Hardening and softening of multilateral climate governance towards the Paris Agreement

References

• Abbott, K. W., Keohane, R. O., Moravcsik, A., Slaughter, A., & Snidal, D. (2000). The concept of legalization. International Organization, 54(3), 401–419. https://doi.org/10.1162/002081800551271
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abbott, K. W., & Snidal, D. (2000). Hard and soft law in international governance. International Organization, 54(3), 421–456. https://doi.org/10.1162/002081800551280
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bang, G., Hovi, J., & Skodvin, T. (2016). The Paris Agreement: Short-term and long-term effectiveness. Politics and Governance, 4(3), 209–218. https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v4i3.640
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bodansky, D. (2010). The Copenhagen climate change conference: A postmortem. American Journal of International Law, 104(2), 230–240. https://doi.org/10.5305/amerjintelaw.104.2.0230
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bodansky, D. (2016a). The legal character of the Paris Agreement. Review of European, Comparative and International Environmental Law, 25(2), 142–150. https://doi.org/10.1111/reel.12154
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bodansky, D. (2016b). The Paris climate change agreement: A new hope? American Journal of International Law, 110(2), 288–319. https://doi.org/10.5305/amerjintelaw.110.2.0288
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brunnée, J. (2002). COPing with consent: Law-making under multilateral environmental agreements. Leiden Journal of International Law, 15, 1–52. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0922156502000018
   Google Scholar
• Churchill, R. R., & Ulfstein, G. (2000). Autonomous institutional arrangements in multilateral environmental agreements: A little-noticed phenomenon in international law. American Journal of International Law, 94(4), 623–659. https://doi.org/10.2307/2589775
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dagnet, Y., & Levin, K. (2017). Transparency (Article 13). In D. Klein, M. P. Carazo, M. Doelle, J. Bulmer, & A. Higham (Eds.), The Paris Agreement on climate change: A commentary (pp. 301–318). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Doelle, M. (2016). The Paris Agreement: Historic breakthrough or high stakes experiment? Climate Law, 6(1/2), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1163/18786561-00601001
   Google Scholar
• Doelle, M. (2019). The Heart of the Paris rulebook: Communicating NDCs and accounting for their implementation. Climate Law, 9(1-2), 3–20. https://doi.org/10.1163/18786561-00901002
   Google Scholar
• Downs, G. W., Rocke, D. M., & Barsoom, P. N. (1996). Is the good news about compliance good news about cooperation? International Organization, 50(3), 379–406. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300033427
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Falkner, R. (2016). The Paris Agreement and the new logic of international climate politics. International Affairs, 92(5), 1107–1125. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2346.12708
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freestone, D. (2016). The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change – The basis for the climate change regime. In C. P. Carlarne, K. R. Gray, & R. G. Tarasofsky (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of international climate change law (pp. 97–119). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Grubb, M., Vrolijk, C., & Brack, D. (1999). The Kyoto Protocol: A guide and assessment. The Royal Institute of International Affairs.
   Google Scholar
• Held, D., & Roger, C. (2018). Three models of global climate governance: From Kyoto to Paris and beyond. Global Policy, 9(4), 527–537. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12617
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herold, A. (2012). Experiences with Articles 5, 7, and 8. Defining the monitoring, reporting and verification system under the Kyoto Protocol. In J. Brunnée, M. Doelle, & L. Rajamani (Eds.), Promoting compliance in an evolving climate regime (pp. 122–146). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hochstetler, K., & Milkoreit, M. (2014). Emerging powers in the climate negotiations: Shifting identity conceptions. Political Research Quarterly, 67(1), 224–235. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912913510609
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Höhne, N., den Elzen, M., Rogelj, J., Metz, B., Fransen, T., Kuramochi, T., Olhoff, A., Alcamo, J., Winkler, H., Fu, S., Schaeffer, M., Schaeffer, R., Peters, G. P., Maxwell, S., & Dubash, N. K. (2020). Emissions: World has four times the work or one-third of the time. Nature, 579, 25–28. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-00571-x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kalimo, H., & Staal, T. (2014). “Softness” in international instruments – The case of transnational corporations. Syracuse Journal of International Law and Commerce, 41(2), 259–344.
