Download Is the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change an

Is the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change an effective (or appropriate)
institution for supporting indigenous peoples’ adaptation to climate change?
by
Michelle L. Maillet
Department of Geography
McGill University
Montréal (Québec) Canada
A thesis submitted to McGill University in partial fulfilment
of the requirements of the degree of M.A. in Geography
© Michelle L. Maillet 2014
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
My supervisor Dr. James Ford, the International Development Research Centre and the TriCouncils of Canada, the Indigenous Health Adaptation to Climate Change project, and McGill
University Department of Geography for the awards and stipends that have funded my graduate
studies; Kirstie Booth for your help in creating and designing figures; Kevin Landry for helping
me translate my abstract; Ellie Stephenson for your moral support and patient advice; Joanna
Petrasek MacDonald for the peer pressure to get things done during the last month of writing; all
my friends at the Climate Change Adaptation Research Group and the Health Geography Lab at
McGill for the regular pub nights, BBQs and potlucks that kept me sane; my supervisor Dr.
James Ford and committee members Dr. Vincent Pouliot and Dr. Thom Meredith for your
immense patience, thoughtful advice, and words of encouragement over the years; the PIs, coinvestigators, collaborators, students, partners and community members involved with the
Indigenous Health Adaptation to Climate Change project for the countless opportunities and
experiences; my parents Charles and Colette, parents-in-law Gaétane and Daniel, and close
friends and family Denis, Kirstie, Julie, Maude L., Marilyse, Soultana, Nick, and Maude D. for
always believing in me and inadvertently helping me build confidence in my work; and last, but
definitely not least, my wonderful loving husband Kevin Landry, without whom none of this
would be possible.
ii
ABSTRACT
The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the core of today’s global
climate change regime, is an intergovernmental institution that was established in the 1990s with
the objective of bringing nations together to negotiate policies in a global effort to stabilize
greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous
interference with the climate system. Today, with increasing scientific certainty regarding the
current and future impacts of climate change, and the growing notion that some degree of change
is unavoidable regardless of mitigation, the role of adaptation, and its scope, have expanded a
great deal within the institution since it was first envisioned. It is unclear however what
opportunities and barriers this discursive structure may create for adaptation support for
vulnerable sub-national populations such as indigenous peoples. Accordingly, this study uses
critical discourse analysis to examine the evolution of the embedded discourse on adaptation to
the adverse effects of climate change in the institution based on the official decisions rendered by
the Conference of the Parties, and seeks to expose the policy implications for indigenous peoples
at different scales. Noteworthy trends identified in this study include an increasingly explicit
recognition of the heightened vulnerability of indigenous peoples to climate change, and the
gradual shift away from approaches that are purely scientific to approaches that value and
include traditional and indigenous knowledge for adaptation where appropriate. Adaptation
assistance provided by developed nations however, remains exclusively aimed at projects in
developing country Parties.
iii
RÉSUMÉ
Maintenant au cœur du régime mondial sur les changements climatiques, la Convention-Cadre
des Nations Unies sur les Changements Climatiques est une institution intergouvernementale qui
fut établie au début des années 1990 sous l’objectif de rassembler les pays du monde dans le but
de stabiliser les concentrations de gaz à effet de serre dans l’atmosphère à un niveau qui
empêcherait une interférence dangereuse avec le climat. Considérant la progression scientifique
dans le domaine des impacts, présents et futures, des changements climatiques, ainsi que la
notion grandissante qu’un certain degré de changement est inévitable peu importe les efforts en
mitigation, le rôle qu’occupe aujourd’hui l’adaptation et sa portée s’est beaucoup élargis à
l’intérieur de l’institution depuis sa naissance. En revanche, les opportunités et les obstacles que
la structure du discours peut imposer à l’accès des populations vulnérables locales ne sont pas
très claires, notamment le support d’adaptation apporté aux populations indigènes. À cet effet,
cette thèse utilise l’analyse de discours critique afin d’examiner l’évolution du discours intégré
sur l’adaptation aux impacts des changements climatiques dans l’institution, basé sur le contenu
des décisions officielles rendues par les Parties à la Convention et cherche à exposer les
implications politiques pour les peuples indigènes à différentes échelles. Parmi les tendances
identifiées dans la présente étude, on note la reconnaissance grandissante et explicite de la
vulnérabilité accrue des peuples indigènes aux changements climatiques, ainsi que l’éloignement
des approches purement scientifiques dans un contexte d’adaptation, vers des approches qui
valorisent et incluent les connaissances traditionnelles et indigènes. L’assistance financière
fournie par les pays développés pour investir en adaptation demeure, par contre, axée sur les
projets dans les pays en voie de développement seulement.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgements
…ii
Abstract
…iii
Résumé
…iv
List of Tables
…vii
List of Figures
…viii
Chapter 1. Introduction
…1
1.1. Background
…1
1.2. Aim and objectives
…3
1.3. Thesis format
…4
Chapter 2. Literature review
…5
2.1. A brief history of the origins of the global climate change regime
…5
2.2. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
…13
2.3. Gaps in the peer-reviewed literature
…17
Chapter 3. Methodology
…21
3.1. Study design rationale: Why institutional discourses matter
…21
3.2. Conceptual framework: Critical discourse analysis
…23
3.3. Analytical framework: Discourse analysis, constructions of identity, and policy..25
3.4. Methodology
…27
3.5. Methods
…29
3.5.1. Data selection: The official discourse on adaptation in CP decisions …29
3.5.2. Data collection
…30
3.5.3. Data analysis
…34
3.5.4. Positionality
…37
Chapter 4. Results
…39
4.1. Game theory and the game analogy
…39
4.2. The official adaptation discourse in UNFCCC CP decisions, 1992-2012
…40
4.2.1. Characteristics of the discourse
…40
Guiding principles of the Convention
…40
Convention objectives and the shifting role of adaptation
…45
v
Adaptation discourse, constructed identities, and their perceived ethical
responsibilities
…52
Adaptation work streams
…58
4.2.2. Disclaimers
…65
4.2.3. References to indigenous peoples, practices and knowledge
…68
4.3. Summary
Chapter 5. Discussion
…78
…79
5.1. Discursive implications: Barriers, opportunities, and prognosis
…79
5.2. Research limitations and further research needs
…85
Chapter 6. Conclusion
…87
References
…90
Appendices
…97
Appendix 1 – List of Abbreviations
…97
Appendix 2 – List of Codes
…99
vi
LIST OF TABLES
Table 3.1.
KEY STEP decision texts
Table.3.2.
Adaptation work stream decision texts
Table 3.3.
Coding and journaling strategy
Table 4.1.
Adaptation work streams by scope and focus of activities
Table 4.2.
Adaptation-related funds under the Convention and the Kyoto Protocol
Table 4.3.
References to traditional or indigenous peoples, practices and knowledge in the
texts examined in this thesis
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1.
The regime complex for managing climate change
Figure 2.2.
Institutional structure of the UNFCCC
Figure 3.1.
Critical discourse analysis conceptual framework
Figure 3.2.
Framework for mapping identities constructed by policy discourses and their
implications
Figure 4.1.
Adaptation discourse in CP decisions timeline, and Convention objectives
Figure 4.2.
Referent identities constituted by the discourse on adaptation in CP decisions
Figure 4.3.
Article 4, paragraphs 8 and 9 of the Convention
Figure 4.4.
Adaptation discourse in CP decisions timeline, and adaptation work streams
Figure 4.5.
Decision 5, paragraph 8, CP.17/2001
Figure 4.6.
Adaptation discourse in CP decisions timeline, and legal disclaimers
Figure 4.7.
Adaptation discourse in CP decisions timeline, and references to indigenous
peoples, practices and knowledge
viii
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
1.1.
BACKGROUND
It is now widely accepted that anthropogenic climate change is one of the most significant
challenges faced by humanity this century (IPCC 2013). The issue is scientifically complex and
politically arduous due to its transboundary and multi-scaled nature, its potential for destabilizing
natural, as well as socioeconomic and cultural systems, and the relative level of uncertainty
relating to tipping points and future climate trajectories (IPCC 2014). One thing is certain
though, human influence on the climate system is clear, and evidence that our climate is
changing rapidly is overwhelming (Fussel 2009, Smith et al. 2009). The general consensus is that
historic emissions commit the Earth to some degree of warming, even with mitigation action, and
that given the current course of events, warming is likely to surpass the 2ºC threshold associated
to ‘dangerous’ interference with the climate system (Parry et al. 2009, Smith et al. 2009, Stafford
Smith et al. 2011, Peters et al. 2013). The potential impacts are manifold, and the effects will
continue to be unevenly distributed, both geographically and societally, with some impacts
already being felt by peoples and communities across the globe. These impacts include an
increase in intensity, occurrence, and unpredictability of extreme weather events such as storms,
floods, droughts, and extreme heat, among other things, increasing the potential for severe
impacts on human systems. Northern communities are also generally faced with changing sea-ice
and permafrost conditions, while low-lying and island communities are faced with sea level rise,
coastal erosion and salt-water intrusion (IPCC 2013). Some of the commonly cited human
impacts include weather-related injury, an increase in gastro-intestinal and/or vector-borne
illness, infrastructure damage, and food and water insecurity (IPCC 2014). Adaptation has thus
1
emerged over the last decade as a central component of climate policy debates at all levels of
governance (Khan & Timmons Roberts 2013).
Given its global scale and transboundary nature, addressing climate change and its
impacts will require some degree of cooperation and coordination at the international level, and
the institutions created to that purpose will need to be critically assessed to ensure their
effectiveness, yet his process has only just begun to emerge in the literature on global climate
governance (Tompkins & Amundsen 2008, Turnheim & Tezcan 2010). Accordingly, the core of
today’s international climate change regime, the United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change (UNFCCC), is the intergovernmental institution that was established in the
1990s with the objective of bringing nations together to negotiate policies in a global effort to
stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent
dangerous interference with the climate system. With recently increasing scientific certainty
regarding the current and future impacts of climate change, and the growing notion that some
degree of change is unavoidable regardless of mitigation, the role of adaptation, and its scope,
have expanded a great deal within the institution since it was first envisioned.
In its latest contribution to the Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC) summarizing the state of our knowledge about climate change since the
publication of its last report in 2007, Working Group II points to the heightened vulnerability to
the adverse impacts of climate change of marginalized and disadvantaged peoples and
communities in countries at all levels of development, with a particular focus on people living in
poverty, and indigenous peoples (IPCC 2014). Indeed there is a growing body of peer-reviewed
literature on the vulnerability of marginalized populations to the impacts of climate change,
stemming from a wide range of countries and contexts in both the developing and developed
2
worlds. One particular trend in this body of work that is relevant here relates to indigenous
peoples; where over the last decade or so, community-based work in the areas of indigenous
peoples vulnerabilities and the use of indigenous knowledge for adaptation have been expanding
significantly (Nakashima et al. 2012), while few studies have been published on the implications
of top-down structures for indigenous peoples’ access to adaptation support, and participation in
international efforts to negotiate adaptation policies in a meaningful way.
1.2.
AIM AND OBJECTIVES
The aim of this thesis is to examine how the structure of the UNFCCC creates discursive
barriers and/or opportunities for indigenous peoples’ adaptation to climate change. To that
purpose, this thesis asks first and foremost, is the UNFCCC an appropriate institution for
supporting indigenous populations’ adaptation to climate change? This is assessed through the
three following sub-questions: (a) what constitutes the discourse on climate change adaptation
embedded in the official decisions rendered by the Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC;
(b) what does the discourse imply for indigenous populations at the national, regional and
international levels; and (c) is it possible for indigenous people to access adaptation support
and/or exert influence onto the discourse, and if so, to what extent?
The research objectives are fourfold. The first is to review peer-reviewed and grey
literature to identify and characterize the history and context of the UNFCCC as a broad
framework for addressing climate change. As detailed in the third chapter of this thesis, this
component of the research project contextualizes the specific discourse under consideration. The
second objective is to characterize what constitutes the discourse on adaptation in the UNFCCC
and outline the discursive implications for indigenous peoples. The third objective is to identify
3
and characterize the discursive factors that facilitate and/or constrain meaningful consideration
and participation of indigenous peoples in the discourse on climate change adaptation in the
UNFCCC. And lastly, the fourth objective is to identify and characterize the discursive factors
that facilitate and/or constrain access to adaptation funding through the UNFCCC by indigenous
peoples.
1.3.
THESIS FORMAT
This thesis is made up of six chapters, including this introductory chapter, and a final
concluding chapter. Chapter 2 is a literature review that addresses the first objective of the
research project. Chapter 3 details the conceptual and analytical frameworks that guide the study,
and outlines the methods used to address the second, third, and fourth objectives. Chapter 4
presents the results of the critical discourse analysis of official Conference of the Parties
decisions. Chapter 5 considers the potential implications of the embedded discourse on
adaptation, characterized in the previous chapter, for indigenous peoples at varying scales,
including capacity to influence the discourse and access adaptation support.
