismal situation of majority of the populations who are highly vulnerable to climate change induced maladies requiring urgent and immediate needs of adaptation actions. Prioritising adaptation needs is critically important when climate change impacts encompass across themes and regions threatening livelihoods sources of large mass of populations.

The key objective of this survey is to contribute in identifying most vulnerable sectors, regions or communities to climate change, and, then, assessing their urgent adaptation needs. Your precious 20 minutes time to fill up this survey form would immensely help us to draw some key insights and recommendations for future investments of climate funds.  

To respond, simply click the 'Reply all' and write your responses against each questions below.

Section 1:   Informant background
1.1.   Name: First and last (not mandatory but encouraged)
1.2.   Country:
1.3.   State/City/District
1.5.   E-mail ID: .... (if you like to be contacted in future or want to know the survey results)
1.6.   Contact no: .... (if you like to be contacted in future or want to know the survey results)
1.7.   What do you represent? 1. Community, 2. Government, 3. Development Organisation,  4. Research/Education Organisations; 5. Other (please specify)            

Sections 2: Climate Change Impacts/perceptions:
2.1.   Do you agree that people living in the mountain regions or their periphery are among the most vulnerable one to climate change impacts? (Please Delete which is not applicable)
1. Agree       2. Can't say        3. Disagree  

2.2. Do you agree that specific needs of climate change adaptation of mountain people have not been well identified (articulated) and addressed? (Please Delete which is not applicable)
Agree 1.       Can't say 2.       Disagree 3.
2.3. From the perspective of currently known climate change risks, what would be the situation of mountain people in the mountain region after 10 or 15 years from now?
(Please Delete which is not applicable)
1. Better    2. Same    3.Worse
2.4 . Most of climate change scenarios project the mountains among the most affected regions due to rapid warming and changes in precipitation patterns in the future. Do you agree? (Please Delete which is not applicable)
1. Agree          2. Can't say                 3. Disagree
2.5. What is the level of satisfaction among the community you represent of current progress on addressing climate risks? (Please Delete which is not applicable)
1. Fully Satisfied          2. Satisfied to some extent                 3. Not satisfied at all 
Section 3:   Adaptation Needs

3.1.   Based on your experiences/observations, please mention up to 3 examples of climate change adaptation needs, gaps or issues concerning to mountain people that require urgent attentions.
3.2.   To tackle climate risks and build resilience, what should be the roles (maximum 3) of regional organizations (e.g. SAARC, ICIMOD), local institutions and national governmental organisations to improve the situation?
1 Roles of regional organizations
i)                    .........      
ii)                  .........
iii)                .........
2 Roles of local institutions 
i) .....      
3. Roles of national government organizations
i) .....      
ii) ........
iiii) .......
3.3.  What should be the strategic actions or approaches to identify and address specific needs of mountain communities?
Section 4: Knowledge sharing and good practices

4.1   In your knowledge, are there any examples of good practices of climate change adaptations that could be replicated in the mountain region?
(Please name them below with references or links where possible).

4.2   What is the appropriate way for promoting South-South knowledge sharing and cooperation on climate cooperation?

1.      Promote sharing of knowledge, good practices, collaborative actions etc.
2.      Recognize roles of regional organizations for promoting research and disseminate knowledge to wider stakeholders
3.      Mobilize NGOs, civil society organizations
4.      Other (Please specify)....

4.3  What roles of regional platforms, like SAARC and ICIMOD, should play to address climate and environment management challenges?
(Example – Environmental policies, scientific research, knowledge productions, knowledge disseminations etc.)
1.      The major roles could be .........
2        I have no knowledge on this.

4.4   What are the possible action points for addressing specific knowledge gaps, enhancing research and cooperation; and, promoting good practices?

1.      The possible action points could be .........
2.      I have no knowledge on this.

Section 5: Converting knowledge into action

5.1 What are the major constraints of local communities to assimilate new knowledge into climate change adaptation practices?

1.      The major constraints include
2.      I  have no comment on this.

5.2 What are the possible ways to enhance communication and cooperation between local communities and research institutions for mutual benefits?

1.      The possible ways are .........
2.      No. I have no comment on this.

5.3             Among mountain people, what could be the best investments to climate vulnerable communities or regions to enhance their adaptive capacity mountain people?
1.      The possible investments schemes include .........
2.      No. I have no comments this.

5.4              Which types of institutions and approaches could facilitate knowledge transfer processes more effectively?
1.      Academic institutions (Universities)
2.      Regional Environment, Policy and Research Organizations (e.g. ICIMOD)
3.      Collaborative approaches of research and academic institutions in partnership with media.
4.      Others (please mention)

Section 6: Responding to international climate policy negotiations 
6.1 What roles can mountain concern institutions play to lead agendas in the international climate policy negotiations?
1.      Yes. They can/should .........
2.      I have no information/comment on this.

6.2       What type of group do you think would be the appropriate platform for raising mountain agendas (considering examples of the LDC Group, G 77 plus China)

1.      There is a need of separate mountain group to advocate mountain agendas of developing countries
2.      Mountain agendas should be mainstreamed into the agendas of existing groups
3.      Efforts are needed to push mountain agendas by both of 1 and 2 approaches.

Thank you for your cooperation