Democratizing the global climate regime 1

Climate change is commonly seen as a global problem that demands a global solution. The fact that measures to mitigate and adapt to climate change are ever increasingly debated and enacted in international, transnational and supranational settings begets multiple challenges for effective and legitimate governance. Such settings beyond the national state largely transcend the reach of democracy, at least as traditionally conceptualized in liberal terms. Yet, decisions on climate mitigation and adaptation will affect many people with diverse values, needs and interests. Legitimacy demands that global climate governance reflects this diversity. Legitimacy, in other words, demands the democratization of the global climate regime. While democratic legitimacy may rightly be pursued as an end in itself, there is also evidence to suggest that democratic decision-making is more conducive to environmental protection than non-democratic forms of governance. ² Moreover, consensual democracies demonstrate a higher level of environmental performance than adversarial democracies (Scruggs 2003; Poloni-Staudinger 2008). There are multiple possible reasons for this: one possible factor is the effort they make to integrate seemingly conflicting values; another is that consensual systems are more deliberative, that is, politics involves a greater ratio of communicative action to strategic action than in adversarial democracies (see Steiner et al. 2004).