4
CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW
There exists an array of peer-reviewed literature from a diversity of disciplines that
examines the multiple facets of climate governance and related topics, ranging in perspectives
from the local to the global. Those that are examined in this chapter contribute to the critical
discourse analysis by characterizing the social, cultural and political context in which the
discourse under consideration takes place, and help explain the rationale for this study.
Accordingly, section 2.1 reviews the peer-reviewed literature on global climate policy and
governance, and provides a brief history of the origins of the international climate change regime
and the underlying principles that guide it. Section 2.2 describes the institution at the core of the
global climate regime, and central to this study: the UNFCCC. And finally section 2.3 considers
the apparent gaps between major findings and recommendations from the literature on the
vulnerability and adaptation needs of indigenous peoples, and the literature on the global
governance of climate change.
2.1. A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE ORIGINS OF THE GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE REGIME
In the political sciences, the concept of ‘international or global regime’ is used to
describe networks of rules, norms, institutions, programs and decision-making procedures
governing a specific issue area of international relations, such as nuclear proliferation and
international trade for example (Keohane 1984, Karns & Mingst 2004). These networks and their
parts are established over time through elaborate crafting and compromise by international
actors, in most cases nation-states, and serve the purpose of facilitating cooperative action on
cross-boundary issues where problems of cooperation exist (Gehring & Faude 2013). The long
5
process of negotiation and consensus decision-making involved in the creation of these regimes
helps legitimize the underlying norms that guide it in the eyes of the actors, both state and nonstate, and helps constrain their behaviour through various combinations of customary and
binding forms of law. In some cases, regimes also serve the function of facilitating action and
improving knowledge integration by fostering knowledge sharing, development and refinement
(Keohane 1984, Bodansky 1995, Karns & Mingst 2004).
In general, global governance regimes are established and realized through
intergovernmental institutions and international treaties (Karns & Mingst 2004, Keohane &
Victor 2011, Gehring & Faude 2013). In the case of environmental regimes, the institutions that
guide them are generally built around conventions or frameworks that establish rules and
decision-making procedures for the negotiation of (potentially binding) protocols and agreements
(or treaties) to be accomplished at a later date. These conventions often impose procedural duties
on Parties to monitor progress and needs, and create linkages between states, public and private
institutions, multilateral or intergovernmental arrangements, and non-governmental organisations
(NGOs) for instance. Environmental regimes also typically include some form of mechanisms
for providing financial and technical assistance to developing countries (Bodansky 1995).
However, it has become increasingly recognized that some areas of environmental governance,
such as climate change, are best understood through a regime complex lens. A regime complex is
defined as a system of functionally (or partially) overlapping international institutions (or
regimes) that relate to a common subject matter, and are characterized by a loose network of
linkages between them, generating substantive, normative, or operative interactions (Keohane &
Victor 2011, Gehring & Faude 2013, Orsini et al. 2013). The global climate change regime then,
should be seen here as a regime complex, rather than a single regulatory regime, loosely linking
6
a number of overlapping institutional efforts governing issue-areas related to climate, with the
UNFCCC at its core (Keohane & Victor 2011). Figure 2.1 illustrates this loose assemblage of
institutional arrangements that make up the regime complex for managing the cooperation
problems that arise with climate change at the global level.
Figure 2.1. The regime complex for managing climate change
(Figure from Keohane & Victor, 2011)
The elements displayed in Figure 2.1 are not comprehensive or integrated, nor are they
arranged in any clear hierarchy (Keohane & Victor 2011), though some institutional linkages
exist between them. Though parallel pathways to climate governance exist, through Multilateral
Development Banks (MDBs), bilateral and multilateral initiatives, and sub-national action for
instance, and occur outside the scope of the UNFCCC (Michonski & Levi 2010), the focus of
this study remains tied to the institution that is still commonly accepted as the central component
7
of global climate governance (Schipper 2006, Ayers et al. 2010, Gupta 2010, Khan & Timmons
Roberts 2013).
Although it is commonly agreed that the global climate change regime, with the
UNFCCC at its core, emerged out of ongoing negotiations between states throughout the 1980s
and early-1990s in response to growing concerns over climate change (Bodansky 1995, Schipper
2006, Ayers et al. 2010, Gupta 2010), it is necessary for the purpose of this thesis to go further
back in time and consider the precursors of the regime and the circumstances in which it came to
be. This contextual information will help clarify the origin of the underlying assumptions found
to guide decision-making trajectories and policy avenues for adaptation in the UNFCCC, as
discussed throughout this thesis. And as will be explained in Chapter 3, this contextual
information also addresses the “social practice” component of the conceptual framework that
guides this project (see Figure 3.1) by characterizing the broad social, cultural and political
context in which the discourse under consideration takes place. Accordingly, the remainder of
this section presents a brief history of the emergence of the international climate change regime
and characterizes what constitutes it.
At the end of the Second World War, nations came together in an effort to promote and
maintain international peace and security, and replace the decaying League of Nations. As a
result, they established the United Nations (UN), a new intergovernmental institution that was to
provide a democratic forum for cooperative diplomacy and conflict resolution. The institution
was created with the vision that it would contribute to deterring acts of aggression, and stimulate
nations to cooperate on socio-economic, cultural and human rights issues. Like most
international arrangements established under the current world order, the functioning of the UN
was, and is still, deeply rooted in the principle of the sovereign equality of states (Kennedy
8
2006). The principle, which had been the basis of international relations since the Treaty of
Westphalia in 1648 (Karns & Mingst 2004), is also deeply tied to the principle of nonintervention, which implies the domestic supremacy of the state’s political institutions and legal
system; that all states have an equal right to self-determination. Together, these complementary
principles frame the role of states at the international level as autonomous legal actors that must
negotiate with each other in an effort to avoid conflict (Cohen 2006).
Though the UN Charter makes no explicit reference to environmental protection or
environmental issues in general (United Nations 1945), it has generally been recognized that
moves to address this governance gap within the institution began as early as the late-1960s amid
growing concerns over the negative effects of pollution and overexploitation of resources on
economic and human development (Karns & Mingst 2004, Schipper 2006). In an effort to foster
cooperation, and in an attempt to generate a shared vision for the preservation of the human
environment, the UN hosted the first global conference on the environment in 1972; the
landmark Conference on the Human Environment (UNCHE), also known as the Stockholm
Conference (Haas 2002, Bunn 2009, Hjerpe & Linnér 2010). This event is significant in that this
was the first time the global community formally came together in an attempt to address the
interdependencies of development and the environment (Karns & Mingst 2004, Roch & Perrez
2006). Three major outputs were produced as a result of the conference: (1) the Stockholm
Declaration, (2) the Stockholm Action Plan for the Human Environment, and (3) the United
Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). The first, the Stockholm Declaration, is the
customary law statement of twenty-six principles of behaviour and responsibilities that paved the
way for the development of global environmental accords in the following decades (Haas 2002,
Roch & Perrez 2006). The principles it promoted include the no significant harm principle, the
9
good neighbor principle, and the principle of intergenerational equity (Karns & Mingst 2004).
The second, the Stockholm Acton Plan, provided 109 recommendations to governments and
international organizations relating to environmental assessment and management, and
supporting institutional measures (Haas 2002). The third, the UNEP, is the UN agency that
coordinates international efforts for the protection of the environment (Karns & Mingst 2004,
Roch & Perrez 2006). The Stockholm Conference was also a milestone event in that it was the
first such international conference to have a parallel forum for the participation of non-state
actors, such as civil-society and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in the context of
international policy. Decidedly, this set an important precedent for all future global
environmental governance efforts (Karns & Mingst 2004, Hjerpe & Linnér 2010).
Shortly thereafter, the global scientific and policy-making community gathered for the
World Climate Conference in 1979, an event organized by the World Meteorological
Organization (WMO) in collaboration with other UN bodies, with the objective of assessing the
state of our knowledge on the climate, and the effects of climate variability and change on
human society. Outputs from the conference, and subsequent meetings of the WMO eventually
led the UNEP and the WMO to jointly establish the IPCC in 1988; the now well-known
epistemic institution charged with the specific task of summarizing the state of our knowledge on
the causes of climate change, the current and future impacts, and response measures, and provide
recommendations to relevant decision-makers and international actors (Zillman 2009, Gupta
2010). In 1990, the WMO held its second World Climate Conference in the goal of assessing the
progress made since the first World Climate Conference, and undertake an initial international
review of the IPCC’s First Assessment Report (Zillman 2009).
10
Soon after in 1992, following the official release of the IPCC First Assessment Report,
and amid growing public concerns over climate change and biodiversity loss and as a follow-up
to the Stockholm Conference, UNEP organized the second global conference on the
environment; the Conference on the Environment and Development (UNCED), also known as
the Rio Conference or Earth Summit (Haas 2002, Bunn 2009, Gupta 2010). The purpose of the
event was to explore ways to address global environmental challenges in a comprehensive
manner by attempting to balance environmental protection and economic development, and
foster North-South cooperation (Roch & Perrez 2006). The conference was an unparalleled event
in both the scope of its agenda, and the number of participants involved. Similar to the
Stockholm Conference, an unprecedented number of NGOs participated in the process, with
some 1400 of them accredited, though they were excluded from the final negotiations between
states over the higher-level documents (Karns & Mingst 2004). Overall, the outputs that were
produced as a result of the conference were ground breaking, and included (1) the Rio
Declaration on Environment and Development, (2) Agenda 21 and (3) the Commission on
Sustainable Development, as well as (4) the Rio Conventions; better known as the Convention
on Biological Diversity (UNCBD), the Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC),
and the Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) (Haas 2002, Karns & Mingst 2004,
Xiang & Meehan 2005, Roch & Perrez 2006). The first, the Rio Declaration, is the soft-law
statement of 287 general principles and obligations that frames the consensus of values,
approaches, and priorities for the global governance of environment and development. The
content of the Declaration is largely the result of compromises between the competing interests
of developed and developing nations (Porras 1992). These principles, forming the basis of
contemporary environmental law as we know it today, include among many others the principle
11
of common but differentiated responsibilities, the precautionary principle, and the polluter pays
principle (Porras 1992, Karns & Mingst 2004). The Declaration also reiterates the sovereign
rights of states, the good neighbour and intergenerational equity principles, and recognizes an
open economic system and the eradication of poverty as indispensable requirements for
sustainable development (Porras 1992). The second and third outputs of the conference are
Agenda 21 and the Commission on Sustainable Development respectively. Agenda 21 is an
action plan promoting sustainable development and providing over 2500 recommendations to
states, IOs and NGOs to implement, while the Commission on Sustainable Development was
created to follow up on post-Rio activities and to monitor subsequent implementation of Agenda
21 at multiple governance levels (Haas 2002, Roch & Perrez 2006). The fourth, the Rio
Conventions, are the three binding legal treaties that were negotiated in the context of the
conference; the UNFCCC, UNCDB, and UNCCD. The three Conventions address specific yet
overlapping environmental problems, set the rules for the negotiation of legally binding
protocols and agreements in the future, promote similar and synergetic approaches and measures
in line with the principles of the Rio Declaration, and have established financial mechanisms
operating through the Global Environmental Facility (GEF) (Xiang & Meehan 2005).
It is also noteworthy to mention here that the Rio Conventions, particularly the
UNFCCC, were modelled in part on the Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone
Layer (1985) and the subsequent Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer
(1987), which sought to phase out ozone depleting CFCs through differing objectives for
developed and developing nations. Indeed, the Vienna Convention and Montreal Protocol are
mentioned throughout the literature on global climate governance as having served as somewhat
12
of a guideline for the approach developed in the UNFCCC (Bodansky 1995, Gupta 2010), and
are explicitly referred to in a number of instances in the Convention text.
2.2. THE UNITED NATIONS FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE
Since its ratification in 1994, the UNFCCC has been the primary institution for
addressing climate change at the global level (Bodansky 1995, Schipper 2006, Ayers et al. 2010,
Gupta 2010). The Framework Convention is first and foremost an international treaty, now
signed by a total of 195 states, which sets out the principles, rules, procedures, and priorities for
negotiating policy approaches between states to mitigate the causes of climate change and cope
with the impacts. But the UNFCCC, like the other Rio Conventions, is also a physical institution
with working bodies, groups, committees, programmes, funds, a bureau, and a permanent
secretariat. The institutional structure of the UNFCCC, as set out by the Convention, is
illustrated in Figure 2.2., and explained thereafter.
Parties to the Convention are states, and are collectively known as the Conference of the
Parties; the supreme body of the Convention, with which all decision-making powers lie. Indeed,
all other bodies, groups and committees within the institution are accountable to, operate in the
service of, and are mandated by the Conference of the Parties. The Secretariat is the institutional
body established to provide administrative, reporting and logistical support for all activities
within the context of the Convention. The Financial Mechanism, under the trusteeship of the
GEF, was created to manage the provision of financial resources from developed country Parties
to developing country Parties on a concessional basis, including technology transfers. To that
purpose then, as will be examined in Chapter 4, the Financial Mechanism operates a number of
funds established under different programmes within the institution.
13
Figure 2.2. Institutional structure of the UNFCCC (United Nations 1992)
The permanent subsidiary bodies of the Convention are the Subsidiary Body for
Scientific and Technological Advice (SB-STA), and the Subsidiary Body for Implementation
(SBI). The two were established to provide the Conference of the Parties with information and
guidance on relevant scientific and technological matters, and to assist the Conference of the
Parties in the review and assessment of effective implementation respectively (United Nations
1992). The groups, committees and work programs established through subsequent decisions
rendered under the Convention in turn, operate under one of the two subsidiary bodies, as will be
seen in Chapter 4.
14
Since 1995, Parties have sent national delegations to annual meetings, also known as
Conference of the Parties (CP) for high-level negotiations, and to multiple lower-level
negotiating rounds and workshops thought the year. Since 2005, the CP has also served as the
Meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (CMP), the legal agreement setting binding
greenhouse gas emissions for developed nations and channels funds for mitigation and
adaptation to developing countries (Hjerpe & Linnér 2010). Throughout the two weeks duration
of annual CPs and CMPs, usually hosted in a different nation every year, multiple concurrent
formal negotiation, plenary sessions, and closed Party meetings take place, alongside more
informal side events, exhibits, press conferences, and workshops (Hjerpe & Linnér 2010,
Schroeder et al. 2012). The decisions reached between the Parties at each CP and CMP are
cumulative; they continue to be built upon, and referred to, at subsequent meetings, and create
the boundaries in which future action can take place. Like most contemporary UN institutions,
decisions in the UNFCCC are made by consensus, where one state equals one vote. Though this
type of arrangement is democratic in theory by putting all states on an equal footing, in practice
the balance of power between member states remains inextricably tied to the distribution of
resources and capacity (Dombrowski 2010, Schroeder et al. 2012). Critics of the UN system
argue that this inevitably ends up leaving developing countries on the losing end in the balance
of power; where larger, richer delegations have been shown to have (Schroeder et al. 2012). The
democratic legitimacy of state-centric institutions of the sort is also largely based on the
assumption that citizens and stakeholders are represented effectively through their national
delegations. However, this assumption has been criticised by a number of scholars on the
grounds that marginalized groups that are consistently underrepresented in domestic politics,
15
such as indigenous peoples for instance, are likely to be underrepresented in national delegations
(Dombrowski 2010, Schroeder 2010, Schroeder et al. 2012).
In an attempt to create a more inclusive and equitable governance approach for
constituencies from all levels, and in the same tradition as the Stockholm and Rio Conferences
and the other two Rio Conventions, the CP and CMP events under the UNFCCC bring together
an ever-growing number of non-state actors in addition to national delegates, including support
staff, civil society, researchers, industry and the media (Cabré 2011). Most non-state actors that
participate in the process are accredited as observers, though in some cases they may be part of
national delegations. Although observers have no formal decision-making power within the
institution, and are barred from closed negotiation sessions, they can attend a large number of
negotiation and plenary sessions, and lead countless side events and exhibits. They are also often
invited to participate in and contribute to other processes that occur through the year in the
institution, such as workshops and meetings on special topics held under the guidance of the SBSTA or the SBI (see UNFCCC 2014 for instance). The reports issued from these events are then
given as recommendations to the Conference of the Parties for consideration. Though this does
not guarantee the implementation of all recommendations, it does contribute to some extent to
put issues on the agenda that the Parties might not otherwise have considered (Dombrowski
2010, Cabré 2011).
Finally, like the other Rio Conventions, the UNFCCC imposes a number of procedural
duties on its Parties to hold them accountable to each other and monitor implementation of the
Convention at the national scale (Bodansky 1995, Xiang & Meehan 2005). For instance, all
Parties are required to periodically submit National Communications (NCs) to the Conference of
the Parties, summarizing the planning and implementation of national and regional measures to
16
mitigate the causes of climate change and facilitate adaptation to the effects. It is also expected
that developed country Parties will report on their contributions to the funds operated by the
institution in NCs (United Nations 1992, Bodansky 1995, Biagini et al. 2014, Sherman & Ford
2014). Developing country Parties, particularly Least Developed Countries (LDCs), were also
required to produce National Adaptation Programmes of Action (NAPAs), in an attempt to help
build adaptive capacity and catalyse adaptation planning (Tanzler et al. 2010). The NAPAs
process being largely completed since 2010, LDCs and interested developing country Parties are
now working to produce National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) (Decision 5, CP.16/2010).
2.3. GAPS IN THE PEER-REVIEWED LITERATURE
Over the last decade, a growing body of peer-reviewed work on impacts, vulnerability,
and adaptation to climate change has emerged in response to the recognition that current and
historic emissions commit the Earth to some degree of climate change regardless of mitigation,
with the potential for both winners and losers (Pielke et al. 2007, Parry et al. 2009). Given the
magnitude and complexity of climate change, these works consider a range of issues, assessed at
differing scales through an array of disciplinary lenses. In many cases, research aims focus on
identifying those groups that are most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, and
characterizing ways to reduce the negative effects and take advantage of the opportunities (IPCC
2014, Wang et al. In Press). At the international level though, studies considering adaptation
needs, policy and best-practices at the country-level are only beginning to emerge, with most of
the work at this scale focusing on assessing developing country vulnerability, adaptation needs,
and piloting adaptation projects (Lesnikowski et al. 2013, Berrang-Ford et al. 2014). At this
level, the most vulnerable countries are often defined by concerned intergovernmental
17
organizations and researchers alike, as developing countries, and more commonly cited as the
Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and Small Island Developing States (SIDS). Their
heightened vulnerability is said to stem from existing socio-economic disadvantage and a high
burden of ill-health, high levels of poverty, political inequality, and weak institutions, which
contribute to exacerbate the negative effects of climate change in these countries and
compromise development efforts (World Bank 2010, IPCC 2014). Accordingly, most of the
academic work in this area calls for increased support for adaptation measures in developing
countries (Biagini et al. 2014).
Parallel to this body of work, is an emerging literature on community-based research on
climate change vulnerability and adaptation at the local scales, in countries at all levels of
development (Forsyth 2013). Though research assessing best practices for adaptation at this level
is still in its infancy (Pearce et al. 2009), a significant amount of work has been done with
regards to characterizing the sources of peoples’ vulnerabilities to climate change. A growing
number of these studies are finding that indigenous peoples, particularly those that inhabit
remote areas that are undergoing rapid change, and practice livelihoods that are closely linked to
the environment, are highly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change (Ford 2009,
Berrang-Ford et al. 2012, Ford 2012, Nakashima et al. 2012, Hofmeijer et al. 2013, Ford et al.
2014, Green & Minchin 2014, Maru et al. In Press). This heightened vulnerability is deeply tied
to, and exacerbated by existing socio-economic and health disparities, and by political inequality
and marginalization brought on by colonial legacies. Negative impacts have already been
documented in indigenous communities in the Arctic (Ford & Pearce 2010, Furberg et al. 2011,
Harper et al. 2011, Cunsolo Willox et al. 2013), in Australia (Green et al. 2010, Zander et al.
2013, Green & Minchin 2014), in New Zealand (Jones et al. 2014), Latin America (Hofmeijer et
18
al. 2013), and in sub-Saharan Africa (Berrang-Ford et al. 2012), among others. Effectively, these
studies also call for increased support to assist indigenous peoples in adapting to climate change.
In the third body of scholarship relevant to this study, the literature on the global
governance of climate change, adaptation has also been gradually emerging as a central
component of the general policy debate (Moss et al. 2013). However, the amount of work that
has been done on adaptation policy is still relatively small in comparison to the existing body of
work available on mitigation (Berrang-Ford et al. 2011). In fact, in the literature focusing on
UNFCCC mechanisms for addressing climate change at the global level, there is a limited focus
on adaptation in general, and indigenous peoples in particular (Ford 2009, 2012). The majority of
the work that does focus on adaptation, in many cases, puts the emphasis on funding for
adaptation actions in developing countries, and seeks to consider new pathways for effective and
binding action on adaptation for those nations (Fankhauser & Burton 2011). On the other hand,
most of the work focusing on indigenous peoples’ effective participation in the UNFCCC
process is related to mitigation, particularly practices related to REDD, and focuses mostly
indigenous peoples originating from developing countries, and on NGO advocacy (see for
instance Schroeder 2010, Cabré 2011) rather than meaningful representation of indigenous
peoples in national delegations, and in UNFCCC institutional bodies and groups. And though
some work has been done on the history of the adaptation discourse in the global climate change
regime (Schipper 2006, Khan & Timmons Roberts 2013), this work is limited in scope and for
the most part does not discuss the analytical methods used to make the conclusions being
brought forth. In general, these works bring limited attention to the inconsistencies and silencing
effects of the discourses they consider, and do not challenge the underlying assumptions that
guide them; though this is increasingly being done in discourse analyses of media representations
19
of climate change (Boykoff 2008a, b, Boykoff et al. 2010, Boykoff & Yulsman 2013). The focus
of the majority of these papers remains largely tied to improving access to adaptation funding for
vulnerable developing countries (Biagini et al. 2014).
Given the recognized heightened vulnerability and sensitivity of indigenous peoples in all
countries to the adverse effects of climate change, and the absence of a comprehensive
assessment of how international structures such as the UNFCCC can create barriers and/or
opportunities for supporting indigenous peoples’ adaptation without geographic prejudice, this
study seeks to initiate efforts to address the gaps by critically assessing how the discursive
structure of UNFCCC CP decisions influences the possibilities for meaningful participation of
indigenous peoples, and their ability to access adaptation funding.
20
CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY
This chapter first describes the rationale that guided the study design, and explains the
conceptual and theoretical frameworks that have guided the execution of this research project.
The chapter then reviews the methodological approach used in this study, including data
selection, collection and analysis.
3.1. STUDY DESIGN RATIONALE: WHY INSTITUTIONAL DISCOURSE MATTERS
The concept of discourse, widely used throughout the social sciences, generally refers to
knowledge systems that give meaning to the world and reinforce specific norms, values, power
structures and rules of knowledge validity. More broadly, discourses can be defined as
collections of meaningful statements, representations and texts about the world (or aspects of the
world), the themes that unify them, and the underlying structures that govern how they are
produced (Fairclough 2003, Waitt 2010). This abstraction is deeply rooted in post-structuralist,
constructivist, and critical theory; three cross-cutting schools of thought that all hold that
language has ontological significance. In other words, these theories hold that it is through
language that we constitute reality, give some realities meaning while silencing others, and
influences how people perceive and understand specific problems and define appropriate
solutions to address them accordingly (Hansen 2006).
How we consider discourse and its effects today is largely based on the work of poststructuralist philosopher Michel Foucault (Hansen 2006, Waitt 2010), whose work dealt with
social power dynamics and the construction of knowledge. He argued that discourses are not
only shaped by the broader social context in which they occur, but also contribute to shaping the
21
behaviours and norms that help constitute the social context itself (Foucault & Gordon 1980,
Foucault 1982). Foucault saw discourse as a layered concept, made up of linguistic and/or visual
representations that have meaning and effect, inter-related systems or groups of representations,
and regulated practice within the structures that govern them (Waitt 2010). Building on
Foucault’s work, Norman Fairclough refined the study of discourses by focusing in greater depth
on methods for the linguistic analysis of discourses. A major contributor to the scholarship on
critical discourse analysis, Fairclough affirms that it is through the language of discourse that
particular social realities and relations of power become naturalized (Fairclough 1992, 2003,
2013).
According to constructivist international relations scholars such as Barnett and
Finnemore (2004) for instance, international organizations, and the discourses and cultures that
they perpetuate, help constitute the world by defining the problems to be governed (constitutive
effects), and help regulate new norms, interests, actors, and shared social tasks (regulative
effects). Organizational discourses are understood to contribute to shaping the perceptions and
behaviours of actors, and tend to favour some outcomes over others. Given this potential
normative power of international organizations in influencing behaviour and outcomes, the
growing complexity of the global climate change regime, and the increasing understanding that
climate change is unavoidable, critically assessing the effects of institutional adaptation
discourses in global climate governance is becoming increasingly necessary. Though some
research assessing media discourses on climate change and their effects on public perception
exist and continue to grow in numbers over the years (see for instance Boykoff 2008a, b,
Boykoff et al. 2010, Boykoff & Yulsman 2013, Moser 2014), there are still few scientific
contributions using a critical discourse analysis methodology to examine how various
22
institutional discourses on climate change contribute to favouring some policy options over
others.