   Google Scholar
• Keohane, R. O., Moravcsik, A., & Slaughter, A.-M. (2000). Legalized dispute resolution: Interstate and transnational. International Organization, 54(3), 457–488. https://doi.org/10.1162/002081800551299
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klein, D., Carazo, M. P., Doelle, M., Bulmer, J., & Higham, A. (Eds.). (2017). The Paris Agreement on climate change: Analysis and commentary. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Knodt, M., & Schoenefeld, J. J. (this issue). Harder soft governance in European climate and energy policy: Exploring a new trend in public policy. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning. https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2020.1832885
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mayer, B. (2018). Obligations of conduct in the international law on climate change: A defence. Review of European, Comparative and International Environmental Law, 27(2), 130–140. https://doi.org/10.1111/reel.12237
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mayer, B. (2019). Transparency under the Paris rulebook: Is the transparency framework truly enhanced? Climate Law, 9(1-2), 40–64. https://doi.org/10.1163/18786561-00901004
   Google Scholar
• Mitchell, R. B. (1994). Regime design matters: Intentional oil pollution and treaty compliance. International Organization, 48(3), 425–458. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300028253
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morgan, J., Ballesteros, A., McGray, H., Levin, K., Daviet, F., Stolle, F., & McMahon, H. (2010). Reflections on the Cancun Agreements. Retrieved April 11, 2019, from https://www.wri.org/blog/2010/12/reflections-cancun-agreements#transparency
   Google Scholar
• Obergassel, W., Arens, C., Hermwille, L., Kreibich, N., Ott, H. E., & Wang-Helmreich, H. (2019). Paris Agreement: Ship moves out of the drydock. An assessment of COP24 in Katowice. Carbon & Climate Law Review, 13(1), 3–18. https://doi.org/10.21552/cclr/2019/1/4
   Google Scholar
• Oberthür, S. (2016a). Compliance under the evolving climate change regime. In C. P. Carlarne, K. R. Gray, & R. G. Tarasofsky (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of international climate change law (pp. 120–136). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Oberthür, S. (2016b). Where to go from Paris? The European Union in climate geopolitics. Global Affairs, 2(2), 119–130. https://doi.org/10.1080/23340460.2016.1166332
   Google Scholar
• Oberthür, S., & Bodle, R. (2016). Legal form and nature of the Paris outcome. Climate Law, 6(1–2), 40–57. https://doi.org/10.1163/18786561-00601003
   Google Scholar
• Oberthür, S., & Lefeber, R. (2010). Holding countries to account: The Kyoto Protocol’s compliance system revisited after four years of experience. Climate Law, 1(1), 133–158. https://doi.org/10.1163/CL-2010-006
   Google Scholar
• Oberthür, S., & Ott, H. E. (1999). The Kyoto Protocol: International climate policy for the 21st century. Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Pauwelyn, J., Wessel, R. A., & Wouters, J. (2014). When structures become shackles: Stagnation and dynamics in international lawmaking. European Journal of International Law, 25(3), 733–763. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chu051
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rajamani, L. (2011a). The Cancun climate agreements: Reading the text, subtext and tea leaves. International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 60(2), 499–519. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020589311000078
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rajamani, L. (2011b). The climate regime in evolution: The disagreements that survive the Cancun Agreements. Carbon & Climate Law Review, 5(2), 136–146. https://doi.org/10.21552/CCLR/2011/2/180
   Google Scholar
• Rajamani, L. (2016a). Ambition and differentiation in the 2015 Paris Agreement: Interpretative possibilities and underlying politics. International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 65(2), 493–514. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020589316000130
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rajamani, L. (2016b). The 2015 Paris Agreement: Interplay between hard, soft and non-obligations. Journal of Environmental Law, 28(2), 337–358. https://doi.org/10.1093/jel/eqw015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roberts, J. T. (2011). Multipolarity and the new world (dis)order: US hegemonic decline and the fragmentation of the global climate regime. Global Environmental Change, 21(3), 776–784. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.03.017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roger, C., Hale, T., & Andonova, L. (2017). The comparative politics of transnational climate governance. International Interactions, 43(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/03050629.2017.1252248
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Savaresi, A. (2016). The Paris Agreement: A new beginning? Journal of Energy & Natural Resources Law, 34(1), 16–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/02646811.2016.1133983
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shaffer, G. C., & Pollack, M. A. (2010). Hard vs. soft law: Alternatives, complements, and antagonists in international governance. Minnesota Law Review, 94(3), 706–799.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skjaerseth, J. B., Stokke, O. S., & Wettestad, J. (2006). Soft law, hard law, and effective implementation of international environmental norms. Global Environmental Politics, 6(3), 104–120. https://doi.org/10.1162/glep.2006.6.3.104
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Terpan, F. (2015). Soft law in the European Union: The changing nature of EU law. European Law Journal, 21(1), 68–96. https://doi.org/10.1111/eulj.12090
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• UNFCCC. (2011). Compilation of information on nationally appropriate mitigation actions to be implemented by Parties not included in Annex I to the Convention. Note by the secretariat, UN Doc. FCCC/AWGLCA/2011/INF.1, 18 March 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Victor, D. G., Raustiala, K., & Skolnikoff, E. B. (Eds.). (1998). The implementation and effectiveness of international environmental commitments. The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Vogler, J. (2016). Climate change in world politics. Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Voigt, C., & Ferreira, F. (2016). “Dynamic differentiation”: The principles of CBDR-RC, progression and highest possible ambition in the Paris Agreement. Transnational Environmental Law, 5(2), 285–303. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2047102516000212
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yamin, F., & Depledge, J. (2004). The international climate change regime: A guide to rules, institutions and procedures. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zihua, G., Voigt, C., & Werksman, J. (2019). Facilitating implementation and promoting compliance with the Paris Agreement under Article 15: Conceptual challenges and pragmatic choices. Climate Law, 9(1-2), 65–100. https://doi.org/10.1163/18786561-00901005
   Google Scholar
• Zimmermann, A., & Tams, C. J. (2019). The Statute of the International Court of Justice: A commentary (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar