Subverting the status quo? Climate debt, vulnerability and counter-hegemonic frame integration in United Nations climate politics – a framework for analysis

ABSTRACT

This article analyzes distinct articulations and forms of political integration of the frame ‘climate debt’ in United Nations climate politics from 2000 to 2015. In analysis of this case study, the framework of ‘counter-hegemonic frame integration’ is developed by which political incorporation of disruptive frames into multilateral regimes can be assessed. This enables analysis of frame integration across two dimensions: strength of recognition and strength of distributive justice. Five outcomes are differentiated: non-integration, disruptive integration, covert integration, impotent integration, and dominant integration. In doing so, it provides a foundation to more precisely assess counter-hegemonic gains, and with it, theorize counter-hegemonic network influence in multilateralism. Despite various discursive and strategic innovations by advocacy networks, the frame of climate debt as it relates to climate vulnerability has been integrated to be largely compatible with structures of hegemony and stripped of subversive meaning and impact. However, this has not been a linear process: at each stage, there have been areas of progress and setbacks in terms of frame recognition and distributive justice. The analysis contributes to a broader research program to uncover the mechanisms and conditions of transformation of unequal power relations within the world system and identifies critical areas of future research.

KEYWORDS:

• World-systems analysis
• climate debt
• international climate governance
• climate finance adaptation
• loss and damage
• transnational advocacy networks
• counter-hegemony
• neo-Gramscian
• frames

Acknowledgements

The author thanks the reviewers and editors for their helpful contributions.

Disclosure statement

The author declares that he has no relevant material or financial interests that relate to the research described in this paper.

Notes

1. This article limits analysis to vulnerability politics; climate debt-related issues such as division of atmospheric space and technology transfer politics are not discussed in detail.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Robert and Patricia Switzer Foundation; the Horowitz Foundation for Social Policy.

Notes on contributors

David Ciplet

David Ciplet is an assistant professor of environmental studies at the University of Colorado Boulder. He is a sociologist focused on global political economy, environmental inequality, and climate justice. He is lead author of Power in a Warming World: The New Global Politics of Climate Change and the Remaking of Environmental Inequality (MIT Press, 2015) and has published articles in journals such as Global Environmental Change, Global Governance, and Global Environmental Politics.