Given the constitutive and regulative effects of institutional discourses in international
organizations (Barnett & Finnemore 2004), the naturalizing effect of discourses in general
(Fairclough 1992, 2003, 2013), and their intricate link to power relations and knowledge
(Foucault & Gordon 1980, Foucault 1982), this study seeks to analyse the adaptation discourse in
the UNFCCC through the lense of critical discourse analysis by challenging the apparent biases
in the way it frames the problem, defines the actors, assigns their roles, and contributes to
limiting or facilitating different types of outcomes for indigenous peoples.
3.2. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK: CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS
The conceptual framework that guides this study is largely based on the work of both
Foucault and Fairclough, who as mentioned above, sought to expose the mechanisms that
maintain structures and rules of validity through discursive analysis. To that purpose, Fairclough
developed a conceptual framework for critical discourse analysis, which is the basis for most
analytical work on discourse today (Fairclough 1992, 2003, Alvesson & Kärreman 2011,
Fairclough 2013). The framework, illustrated in Figure 3.1., conceptualizes critical discourse
analysis as a three-layered approach, characterized by a textual analysis and supported by two
levels of contextualization. The textual analysis should give particular attention to the
constitutive effects of discursive and linguistic elements such as narratives, wording, tone,
framing, and themes (Fairclough 1992, 2003, Waitt 2010, Fairclough 2013), and be receptive to
inconsistencies and discursive frames that privilege some approaches, groups, or forms of
knowledge over others (Boykoff 2008a, b). The contextual information that makes up the outer
23
two layers of the conceptual framework provides a basis for interpretation of the outputs of the
textual analysis, and seeks to help reduce research bias. Effective context should be provided
relative to the production, distribution, and consumption of the texts under consideration, as well
as to the broader social, cultural and political systems in which it occurs or to which it is related
(Fairclough 1992, 2003, 2013).
Figure 3.1.
Critical Discourse Analysis conceptual framework (based on Fairclough 1992,
2003, 2013; Waitt, 2010)
In this study then, the social practice sphere of Fairclough’s critical discourse analysis
framework is addressed in the first and second sections of the literature review; consisting in a
brief history of the origins of the global climate change regime until the establishment of the
UNFCCC, and a description of the general purpose, structure and operation of the institution.
24
Discursive practice is reviewed later in this chapter; outlining the circumstances in which the
texts analyzed in this study are produced, distributed, and consumed. The methodology used for
the textual analysis is then detailed, followed by the description of the results in Chapter 4.
3.3. ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK: DISCOURSE ANALYSIS, CONSTRUCTIONS OF
IDENTITY, AND POLICY
The analytical framework that has guided the textual analysis in this thesis is adapted
from the work of post-structuralist international relations scholar Lene Hansen, who developed
an approach using discourse analysis to study how identities are negotiated, implemented, and
realized through international institutions, governments, and the media, among others in foreign
policy discourse. In line with the traditions set forth by Foucault and Fairclough, Hansen’s work
is based on the assumption that it is through language that meaning and particular identities are
attached to peoples and groups. Those identities and how they are constructed then contribute to
Identity is thus understood as relational; stemming from discursive juxtapositions, through
processes of linking and differentiation of the self to others. Accordingly, identities are
(re)constructed and prioritized in policy discourses, characterizing what constitutes legitimate
actions or responses to address the problems as they are formulated. This construction of
identities in policy discourses and their implications can be analysed according to Hansen, by
extracting the spatial, temporal and ethical elements that constitute them, displaying them, and
mapping their inter-connectedness (Hansen 2006). This framework is detailed in Figure 3.2.
25
Spatial construction
Temporal
construction
The Other (1)
Spatial construction
Temporal
construction
The Other (2)
Ethical responsibility
Process of differentiation
Process of linking
Figure 3.2.
Framework for mapping identities constructed by policy discourses, and
their implications (based on Hansen, 2006)
Though the analytical framework shown in Figure 3.2 displays only two identities (or
‘others’) for demonstration purposes here, in reality there can be multiple layers of contrasting
identities, as well as identities in relations of sameness in any given discourse. Accordingly, the
framework is designed to allow for the careful consideration of the signs articulated in specific
discourse or texts, to review how they are coupled to provide meaning, to reveal their effects of
truth, and to expose where instabilities or inconsistencies might occur (Hansen 2006).
26
3.4. METHODOLOGY
This section reviews the methodological approach used in this study, which was devised
in an attempt to respond to common critiques of critical discourse analysis, and in the goal of
designing and conducting a project that is both rigorous and replicable. All too often, discourse
analysis studies have been criticised for failing to provide a description or explanation of the
methods used to select the texts, code them, and analyse them (Fuhrman & Oehler 1986, Rydin
2005), and for lacking in reflexivity by omitting to acknowledge the researcher’s positionality
and potential biases (Blommaert & Bulcaen 2000, Bucholtz 2001). In many cases, the absence
of these elements in discourse analysis studies can lead to difficulties in the replication of those
studies, and create a greater potential for researcher bias in the framing of the context and
misinterpretation of the findings (Blommaert & Bulcan 2000, Bucholtz 2001).
The methodological approach used to conduct the discourse analysis in this study then, is
largely based on a combination of Waitt (2010) and Hansen (2006), seeks to be attentive to both
Foucault and Fairclough’s work, while also actively seeking to control for . Accordingly this
section seeks to justify the use of these methods, while the remainder of this Chapter explains
how these methods were applied to the current study.
Waitt (2010) affirms that effective critical discourse analysis should be explicit in its
rationale for the choice of source materials to be examined, and for the choice in focus of the
study, while being attentive to researcher positionality. Given that critical discourse analysis
assumes that language and discursive frames shape our understanding of reality, it is reasonable
to expect that researchers using the method openly control for subjectivity as much as possible
and actively seek to suspend pre-existing assumptions about the discourse, its context, and
expected findings. Waitt suggests that this can be facilitated by research journaling throughout
27
the study in an effort to remain reflexive and keep track of the evolving thought process of the
researcher, helping him/her to remain critical of the discourse and context in which the
discourse(s) occurs. On the other hand, it has also been suggested by a number of discourse
analysis that including an acknowledgment of the researcher’s positionality in these types of
studies can help reduce the potential misinterpretation of the study findings by the readers
(Blommaert & Bulcaen 2000, Bucholtz 2001).
According to Waitt (2010), the formal execution of a critical discourse analysis includes
three major steps: (1) familiarization exercises, (2) iterated rounds of coding, and (3)
investigation for effects of truth, inconsistencies, and silencing effects. In line with the two outer
layers of Fairclough’s conceptual framework detailed in Figure 3.1, Waitt recommends that
researchers using discourse analysis first start by immersing themselves in, and thinking
critically about, the social and historical context of the considered texts, while being alert to the
authorship, intended audience, and process. And as mentioned above, it is important to give an
effective account of this context to increase the rigour of such studies. Second, both Hansen
(2006) and Waitt (2010) suggest multiple rounds of reading and coding, first starting with
descriptive coding to organize the data, then reviewing multiple times for analysis seeking to
expose the nested themes. Third, the investigation for effects of truth, inconsistencies and
silencing effects in policy discourses can, as discussed in Chapter 3, can effectively be mapped
out by deconstructing discursive identities into spatial, temporal and ethical components,
exposing processes of identity linking and differentiation within a web of signs, characterizing
the varying degrees of otherness, and identifying basic discourses (Hansen 2006).
In this study then, the social and historical context (social practice sphere) is reviewed in
Chapter 2. The reasons for selecting the texts examined in this study and the discursive practices
28
of their creation, consumption and distribution (discursive practice sphere) are overviewed in
section 3.5.1, while section 3.5.2 lists the texts considered and states how they were collected.
Section 3.5.3 details the methods used to conduct the textual analysis, and discusses strategies
used to reduce researcher bias in the execution of the project and interpretation of the findings.
Finally, section 3.5.4 states my positionality in the context of this project.
3.5. METHODS
3.5.1. DATA SELECTION: THE OFFICIAL DISCOURSE ON ADAPTATION IN CP DECISIONS
The case study under examination in this thesis concerns the official discourse on
adaptation to climate change formulated over time in the decisions, agreements and protocols
issued by the Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC. The body of decision texts considered
here as forming the official discourse on adaptation to climate change in CP and CMP decisions
was selected from institutionally self-identified key steps in the UNFCCC (from both CPs and
CMPs), and specific adaptation-relevant decisions (from CPs only) pulled from the
organization’s website. These institutionally self-identified adaptation-relevant decisions are
qualified as such in this study given that the content of the website is managed by institution’s
Secretariat and thus reflect internal perceptions about what content is adaptation-relevant. In
selecting these texts as the objects of the discourse analysis, I purposefully sought to remove
potential bias by attempting not to influence the characterization of what decisions should
constitute the official adaptation discourse in CP decisions.
Though there are multiple competing discourses within institutions like the UNFCCC at
any given time, ranging from civil society-led discourse, to negotiation positions, and discourses
within its distinct programmes and bodies, this project only focus on the discourse as constituted
29
by selected CP and CMP decisions. Therefore, this work should not be understood as an end
point in and of itself, but should rather be seen as the first step of a larger research programme
critically assessing the effects of adaptation discourses at multiple levels in the UNFCCC, and
other institutions in the context of global climate governance.
All of the decision texts examined in this study are outputs from the annual CP meetings,
rendered by consensus of the Parties to the Convention (Dombrowski 2010, Schroeder et al.
2012). These decisions take the form of customary law, with very few binding agreements other
than the Convention and the Kyoto Protocol (Karns & Mingst 2004). The content of the
decisions primarily addresses commitments, obligations, norms, and rules for the Parties to the
Convention, but also provides instructions for the operation of the bodies, work programmes,
committees, groups, funds and mechanisms internal to the Convention, and creates linkages to
external multilateral, intergovernmental, epistemic, and civil society organizations. Though
drafts of the decisions rendered at CPs and CMPs are negotiated in part in advance of the annual
meetings by negotiating teams built up of a variety of actors, their final contents largely depend
on the bargaining dynamics between nations and national delegations at CPs and CMPs
(Dombrowski 2010). CP and CMP negotiation sessions can be long, difficult and even upsetting
for national delegations that have to reach a consensus on the explicit content of the decisions
within the short time frame allotted to these conferences, while also serving their national
interests, often leading to disagreement over wording and leading to decisions based on the
lowest common denominator (Dombrowski 2010, Keohane & Victor 2011, Smead et al. 2014).
3.5.2. DATA COLLECTION
30
The texts examined in this thesis are all publicly available on the UNFCCC’s website in
electronic format (pdf). The data examined here is made up of two streams of texts. The first
consists of all the decisions, from both the CPs and the CMPs, listed under the KEY STEPS tab
on the UNFCCC website’s main page on October 22nd 2013. The second consists of all the
specific adaptation-related decisions listed under the PROCESS / Adaptation / Decisions &
Conclusions tabs on the UNFCCC website’s main page on the 22nd of October 2013. The list of
these documents is provided in Table 3.1 and 3.2.
