The Possibility of Majority Voting within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is struggling in its attempts to address the threat of anthropogenic climate change and create an effective post-Kyoto international climate agreement. One substantial part of the problem is con-sensus decision making within the Convention, which effectively gives every party a veto over the process. Majority voting is one potential alternative which is already being dis-cussed within the UNFCCC. A comparative analysis of consensus and majority voting sug-gests that majority voting is superior in terms of both efficiency and effectiveness since it is a better consensus-builder, a speedier decision making process and provides opportuni-ties for a semi-global approach to international climate policy. The objective in this paper is to investigate how majority voting could be implemented in the UNFCCC and to consider politically feasible and effective approaches to voting arrangements for the Convention. Implementing majority voting in the Convention faces legal, political and institutional ob-stacles. While it has growing support from some states, others remain staunchly opposed, with concerns over voting on financial matters being particularly sensitive. A type of Lay-ered Majority Voting with larger majorities for financial and substantial matters is consid- ered to be the optimal approach in balancing political feasibility and effectiveness. A weighted voting system differentiated on the basis of mitigation commitments, vulnerabil-ity and population (Common but Differentiated Voting) is proposed as an ideal approach. Despite these possibilities a change in decision making will likely require a crisis to cata-lyse the necessary political will and break the current path dependency that has been built around consensus

The Possibility of Majority Voting within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is struggling in its attempts to address the threat of anthropogenic climate change and create an effective post-Kyoto international climate agreement. One substantial part of the problem is con-sensus decision making within the Convention, which effectively gives every party a veto over the process. Majority voting is one potential alternative which is already being dis-cussed within the UNFCCC. A comparative analysis of consensus and majority voting sug-gests that majority voting is superior in terms of both efficiency and effectiveness since it is a better consensus-builder, a speedier decision making process and provides opportuni-ties for a semi-global approach to international climate policy. The objective in this paper is to investigate how majority voting could be implemented in the UNFCCC and to consider politically feasible and effective approaches to voting arrangements for the Convention. Implementing majority voting in the Convention faces legal, political and institutional ob-stacles. While it has growing support from some states, others remain staunchly opposed, with concerns over voting on financial matters being particularly sensitive. A type of Lay-ered Majority Voting with larger majorities for financial and substantial matters is consid- ered to be the optimal approach in balancing political feasibility and effectiveness. A weighted voting system differentiated on the basis of mitigation commitments, vulnerabil-ity and population (Common but Differentiated Voting) is proposed as an ideal approach. Despite these possibilities a change in decision making will likely require a crisis to cata-lyse the necessary political will and break the current path dependency that has been built around consensus

Critical Mass Governance: Addressing US Participation in Environmental Multilateralism

A recurring problem for international environmental governance has been the legal participation of the United States (US). Due to a number of unique domestic institutional and political conditions, the US is effectively trapped in a ‘ratification straitjacket’. This has made US ratification of most environmental treaties impossible. It has been a crucial obstacle given the role of the US as the foremost great power of the developed world and formerly as a hegemon. Despite the importance of this obstacle to environmental multilateralism, it has attracted little sustained, direct academic scrutiny. Moreover, the rise of China and a multipolar world provides unique opportunities to consider different approaches to managing US ratification and participation in environmental regimes. This thesis attempts to address this gap in the literature through two research questions: 1. How US ratification and participation be effectively enabled within an effective international architecture for environmental governance? 2. How can effective environmental governance without the US (or other recalcitrant states) be enabled through; major international institutions, decision-making processes, and operational treaties? This thesis is structured as a thesis by publication that is composed of four peer-reviewed papers along with a context statement that covers the introduction, methods, discussion and conclusion. The four papers focus primarily on the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). The thesis examines how US ratification and participation can be addressed in the context of an international institution (UNEP and a potential World Environment Organisation), multilateral decision-making (consensus and majority voting in the UNFCCC) and treaty design (a future climate agreement). The results suggest that there are primarily two ways of dealing with US participation, both of which involve some form of plurilateralism. First, governance arrangements can attempt to pursue US participation by appealing to its interests in fragmentation and allowing for the use of presidential-executive agreements. Alternatively, an international regime can be constructed to bypass US ratification and instead attempt to maximise the participation of other states as well as willing subnational actors within the US. The former approach is termed ‘inclusive critical mass governance’. In contrast, the latter is labelled as ‘exclusive critical mass governance’. Both strategies to address US ratification rely on the use of semi-globalism and thus challenge the current dominant paradigm of creating consensus-based, broad-but-shallow international agreements. Based upon this, a theory of plurilateralism and accompanying theoretical framework is developed. The theory and framework of critical mass governance suggests that a small group of progressive actors can create the political, social and economic feedbacks necessary to spread environmental actions and encourage increasing cooperation over time. Where the feedbacks exist, there is a greater need to encourage a critical mass of progressive actions rather than incorporate the US. Ultimately, the success of international environmental governance does not necessarily depend upon the leadership or participation of the US, but simply the action of a critical mass

A Fate Worse Than Warming? Stratospheric Aerosol Injection and Global Catastrophic Risk

Injecting particles into atmosphere to reflect sunlight, stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI), represents a potential technological solution to the threat of climate change. But could the cure be worse than the disease? Understanding low probability, yet plausible, high-impact cases is critical to prudent climate risk management and SAI deliberation. But analyses of such high impact outcomes are lacking in SAI research. This paper helps resolve this gap by investigating SAI's contributions to global catastrophic risk. We split SAI's contributions to catastrophic risk into four interrelated dimensions:1. Acting as a direct catastrophic risk through potentially unforeseen ecological blowback.2. Interacting with other globally catastrophic hazards like nuclear war.3. Exacerbating systemic risk (risks that cascade and amplify across different systems);4. Acting as a latent risk (risk that is dormant but can later be triggered).The potential for major unforeseen environmental consequences seems highly unlikely but is ultimately unknown. SAI plausibly interacts with other catastrophic calamities, most notably by potentially exacerbating the impacts of nuclear war or an extreme space weather event. SAI could contribute to systemic risk by introducing stressors into critical systems such as agriculture. SAI's systemic stressors, and risks of systemic cascades and synchronous failures, are highly understudied. SAI deployment more tightly couples different ecological, economic, and political systems. This creates a precarious condition of latent risk, the largest cause for concern. Thicker SAI masking extreme warming could create a planetary Sword of Damocles. That is, if SAI were removed but underlying greenhouse gas concentrations not reduced, there would be extreme warming in a very short timeframe. Sufficiently large global shocks could force SAI termination and trigger SAI's latent risk, compounding disasters and catastrophic risks. Across all these dimensions, the specific SAI deployment, and associated governance, is critical. A well-coordinated use of a small amount of SAI would incur negligible risks, but this is an optimistic scenario. Conversely, larger use of SAI used in an uncoordinated manner poses many potential dangers. We cannot equivocally determine whether SAI will be worse than warming. For now, a heavy reliance on SAI seems an imprudent policy response.</jats:p

Characteristics and Treatment Preferences of People with Symptoms of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder: An Internet Survey

Background: Although Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) is a severe and disabling anxiety disorder, relatively few people with this condition access evidence-based care. Barriers to treatment are multiple and complex, but the emerging field of Internet therapy for PTSD may improve access to evidence-based treatment. However, little is known about the characteristics of people with PTSD who seek online treatment, or whether they perceive internet treatment as an acceptable treatment option. Methodology: An online survey was used to collect information about the demographic and symptom characteristics of individuals with elevated levels of PTSD symptoms, and this was compared to data from corresponding sample from a national survey. Previous treatment experiences, perceived barriers to treatment and treatment preferences for Internet therapy and face-to-face treatment were also compared. Principal Findings: High levels of PTSD symptoms were reported by survey respondents. Psychological distress and disability was greater than reported by individuals with PTSD from a national survey. Half of the sample reported not having received treatment for PTSD; however, 88% of those who reported receiving treatment stated they received an evidence-based treatment. Primary barriers to treatment included cost, poor awareness of service availability, lack of prior treatment response and not perceiving personal distress as severe enough to warrant treatment. Most survey respondents indicated they were willing to try Internet treatment for PTSD. Conclusions: The Internet sample was symptomatically severe and multiple barriers existed to treatment. Internet therapy is an acceptable option for the treatment of PTSD in an internet sample.6 page(s