Table 3.1. KEY STEP decision texts (583 pages in total)
KEY STEP
The Convention
Year
1992
Kyoto Protocol
1998
Bali Road Map
2007
2007
Cancun
Agreements
2010
2010
2010
Durban Outcomes
2011
2011
2011
2011
Document Title
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change
Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change
Decisions adopted by the Conference of the Parties
serving as the meeting to the Kyoto Protocol at its third
session (CMP.3)
Decisions adopted by the Conference of the Parties at its
thirteenth session (CP.13)
Decisions adopted by the Conference of the Parties
serving as the meeting to the Kyoto Protocol at its sixth
session (CMP.6)
Decisions adopted by the Conference of the Parties at its
sixteenth session (CP.16) – Add.1
Decisions adopted by the Conference of the Parties at its
sixteenth session (CP.16) – Add.2
Decisions adopted by the Conference of the Parties at its
seventeenth session (CP.17) – Add.1
Decisions adopted by the Conference of the Parties at its
seventeenth session (CP.17) – Add.2
Decisions adopted by the Conference of the Parties
serving as the meeting to the Kyoto Protocol at its
seventh session (CMP.7) – Add.1
Decisions adopted by the Conference of the Parties
serving as the meeting to the Kyoto Protocol at its
seventh session (CMP.7) – Add.2
Pages
1-24
1-20
1-35
1-60
1-32
1-31
1-25
1-86
1-63
1-27
1-49
31
Doha Climate
Gateway
2012
2012
2012
2012
Decisions adopted by the Conference of the Parties at its
eighteenth session (CP.18) – Add.1
Decisions adopted by the Conference of the Parties at its
eighteenth session (CP.18) – Add.2
Decisions adopted by the Conference of the Parties
serving as the meeting to the Kyoto Protocol at its
eighth session (CMP.8) – Add.1
Decisions adopted by the Conference of the Parties
serving as the meeting to the Kyoto Protocol at its
eighth session (CMP.8) – Add.2
1-37
1-44
1-21
1-29
Table 3.2. Adaptation work stream decision texts (172 pages in total)
Work Stream
National
Adaptation
Programmes
of Action
(NAPAs)
Year
2001
CP
CP.7
2001
CP.7
2001
CP.7
2001
CP.7
2001
CP.7
2003
CP.9
2003
CP.9
2003
CP.9
2004
CP.10
2005
CP.11
2005
CP.11
2007
CP.13
Decision
Decision 2 (+ Annex)
Capacity building in developing countries (nonAnnex I Parties)
Decision 5
Implementation of Article 4, paragraph 8 and 9 of
the Convention
Decision 7
Funding under the Convention
Decision 27
Guidance […] for the operation of the LDCF
Decision 28 (+ Annex)
Guidelines for the preparation of NAPAs
Decision 5
Further guidance […] for the operation of the
SCCF
Decision 6
Further guidance for the operation of the LDCF
Decision 8
Review of the guidelines for the preparation of
NAPAs
Decision 4
Work of the LDC Expert Group
Decision 3
Further guidance for the operation of the LDCF
Decision 4
Extension of the mandate of the LDC Expert
Group
Decision 8
Extension of the mandate of the LDC Expert
Pages
5-14
32-39
43-45
6
7-13
11-12
13-14
16
13
10-11
12
36
32
LDC Expert
Group
Nairobi Work
Programme
on impacts,
vulnerability
and
adaptation to
climate
change
Adaptation
Committee
2008
CP.14
2010
CP.16
2010
CP.16
2012
CP.18
2001
CP.7
2003
CP.9
2005
CP.11
2007
CP.13
2010
CP.16
2003
CP.9
2004
CP.10
2005
CP.11
2011
CP.17
2007
CP.13
2010
CP.16
2011
CP.17
Group
Decision 5
Further guidance for the operation of the LDCF
Decision 5
Further guidance for the operation of the LDCF
Decision 6
Extension of the mandate of the LDC Expert
Group
Decision 10
Further guidance to the LDCF
Decision 29 (+ Annex)
Establishment of a LDC Expert Group
Decision 7
Extension of the mandate of the LDC Expert
Group
Decision 4
Extension of the mandate of the LDC Expert
Group
Decision 8
Extension of the mandate of the LDC Expert
Group
Decision 6
Extension of the mandate of the LDC Expert
Group
Decision 10
Scientific, technical & socio-economic aspects of
impacts of, and vulnerability and adaptation to
climate change […]
Decision 1
Buenos Aires programme of work on adaptation
and response measures
Decision 2 (+ Annex)
Five year programme of work of the SB-STA on
impacts, vulnerability and adaptation to climate
change
Decision 6
Nairobi work programme on impacts,
vulnerability and adaptation to climate change
Decision 1
Bali Action Plan
Decision 1
The Cancun Agreements: Outcome of the WGLTCA under the Convention
Decision 2 (+ Annex V)
Outcome of the AH-WG-LTCA under the
Convention
8-9
9-10
11-12
35-37
14-16
15
12
36
11-12
19
2-6
5-9
3-4
3-7
2-31
4-54
33
2012
National
Adaptation
Plans
2010
2011
2012
Work
Programme
on loss and
damage
2010
2011
2012
CP.18 Decision 11
Work of the Adaptation Committee
CP.16 Decision 1
The Cancun Agreements: Outcome of the WGLTCA under the Convention
CP.17 Decision 5 (+ Annex)
National Adaptation Plans
CP.18 Decision 12
National Adaptation Plans
CP.16 Decision 1
The Cancun Agreements: Outcome of the WGLTCA under the Convention
CP.17 Decision 7 (+ Annex)
Work programme on loss and damage
CP.18 Decision 3
Approaches to address loss and damage associated
with climate change impacts in developing
countries that are particularly vulnerable […] to
enhance adaptive capacity
2
2-31
80-86
3-5
2-31
5-8
21-24
3.5.3. DATA ANALYSIS
The decision texts were coded using Atlas.ti, a qualitative analysis software. The specific
codes used in this study were not established prior to the start of the coding process; the content
of the texts themselves helped determined the necessary codes, in an attempt to reduce risk of
influence from researcher assumptions about expected findings. This was done with the purpose
of explicitly addressing the recommendation often made by critics of discourse analysis; to
suspend all pre-existing assumptions and expectations about the discourse, and the context in
which it occurs and to let the text ‘speak for itself’(Fairclough 2003, Hansen 2006, Waitt 2010).
No key-word searches were done prior to having fully read through all of the texts under
consideration in this study for that same reason. While establishing the codes throughout the
iterative rounds of reading, I sought to be sensitive to context, practices, attitudes and themes in
line with Fairclough (2003), while also flagging the elements that frame the identities entrenched
34
in the discourse in line with Hansen (2006). All codes were numbered as they were created to
keep track of the chronology in which they were established. The detailed list of codes devised
during the execution of this study is provided in the Appendix section. My impressions and
thoughts were also logged in a personal journal throughout the entire process. The rationale for
these steps, in line with critical, constructivist and post-structuralist thought, was to try to reduce
the potential biases that could occur by being reflexive throughout (Blommaert & Bulcaen 2000,
Bucholtz 2001, Waitt 2010)
The review and coding of the texts was carried out through iterative rounds of reading to
try to avoid omitting any relevant information, or misinterpretations. This lengthy process took
place over a period of several months, from October 2013 to March 2014. The coding strategy
used sought to help organize the textual data for thematic analysis of the discourse on climate
change adaptation and its referent identities, while also extracting specific quotes that have
meaning and effects for the participation of indigenous peoples, and their access to adaptation
funding. The detailed steps of the coding and journaling strategy used are described in Table
3.3.
After having completed the review and coding process described above, the coded texts
and the second research journal were then reviewed for two analogous purposes. The first was to
extract the elements that make up the identities established by the discourse on adaptation in CP
decisions, and map out the relationships between them using Hansen’s analytical framework.
The second was to organize the data in order to present a visual depiction of the major trends and
shifts apparent in the adaptation discourse over time in the form of a story-board timeline.
Finally, additional elements relevant to the thesis aim and objectives, including references to
indigenous and/or traditional peoples, practices and knowledge for instance were also extracted,
35
chronologically organized, examined for themes and trends and integrated into the timeline. In
all cases, review sought to identify the potential effects of truth, silencing effects and
inconsistencies that the discourse could impose based on these representations of the discursive
elements that constitute the text, the relationships between them, and the context in which they
occur.
Table 3.3. Coding and Journaling Strategy
Steps
KEY STEPS:
Familiarization
Text Stream
All KEY STEP
decision texts
(both CP and CMP)
KEY STEPS:
Second readthrough
KEY STEP decisions
(CP only)
WORK STREAMS:
In depth readthrough
KEY STEPS
(the Convention and
Kyoto Protocol only)
&
All adaptation work
stream decision texts
Coding
Skim through all
decisions. Only code
those paragraphs that
directly reference
adaptation and/or
indigenous peoples.
Look for elements that
constitute identities,
and consider the themes
and topics addressed.
Perfect the coding
strategy by eliminating
repetitive codes and
incorporating new
codes as needed. Only
code those paragraphs
that directly reference
adaptation and/or
indigenous peoples.
Review of coding in the
Convention and Kyoto
Protocol texts, and code
through all adaptation
work stream decisions.
Give particular
attention to language,
identities, themes,
trends, and topics.
Journaling
Keep track of
general impressions
and thoughts on the
texts (reflexive
exercise), and keep
notes on coding
strategy
development.
Keep track of
general impressions
and thoughts on the
texts (reflexive
exercise), and keep
notes on coding
strategy
development.
In a second research
journal, take detailed
notes on the relevant
elements in decision
texts with regards to
the thesis aims and
objectives.
36
3.5.4. POSITIONALITY
I am a French Canadian female researcher interested in indigenous issues, particularly
in terms of rights and social justice, and sensitive to indigenous peoples, practices and
knowledge in general. I am based in a research team that works closely with indigenous peoples
and communities in the Canadian Arctic, the Peruvian Amazon, and remote areas of Uganda. In
the context of this work with the Climate Change Adaptation Research Group at McGill, I have
also had the opportunity to attend three CP meetings as a non-governmental research-based
observer; CP.16, CP.17, and CP.18. At these CP events, I have attended a number of negotiation
and plenary sessions, side-events, exhibits and press-release events, and met and discussed with
members of indigenous peoples’ organizations and observers from developing countries about
their experiences and thoughts on the process. I have also had the opportunity to visit one of the
Indigenous Health Adaptation to Climate Change project communities in Mukongoro, Uganda, a
Batwa settlement during the summer of 2013. I am empathetic towards indigenous peoples from
all countries, at all levels of development, and I am sensitive to the effects of colonial legacies.
My desire to focus on the adaptation discourse in the UNFCCC and its implications for
indigenous peoples at all levels stems for the most part from my personal values, interests, and
experiences as a researcher, as well as my disciplinary background as a geographer. Though I am
conscious that climate change adaptation is rigidly framed as a developing country issue in the
UNFCCC based on the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective
capabilities, as will be explained in Chapter 4 and 5; I am also critical of the silencing effects of
the discourse for indigenous peoples inhabiting developed nations, who in some cases are just as
marginalized, impoverished, and vulnerable to the impacts of climate change as some of the least
developed countries (Ford et al. 2010). I do not want to diminish the experience and
37
justifications for adaptation support for developing countries and seem insensitive towards the
established structure of the discourse, given that it was negotiated through over 40 years of
international diplomatic efforts. However, I do seek to bring attention to the inconsistencies in
the discourse with the goal of creating a space for the formal consideration of the adaptation
needs of indigenous peoples who are highly vulnerable to climate change in tandem to those
from the most vulnerable countries from the developing world.
I understand that attempting to redefine what it means to be ‘particularly vulnerable to the
adverse effects of climate change’, assigning responsibility, and deciding on the appropriate
response at all levels of governance is, in and of itself, a political challenge that involves value
judgements (Klein 2009).
38
CHAPTER 4. RESULTS
This chapter presents the results of the textual analysis of the CP and CMP decisions
listed in Tables 3.1 and 3.2, ties them back to the context of the literature review, and addresses
the first sub-question that this study seeks to answer by characterizing what constitutes the
discourse on climate change adaptation, as embedded in the official decisions rendered by the
Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC. The first section of this chapter then provides some
context with regards to the kind of language used here to review the results of this study, while
the remainder of the chapter considers those results.
4.1. GAME THEORY AND THE GAME ANALOGY
Before exploring the results of this study however, it is necessary to provide some
context with regards to the kind of language used here to discuss state behaviour within the
bounds of the UNFCCC CP. In the study of state behaviour in the international system in the
political sciences, game analogies are often used to explain (or predict) how and why states
interact the way they do, given often competing sovereign interests and the absence of a
centralized world authority. Game theorists understand states as rational actors that make
calculated decisions based on a variety of interests both domestic and international, where
different perceived payoff structures are assumed to foster different behaviours. In iterated
games (interactions), as opposed to single-play games for instance, players (states) with similar
and competing interest alike are more likely to cooperate in the present if they believe it might
increase the odds for pay-offs in the future. In theory, international regimes and institutions are
said to help make this possible, particularly in games that have a significant number of players,
39
by establishing rules, procedures, and mechanisms facilitating cooperative iterative interaction
(Oye 1985).
Although the consideration of perceived pay-off structures created by state interactions in
UNFCCC negotiations and their effects lie outside of the scope of this thesis (for an example of
game theory applied to UNFCCC CP negotiations, see Smead et al. 2014), some of the
terminology used by game theorists is used here to help frame the results in a way that reflects
the reality that national delegations face when participating in these intergovernmental
endeavours. Hence-forth the term players will refer to the Parties to the Convention, and the
game will refer to the institutionalised cooperative process to address climate change adaptation
established through UNFCCC CP and CMP decisions.
4.2. THE OFFICIAL ADAPTATION DISCOURSE IN UNFCCC CP DECISIONS, 1992-2012
4.2.1. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE DISCOURSE
Guiding principles of the Convention
The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and all subsequent
decisions, protocols and agreements rendered by the CP are built around, and operate according
to both implicit and explicit guiding principles that set the rules of the playing field in which
state representatives can then interact in an attempt to respond to, and address the causes and
impacts of climate change. Some of these principles are explicitly identified as such in Article 3
of the Convention, while others are referred to either directly and/or indirectly throughout the
text without being explicitly identified as such. These principles are the result of the long process
of intergovernmental negotiation that lead to the emergence of the international climate change
regime and the birth of the UNFCCC, as detailed in Chapter 2. Accordingly, this section
40
identifies these principles, examines how they contribute to shaping the rules of the game, and
ties them back to the emergence of global environmental regimes.
Article 3 of the Convention identifies five overarching principles that are the basis of all
action to address climate change through the Convention. These five principles are consistently
cited and reiterated throughout all decisions, agreements and protocols considered in this study,
framing the boundaries of the game. In the first principle, Parties are encouraged to “protect the
climate system for the benefit of present and future generations of humankind, on the basis of
equity and in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities and respective
capabilities” (p.4). In the second principle, Parties are urged to give full consideration to the
“specific needs and special circumstances of developing country Parties […] that are particularly
vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change, and […] that would have to bear a
disproportionate or abnormal burden under the Convention” (p.4). Both these principles speak to
the commonly shared notion that developed countries are responsible for the majority for historic
and current emissions, while also having the financial and institutional capacity to address
climate change and its adverse effects given their level of socio-economic development.
Correspondingly, developing nations are seen as having little to no responsibility for historic and
current emissions and lack the capacity to address climate change or adapt to its negative effects
given their lower levels of development and higher rates of poverty. This particular framing
tends to portray developing countries as victims, and places blame on developed country Parties.
In this case then, based on the principle of equity, developed nations are expected to take the lead
in halting greenhouse gas emissions and give particular attention to the needs and special
circumstances of developing country Parties, especially those that are particularly vulnerable to
climate change, or that would experience an unfair burden under the Convention. Developed
41
country Parties are expected to assist these Parties, whether financially or in kind through
mechanisms of the Convention, in implementing their commitments under the Convention, in
responding to the negative socio-economic impact of response measures, adapt to the adverse
effects of climate change and take advantage of the opportunities. Principles 1 and 2 of the
Convention then, can be seen as a variation of three principles that are at the basis of
contemporary global environmental governance; the principle of intergenerational equity, the
principle of common but differentiated responsibilities between developed and developing
countries, and the polluter pays principle, as discussed in Chapter 2.
In the third principle listed in Article 3 of the Convention, Parties are urged to use the
precautionary principle and not let the potential lack of scientific certainty be used as a reason for
postponing cost-effective measures to prevent, anticipate or minimize the adverse effects of
climate change and address the causes, particularly “[w]here there are threats of serious or
irreversible damage” (p.4). It is then proposed that these efforts should follow a comprehensive
process and may involve cooperative efforts by interested Parties. The fourth principle states that
all Parties have a right to, and should promote sustainable economic development, as this is
assumed to be “essential for adopting measures to address climate change” (p.5) by increasing
the financial and institutional capacity of nations, enabling them to better implement their
commitments under the Convention. In such a context, also recalling the principle of equity and
common but differentiated responsibilities and capabilities, it is implied that developing country
Parties’ share of global greenhouse gas emissions will continue to grow in order to allow them to
meet their socio-economic development needs. This idea is consistently reiterated throughout
subsequent decisions by the Conference of the Parties, where, for instance, “economic and social
42
development and poverty eradication are [understood as being] the first and overriding priorities
of the developing country Parties” (Decision 5, CP.7, 2001, preamble).
The fifth principle continues to build on these assumptions, and encourages Parties to
“cooperate to promote a supportive and open international economic system that would lead to
sustainable economic growth and development in all Parties, particularly developing country
Parties” (p.5) allowing them to build or improve their capacity to address climate change. Parties
are also reminded here, that all measures taken to address climate change, whether multilateral or
unilateral in nature, should not unfairly or arbitrarily penalize states’ participation in, or create
restrictions on international trade. Though the purpose of the Convention is to foster effective
action between states with the goal of preventing dangerous interference with the climate system,
the wording in the third, fourth and fifth principles of the Convention has effects of truth. These
principles markedly prioritize sustained economic growth and development, and the eradication
of poverty as having precedence over climate actions. The prioritizing of economic development
and poverty eradication has been documented as stemming from the strong negotiating stance
that developing countries took at the 1992 Rio Conference, in an attempt to protect their right to
development from what they perceived as a new wave of colonialism (Porras 1992, Xiang &
Meehan 2005).
Although not explicitly listed in Article 3, but crucial to the operation of the UNFCCC
nonetheless, is the principle of sovereign equality of states, embodied here though consensus
decision-making, and also implying the right to self-determination, and the no significant harm
principle. As is mentioned in the preamble to the Convention, in accordance with the principles
of international law and the Charter of the United Nations, states have the sovereign right to selfdetermination. This not only implies that nations have the right to exploit their resources
43
pursuant to self-determined national policies, but that they also have the responsibility to “ensure
that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to the environment of
other States or of areas beyond the limits of [their] national jurisdiction” (p.2). Consensus
decision-making in the Conference of the Parties firmly establishes the principle of sovereign
equality of states, and the suggestive rather than prescriptive language used in Article 3 (see
words that are italicized in the previous paragraphs of this section) reinforces the effects of truth
relating to states’ right to self-determination. These overarching yet implicit norms about state
sovereignty and international treaties are also expressed indirectly throughout the Convention
text, as well as in the subsequent decisions, agreements and protocols from CPs and CMPs
considered in this study, through the persistent use of the terms country-driven and nationally
appropriate to characterize Parties’ commitments and contributions. It is noteworthy here to
mention that the code TC7 – country-driven / state-centric was the code most used, of all the
codes established in the textual analysis; a total of 61 times (for a list of the main codes
developed in this study and the frequency at which they were used, see Appendix 2).
In short, the language used to establish both the implicit and explicit principles that guide
the Convention reviewed in this section reaffirms overarching principles related to sovereignty
that prevail in today’s international world order. Furthermore, the explicit content of Article 3
entrenches differentiated roles, priorities and pathways for addressing climate change between
developing and developed Parties, and sets the rules of the game within which countries must
operate. Together, these principles frame what Parties to the Convention have collectively
accepted should constitute appropriate responses to climate change at the global scale through
this institution.
44
Convention objectives and the shifting role of adaptation
The role of adaptation in the Convention has greatly evolved since the UNFCCC was first
envisioned and ratified in the early 1990s. Indeed, the content of Article 2 indicates that
adaptation was not initially conceptualised by the Conference of the Parties as a key component
to a balanced approach to addressing climate change as it is today. At the time, the ultimate
objective of the Convention, as stated in Article 2, was solely to stabilize “greenhouse gas
concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous interference with the
climate system” (p.4). The idea was to achieve this in a sufficient time frame to enable
environments to adapt naturally. Climate policy analysts have documented this tendency to
marginalize the focus on adaptation policies in favour of mitigation in the early years of the
global climate regime (Schipper 2006, Pielke et al. 2007, Gupta 2010, Khan & Timmons Roberts
2013). Given the available knowledge on climate change at the time, and in the context of global
efforts to prevent climate change, adaptation was viewed as a ‘defeatist’ approach that insinuated
that mitigation would fail, or that only served the interests of countries that were unwilling to cut
emissions. Discussion of adaptation was also said to be avoided by developed country Parties,
who saw it as an implicit acceptance of their responsibility for causing climate change.
Discussion of adaptation policies were thus avoided during these early years (Schipper 2006,
Khan & Timmons Roberts 2013). Overall, the idea was that if mitigation measures were properly
implemented, in an efficient and timely manner so as to prevent dangerous interference with the
climate system, there would be little to no adverse effects for ecosystems, and so there was little
to no incentive, or interest in establishing formal adaptation measures through the Convention
(Schipper 2006). Accordingly, references to adaptation to the adverse effects of climate change
in the Convention text are minimal, general in scope, are quite sparse in the text in general. For
45
instance, the word adaptation and variation (adapt*) only come up 6 times in the 25 pages of the
Convention text, whereas references to mitigation through reduction of greenhouse gas emissions
are implied throughout.
In the few paragraphs that do touch upon adaptation, in Article 4 for instance, which lists
the commitments of the Parties under the Convention, two important themes arise: (1) capacitybuilding to facilitate adaptation through assessments, strategies and planning, and knowledge
creation and dissemination, and (2) finance to assist developing countries that are particularly
vulnerable meet the costs of adaptation. As will be shown later in this Chapter, these themes
become the basis of all future action on, and funding for adaptation in the Convention. The first
theme is referred to in Article 4, paragraphs 1(b), and 1(e). Paragraph 1(b) invites all Parties to
regularly update and disseminate national and regional programs detailing mitigation efforts, as
well as “measures to facilitate adequate adaptation to climate change” (p.5), while paragraph 1(e)
invites Parties to “[c]ooperate in preparing for adaptation to the impacts of climate change” (p.5),
by developing integrated plans for natural resource and ecosystems management, and protection
and rehabilitation of areas sensitive to drought, desertification, and floods. This first theme of
facilitation, or capacity-building would begin to be realized almost a decade later, through the
Least Developed Countries Expert Group (LDC EG), the Nairobi Work Programme on Impacts,
Vulnerability and Adaptation (Nairobi WP), and NAPAs. The second theme originates in
paragraph 4 of the same Article, which calls upon developed nations to assist “developing
country Parties that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change in
meeting the costs of adaptation to those adverse effects” (p.8). Though this commitment is
accepted into the Convention 1992, funds for adaptation were only first established in 1997 and
46
ratified in 1998 through the Kyoto Protocol, at CP7 in 2001 in Marrakesh, and CP16 in Cancun
in 2010.
Continuing on the themes of facilitation and finance of potential adaptations to the
adverse effects of climate change, and in correspondence with principles 1 and 2 of the
Convention, Article 4, paragraph 8 and 9 then identifies those developing countries that are seen
as most deserving of having their specific needs and concerns about the adverse effects of
climate change, and/or of mitigation measures addressed through funding, insurance and
technology transfers, and singles out least developed countries (LDCs) as the most likely
benefactors of funding and technology transfers regarding all aspects of the Convention.
Together, these elements have an effect of truth, and frame adaptation as a developing country or
development issue. And, as will be argued throughout this chapter, Article 4, paragraphs 8 and 9
becomes one of the key components to guide focus of the adaptation discourse at subsequent CPs
and CMPs, and makes some actions possible but not others.
In line with the principle of no significant harm, and principles 1 and 2 of the
Convention, the Kyoto Protocol (KP) continued to characterise Parties’ commitments and embed
norms about in assigning responsibility and identifying those who should be seen as being
vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change and deserving of special consideration. The
Kyoto Protocol explicitly requests developed country Parties to implement policies, measures,
and commitments under the Protocol in such a way as to minimize the adverse effects of climate
change and response measures on other Parties, especially developing countries and in particular
those identified in Article 4, paragraphs 8 and 9 of the Convention (see KP Article 2, paragraph
3; and KP Article 3, paragraph 14). This framing has effect of truth; it assigns blame and
47
responsibility to developed country Parties, and victimized developing country Parties,
particularly those listed in Article 4, paragraphs 8 and 9 of the Convention.
As noted earlier in this section, the first hint of a formal mechanism that would eventually
lead to funding for adaptation through the Convention was established through the Kyoto
Protocol’s Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). As Article 12, paragraph 8 points out, a
portion of the proceeds from certified project activities would eventually be made available to
assist “developing country Parties that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of
climate change to meet the costs of adaptation” (p.12). The Adaptation Fund, created at the
conference in Marrakesh in 2001 to funnel funds from certified projects from the CDM so as to
finance concrete adaptation programmes and projects in developing countries that are Parties to
the Kyoto Protocol, would only become operational nearly a decade later (Biagini et al. 2014,
Sherman & Ford 2014). It is noteworthy here that it has been argued by climate policy analysts
this slow pace of the establishment and operationalization of funds in the UNFCCC reflects the
small sense of urgency that was felt towards adaptation measures in comparison to mitigation in
general at that time (Schipper 2006, Gupta 2010).
In the years following the 1998 ratification of the Kyoto Protocol, the Conference of the
Parties continued to build bodies and financial mechanisms that would allow for developed
country Parties that were in a position to do so to commit to assisting developing countries
identified in Article 4, paragraphs 8 and 9 of the Convention adapt to the adverse effects of
climate change. Although mitigation remained as the ultimate objective of the Convention, the
discursive space given to adaptation seemed to be growing slowly, but surely. As will be
examined in greater detail in the following section of this chapter, formal funding and capacitybuilding arrangement for adaptation began to appear in decisions made under the Convention
48
from 2001 onwards. Of course, all of these decisions focus on establishing the rules, processes
and priorities to facilitate the provision of financial and technical assistance by developed
country Parties to developing country Parties, and more particularly LDC Parties. Some climate
policy analysts have tied this framing of adaptation as a developing country issue in the
UNFCCC to the framing of adaptation in the Third Assessment Report of the IPCC (AR3), that
views vulnerability to climate change and the need for adaptation as stemming primarily from
low levels of development and poverty (Huq & Toulmin 2006, Ayers & Huq 2009, Ayers et al.
2010). Accordingly, most decisions relating to adaptation from the Marrakesh CP onwards focus
on developed country obligations to assist in assessing the urgent and immediate adaptation
needs and priorities of developing country Parties, while also seeking to increase the general
understanding and assessment of impacts, vulnerability and adaptation in all Parties.
At CP.11 in 2005 in Montreal, the understanding of the role of adaptation in the
Convention began to change once more. First there was a growing understanding among the
Parties that significant changes were going to happen to the global climate system, and that
“adaptation to climate change and its adverse effects [should be] of high priority for all
countries” (Decision 2, CP.11, 2005, preamble), reiterating the heightened vulnerability of LDCs
and Small Island Developing States (SIDSs). In 2007, at CP.13 in Bali, the patterns in choice of
wording began to change in the text of the decisions made under the Convention, in line with
new scientific developments. Indeed, throughout the decision texts from Bali, the words
mitigation and adaptation begin being used together and are inserted more generically
throughout the text in nearly all decision. This general shift in discursive structure, moving from
referring to adaptation only sporadically in comparison to mitigation, to tagging the term
mitigation and adaptation at the end of nearly every paragraph in Decision 1, CP.13/2007,
49
known as the Bali Action Plan, can be linked to the then recent publication the Fourth
Assessment report of the IPCC (AR4). For instance, climate policy analysts have noted parallels
between the content and structure of IPCC Assessment reports, and discursive frames in the
UNFCCC (Huq & Toulmin 2006, Ayers et al. 2010, Gupta 2010). The IPCC’s AR4 affirmed
increasing scientific certainty about the current and potential future impacts of climate change
and the growing understanding that some degree of future change was now becoming
unavoidable (Pielke et al. 2007, Dovers 2009, Parry et al. 2009). Adaptation was increasingly
being framed in the IPCC and the UNFCCC as a necessity for all nations, and particularly for
developing countries (Huq & Toulmin 2006, Ayers et al. 2010). CP.13 was also the point in time
that marked the beginning of a gradual shifting away from solely focusing on short term
adaptation priorities in the UNFCCC, to embracing an approach that also included medium- to
long-term needs and goals. This shift is formalized and exemplified through the “shared vision
for long-term cooperative action under the Convention”, a term first coined in the Bali Road
Map, and later reiterated throughout the Cancun Agreements, and Durban Outcomes.
The next important shift in wording occurred in 2010 at CP.16, which was a pivotal
moment in the growing role of adaptation in the Convention. Indeed, it was the first time in
UNFCCC history that it was explicitly stated in the context of Convention objectives for all
Parties, that “[a]daptation must be addressed with the same priority as mitigation” (Paragraph
2(b), Decision 1, CP.16, 2010). In comparison to the wording used at CP.11 in Montreal, or
CP.13 in Bali discussed in the previous paragraphs for instance, the wording used in the Cancun
decisions is significant in that this was the first time that adaptation was explicitly and formally
placed on an equal footing with mitigation, reflecting the formally growing importance of
adaptation as a general objective of the Convention. A number of additional developments from
50
CP.16 also exemplify this trend. For example, the Adaptation Committee (AC) was created at
Cancun with the goal of providing technical support and guidance to all Parties to the
Convention, with a view of facilitating implementation of nationally appropriate adaptation
measures, and formalizing the increased role of adaptation in the Conventions. The establishment
of the AC embodies this shift in understanding in the role that adaptation should take in the
global governance of climate change, as it is the first body of its kind to not focus specifically on
the plight of developing county Parties in particular, but to focus on providing technical support
for capacity-building for all Parties of the Convention. As noteworthy as this discursive
development is, however, principles 1 & 2 of the Convention remain strongly entrenched in the
UNFCCC. And though the creation of the Adaptation Committee is a step in the right direction,
the focus of all other work streams related to adaptation remains tied to developing country
needs and interests, and the wording used in decisions relating to adaptation funding imply that
the only possible benefactors of will always be developing country Parties. In other words,
though the scope of responses for the facilitation of adaptation had expanded from focusing
primarily on developing countries to include all countries, adaptation assistance remained firmly
geared towards developing countries. Indeed, at this point in time, the shift to include mediumand long-term priorities for adaptation was, further concretized through the establishment of the
Work Programme on Loss and Damage (see Decision 1, paragraphs 25 and 26/CP.16, and
Decision 7/CP.17) and National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) (see Decision 5/CP.17), two programs
effectively constituted with the goal of assisting developing country Parties. Figure 4.1
illustrates some of these key shifts on adaptation framing in the CP and CMP decisions examined
in this study over time.
51
Figure 4.1. Adaptation discourse in CP decisions timeline, and Convention objectives
Adaptation discourse, constructed identities, and their perceived ethical responsibilities
Though the role of adaptation has significantly changed over the last 20 years of
UNFCCC history, the principles that guide action in all aspects of the Convention have largely
remained intact. Indeed, though the focus of the game may be changing, the rules that dictate
how the game is played are strongly entrenched in the UN bureaucratic cultures that brought
about the current international climate change regime, as the data of the textual analysis and the
literature review in this study indicate. The UNFCCC, like all international treaties, creates
groups to classify its signatory Parties according to responsibilities and obligations, in this case
primarily opposing developing and developed nations, where the latter is expected to provide
assistance to the former. These groups, or identities, are for the most part formalized in Article 4
of the Convention. Specific responsibilities, obligations, and commitments for respective groups,
and expected transactions between the two can then be negotiated within the bounds of what
these identities, and what the principles that guide them allow for.
52
The figure below then, displays these identities as constituted by the UNFCCC in the
context of adaptation. This figure displays the spatial, temporal and ethical elements that
constitute these identities, as per the identity-policy analytical model based on Hansen (2006),
and discussed in the study design chapter of this thesis. It is important to reiterate here that there
is no institutionalized hierarchy between the Parties to the Convention in the UNFCCC, given
that the institution abides by the principle of sovereign equality of all its member state. However,
it does impose differing obligations to the distinct groups based on principles 1 & 2 of the
Convention (Article 3). It should also be noted here that this figure illustrates only those
identities that the embedded discourse in CP and CMP decisions constitutes as its referent
subjects: the Parties to the Convention, or nation-states. This means that even though non-state
actors such as indigenous peoples and organizations do participate in CP and CMP events, given
that they are not are not categorized by the discourse as referents, non-state constituents are not
considered here. Their absence from the discourse should be seen here has silencing effect,
which will be discussed later in this chapter.
53
Figure 4.2. Referent identities constituted by the discourse on adaptation in CP decisions
54
As the top level of Figure 4.2 above demonstrates, there is a clear dichotomy between the
Parties to the UNFCCC, as is the case with most institutions in international environmental
regimes, splitting Parties into two distinct groups, namely developed and developing nations,
formally identified in this case as Annex I and non-Annex I Parties respectively, though no
hierarchy exists between them. As mentioned in the literature review of this study, such
differentiated roles and responsibilities dichotomized between developed and developing
counties is common practice in the Rio Conventions, and typical of contemporary global
environmental governance agreements. As specified above, developed country Parties are known
to be largely responsible for anthropogenically induced climate change given their major
contribution greenhouse gas emissions, owing to the timing of their industrial revolutions, the
kinds of technologies developed and used over centuries, and the high intensity of their
emissions today (high per/capita emissions). The discursive structure also assumes here that
Annex I Parties, who are socio-economically well-off because of their long history of industrial
development, have both the financial and institutional capacities to adapt to the adverse effects of
climate change on their own. Developing countries on the other hand, have contributed to a
much lesser extent to historical emissions, and still contribute relatively little to current
emissions (relatively low per/capita emissions in comparison to Annex I Parties). Because of
their lower levels of socio-economic development it is also assumed that non-Annex I Parties
have lower adaptive capacities, where they are understood to lack the appropriate financial
resources, institutional infrastructure, and scientific knowledge to adapt to the adverse effects of
climate change on their own. In this context, the discourse holds Annex I Parties are responsible
and are thus expected to provide financial and technical support for adaptation to non-Annex I
Parties. The discourse also tends to victimize Non-Annex I Parties, and frames them as deserving
55
of, or necessitating outside intervention to obtain the financial and technical support that they
need in order to be able to help themselves.
As can be seen in the lower level of identities of Figure 4.2., both Annex I and nonAnnex I Parties are further divided into subgroups, and organized by the varying degrees of
responsibilities and obligations ascribed to them. First, Annex I Parties are subdivided into two
groups: Annex II Parties, and Economies in Transition. The former is composed of all the
members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), while the
latter consists of former Soviet nations. OECD countries are assumed to have stronger economies
and so seen as being in a better position to assist non-Annex one parties in meeting the costs of
adaptation. For that matter, Annex II Parties are generally urged to contribute to UNFCCC funds
created to assist non-Annex I Parties adapt to climate change (among other things), whereas EITs
are usually invited to contribute if capable.
Non-Annex I Parties on the other hand, are subdivided into three distinct groups: least
developed country Parties, developing country Parties that are particularly vulnerable to the
adverse effects of climate change, and the remaining developing country Parties not included in
the first two groups. As a key component of the adaptation discourse, Article 4, paragraph 8 and
9 is central to the classification of non-Annex I Parties and assignment of their respective duties
under the Convention. First, LDC Parties, referred to in Article 4, paragraph 9 (those 49
countries with the lowest Human Development Indexes), are seen as having the lowest adaptive
capacity given their low levels of socio-economic development and so are viewed as being the
most deserving of assistance from Annex I Parties. LDCs are also required to submit to capacitybuilding exercises and processes developed throughout the years by the Conference of the
Parties, and are offered additional financial support to help them commit to these capacity-
56
building processes. Second, the group of developing country Parties that are coined particularly
vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change is somewhat permeable in comparison to the
LDC group. Although the title usually refers to those countries that correspond with Article 4,
paragraph 8 and 9 of the Convention (detailed in Figure 4.3 below), the term refers more
explicitly to LDCs, SIDSs and Africa in a number of specific instances (see for instance
Decisions 1, paragraph 1(c), CP.13/2007). As Klein (2009) suggests, the abstract concept of
‘countries that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change’ is a highly
politicized concept that leaves open to interpretation the identification of which countries this
explicitly refers to.
8. In the implementation of the commitments in this Article, the Parties shall give full
consideration to what actions are necessary under the Convention, including actions related to
funding, insurance and the transfer of technology, to meet the specific needs and concerns of
developing country Parties arising from the adverse effects of climate change and/or the impact
of implementation of response measures, especially on:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
Small island countries;
Countries with low-lying coastal areas;
Countries with arid and semi-arid areas, forested areas and areas liable to forest decay;
Countries with areas prone to natural disasters;
Countries with areas liable to drought and desertification;
Countries with areas of high urban atmospheric pollution;
Countries with areas with fragile ecosystems, including mountainous ecosystems;
Countries whose economies are highly dependent on income generated from the
production, processing and export, and/or consumption of fossil fuels and associated
energy-intensive products; and
(i) Landlocked and transit countries
Further, the Conference of the Parties may take actions, as appropriate, with respect to this
paragraph.
9. The Parties shall take full account of the specific needs and special situations of the least
developed countries in their actions with regard to funding and transfer of technology.
Figure 4.3. Article 4, paragraphs 8 and 9 of the Convention
57
It is interesting to note here that among those countries that are included in Article 4,
paragraphs 8 and 9, there is a high degree of variation in levels of socio-economic development,
and ensuing varying degrees of adaptation needs and adaptive capacity. The common thread
between these countries lies in their heightened sensitivity to climate change, though no ranking
between them exists. Finally, the last Party group identity formulated in the decisions considered
in this study are the remaining developing country Parties not included in Article 4, paragraphs 8
and 9 of the Convention. This smaller group of ‘other developing country Parties’ are seen as
less vulnerable that the other two groups of developing country Parties (although they are still
defined as vulnerable in comparison to Annex-I Parties), and so are often invited to participate in
the facilitation process that is required for LDC Parties and non-Annex I Parties that are
particularly vulnerable to climate change, and can qualify for some but not all adaptation
funding.
Adaptation work streams
Having now reviewed the principles that guide action through the Convention, it’s slowly
shifting objectives and the identities and respective responsibilities it constitutes for its signatory
Parties, it becomes possible to discuss the discursive trends found in the adaptation work stream
decisions. The list of these decisions is provided in Table 3.2. These 31 decisions, some relevant
to multiple work streams, are seen here as forming basis of the official discourse on climate
change adaptation in CP decisions. This affirmation is made here based on the following logic;
these decisions are specifically named by the UNFCCC Secretariat on its website as being the
58
relevant decisions for each of these work streams. They will be examined here chronologically
and thematically to demonstrate the apparent trends found in the adaptation discourse.
The adaptation discourse timeline displayed in Figure 4.4 will be used throughout the
remaining sections of this chapter to help visually demonstrate how the findings of the textual
analysis overlap. The figure uses the Convention objectives timeline from Figure 4.1 and
expands it to include specific details on the Adaptation work streams and the adaptation
discourse that they perpetuate. In its simplified version here, relevant discursive elements will be
laid over top it to help reveal how the discourse evolved over time, uncover what trends are
apparent, and help explain what it might means for indigenous peoples.
As mentioned in the section on Convention objectives and the shifting role of adaptation
in addressing climate change, there have been two major trends in terms of the scope of
adaptation priorities in CP decisions over time. Initially, the focus of adaptation activities
through the Convention was oriented towards identifying and addressing urgent and immediate
priorities, especially in developing country Parties. But in the mid-2000s, as the components of
this short-term strategy had made considerable progress, a parallel focus on medium- to longterm adaptation priorities began to take shape, building upon the institutional capacities
developed for the former. Table 4.1 below organized the six adaptation work streams according
to these two themes and summarizes their respective mandates.
59
LDCF
SCCF
AF
GCF
Figure 4.4. Adaptation discourse in CP decisions, and adaptation work streams
60
Table 4.1. Adaptation work streams by scope and focus of activities
Focuses primarily on urgent and immediate
adaptation needs and priorities
NAPAs
National reports communicating priority
activities addressing urgent and immediate
needs and concerns of the LDCs relating to the
adverse effects of climate change.
(Annex to Decision 28, CP.7, paragraph 1)
Shifting focus to include medium- and longterm adaptation needs and priorities
Adaptation Committee
Advisory body established to provide technical
support, guidance, information and
recommendations to the Conference of the
Parties so as to promote the implementation of
enhanced action on adaptation in a coherent
manner.
(Decision2, CP.17, Paragraphs 92 and 93)
LDC Expert Group*
NAPs
Advisory body for LDCs on the preparation
National reports, building on the NAPAs
and implementation strategy for NAPAs.
experience, identifying medium- and long-term
(Annex to Decision 29, CP.7, paragraph 1)
adaptation needs of LDCs (and interested
developing country Parties) and developing
strategies and programmes to address those
needs.
(Annex to Decision 5, CP.17)
Nairobi Work Programme
Work Programme on loss and damage
Advisory body for developing country Parties
Advisory body to the Conference of the Parties
in particular, including LDCs and SIDSs,
established to consider potential approaches to
aiming to improve understanding and
loss and damage associated with climate
assessment of impacts, vulnerability and
change in developing countries that are
adaptation, in the goal of assisting Parties to
particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects,
make informed decision on practical adaptation including impacts related to extreme weather
actions and measures in response to climate
events and slow onset events.
change.
(Decision 7, CP.17)
(Annex to Decision 2, CP.11, paragraph 1)
*The mandate of the LDC Expert Group was extended in Decision 6, CP.16, paragraph 2(b) to
also assist LDCs in identifying medium- to long-term adaptation needs and concerns, but was
initially created with its sole focus being urgent and immediate needs of LDCs
The work streams developed in this first era of the adaptation discourse, understood here
are those work streams established though CP decisions that take place before CP.13 in Bali
focusing solely on urgent and immediate adaptation priorities, include the LDC Work
Programme (NAPAs and LDC EG) and the Nairobi Work Programme. The LDC WP facilitates
adaptation planning and capacity-building through the NAPAs exercise supported by the LDC
61
EG, but also provides financial assistance through the LDC Fund (LDCF), established to support
the implementation work programme.
Three funds were created at CP.7 in Marrakesh in the context of urgent and immediate
adaptation priorities. The LDCF mentioned in the previous paragraph, the Special Climate
Change Fund (SCCF) and the Adaptation Fund (AF), and at CP.16 in Cancun the Green Climate
Fund (GCF). Although the GCF was created much later than the other three fund, its focus for
the allocation of funds towards adaptation is primarily targeted towards the “urgent and
immediate needs of developing countries that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of
climate change, including LDCs, SIDS and African States” (paragraph 52, Annex to Decision 3,
CP.17/2011, p.64), and so should be included here. All four funds, their mandates and the source
of their funds are detailed in Table 5.4 below. It is also noteworthy to mention here that in the
SCCF adaptation activities to address the adverse impacts of climate change have top priority for
funding, as do technology transfers and its associated capacity-building activities (paragraph 1(c)
and (d), Decision 5, CP.9/2003, p.11). This prioritizing of adaptation funding in the SCCF, a
fund that also contributed to funding for mitigation-related actions, has effects of truth; where the
approach contributed to reinforcing assumptions about vulnerabilities and ‘helplessness’ of
developing country Parties.
Table 4.2. Adaptation-related funds under the Convention and the Kyoto Protocol
Inception
Decision 5,
CP.7/ 2001
Fund Name
Least
Developed
Countries
Fund
(LDCF)
Mandate
Focus
To support the LDC work
Adaptation
programme. This includes
the preparation and
implementation of NAPAs,
and the operation of the LDC
Expert Group, among other
things.
Funding Source
Voluntary
contributions from
Annex II Parties,
and other Parties
included in Annex
I that are in a
position to do so
62
Decision 7,
CP.7/2001
Special
Climate
Change Fund
(SCCF)
Decision 10,
CP.7/2001
Adaptation
Fund (AF)
Decision 1,
CP.16/2010
Green
Climate
Fund (GCF)
To finance activities,
programmes and measures
relating to climate change in
non-Annex I Parties in the
following areas:
(a) Adaptation, in
accordance with
paragraph 8 of
Decision 5, CP.7*
(b) Transfer of
technologies
(c) Energy, transport,
industry, agriculture,
forestry and waste
management
(d) Activities to assist
Parties referred to in
Article 4, paragraph
8(h)**, in
diversifying their
economies
To finance concrete
adaptation projects and
programmes (including the
activities listed in
paragraph 8 of Decision 5,
CP.7*) in developing
country Parties that are
Parties to the Kyoto Protocol
Mitigation
AND
Adaptation
Voluntary
contributions from
Annex II Parties,
and other Parties
included in Annex
I that are in a
position to do so
Adaptation
Proceeds from the
Clean
Development
Mechanism, and
voluntary
donations from
Annex I Parties
that are Parties to
the Kyoto Protocol
Voluntary
contributions from
Annex II Parties,
and other Parties
included in Annex
I that are in a
position to do so
To provide scaled-up, new
Mitigation
and additional, predictable
AND
and adequate funding to
Adaptation
developing country Parties,
with a balanced allocation
between adaptation and
mitigation, taking into
account the urgent and
immediate needs of
developing country Parties
that are particularly
vulnerable to the adverse
effects of climate change,
including LDCs, SIDSs, and
Africa.
* See Figure 4.5. for decision text / ** See Figure 4.3. for decision text
63
8. Decides that the implementation of the following activities shall be supported through the
special climate change fund (in accordance with Decision 7, CP.7) and/or the adaptation fund (in
accordance with Decision 10, CP.7), and other bilateral and multilateral sources:
(a) Starting to implement adaptation activities promptly where sufficient information is
available to warrant such activities, inter alia, in the areas of water resources
management, land management, agriculture, health, infrastructure development, fragile
ecosystems, including mountainous ecosystems, and integrated coastal zone
management;
(b) Improving the monitoring of diseases and vectors affected by climate change, and related
forecasting and early-warning systems, and in this context improving disease control and
prevention;
(c) Supporting capacity building, including institutional capacity, for preventive measures,
planning, preparedness and management of disasters relating to climate change, including
contingency planning, in particular, for droughts and floods in areas prone to extreme
weather events;
(d) Strengthening existing and, where needed, establishing national and regional centres and
information networks for rapid response to extreme weather events, utilizing information
technology as much as possible;
Figure 4.5. Decision 5,paragraph 8, CP.7/2001
As mentioned in the previous sections of this chapter, a shift occurred in the framing of
the adaptation discourse at CP.13; the shift of focus to include medium- to long-term adaptation
priorities along-side urgent and immediate priorities, explicitly typified in the Bali Action Plan in
the shared vision for long-term cooperative action. Three work streams were added to the
UNFCCC’s adaptation work stream inventory: the AC, NAPs, and the Work Programme on Loss
and Damage (L&D). The AC, the first UNFCCC body to explicitly focus on providing support
for the facilitation of adaptation in all Parties, was established in Bali, under the Ad Hoc
64
Working Group on Long-Term Cooperative Action (AH-WG-LTCA) also created in Bali. NAPs
and L&D were later established at CP.16 in Cancun.
4.2.2. DISCLAIMERS
Before discussing the implications of the official discourse for indigenous peoples at
various scales in the next chapter of this thesis, it is noteworthy to mention that there exist a
small number of “legal disclaimers” have been identified in three decisions that are of relevance
to the adaptation discourse. Two of these disclaimers are related to specific LDC-focused
entities/endeavours, while the third is related to an agreement in its entirety. All three disclaimers
will be examined here and situated within the specifics of the discourse. These disclaimers are
explained below, and superimposed over the adaptation discourse timeline in Figure 4.6.
The first two disclaimers are found in Decisions 29, CP.7 and Decision 3, CP.11
respectively, and are both directly tied to the LDC Work Programme. The first disclaimer
appears in the decisions that established the LDC Expert Group, rendered at the 7th Conference
of the Parties in Marrakesh in 2001, and states that “taking into account the unique circumstances
of the least developed countries, the establishment of the group does not set a precedent for the
establishment of similar groups for other categories of countries” (Decision 29/CP.7, paragraph
2, p.14). A similar disclaimer surfaces not in the decision that established the LDC Fund, but
some years later in a decision providing further guidance on the operation of the Fund. Indeed,
the disclaimer in Decision 3, adopted at the 11th Conference of the Parties in Montreal in 2005,
states that “given the unique circumstances of the Least Developed Countries Fund, the operation
of the fund shall not set a precedent for other funding arrangements under the Convention”
(paragraph 7, p.10).
65
Figure 4.6. Adaptation discourse in CP decisions, and legal disclaimers
66
Both these disclaimers are inadvertently tied to the underlying assumptions of the
Convention, particularly with regards to Article 3, principles 1 and 2. These disclaimers reinforce
and further embed the roles and responsibilities of the Parties to the Convention, and limits the
possibilities for use of the argument being made for the support provided to LDCs as a precedent
for other vulnerable groups in similar contexts as LDCs, and insures the concentrated focus of
adaptation support to remain as the status quo. It can be assumed here that the insertion of these
disclaimers in Convention decisions stems from the strong positions taken by LDCs and SIDS in
CP negotiations in early 2000s with regards to adaptation funding that has been cited in the
literature as being a driving force in Convention negotiations on adaptation (Ayers & Huq 2009)
that have their roots in developing country negotiation stances at the 1992 Rio Conference
(Porras 1992).
The third disclaimer is a little less focused on specific bodies that operate within the
bounds of the Convention, and relates to the Cancun Agreements adopted in 2010. This
particular declaimer can be found in the preamble to the Cancun Agreement, and applies to the
agreement in its entirety. The disclaimer states that “[s]eeking to secure progress in a balanced
manner, with the understanding that, through this decision, not all aspects of the work of the Ad
Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention are concluded, and
that nothing in this decision shall prejudge prospects for, or the content of, a legally binding
outcome in the future” (Decision 1/CP.16, preamble, p. 2).
This last disclaimer may be somewhat less significant than the first two examined in this
section given that it does not explicitly limit the use of the content of the decision in question as
a precedent for other similar arrangements under the Convention, but rather reiterates the soft
law status of the decision.
67
4.2.3. REFERENCES TO INDIGENOUS PEOPLES, PRACTICES AND KNOWLEDGE
Now that the main components of the official discourse on adaptation have been
examined, it is possible to take a closer look at the evolving conceptualization of, and reference
to traditional and/or indigenous peoples, practices and knowledge in the texts examined in this
study, in order to examine the potential implications for indigenous peoples at different scales in
the next chapter. Accordingly, this section examines these references in detail, and situates them
within the larger themes and trends of the discourse on adaptation detailed in the previous
section. These references, listed in Table 4.3, were identified and extracted from the text as they
occurred through iterative rounds of reading and coding. They were not identified using key
word searches so as to catch any variation in wording that could relate to indigenous peoples in
one way or another that might otherwise be missed. For that matter, references to traditional
peoples, practices and knowledge are considered as relevant, and so were also included here.
Figure 4.7 below then, superimposes those references from Table 4.3 that are explicitly
relevant to one of the six work streams considered in this study over the adaptation discourse
timeline. A number of general trends can be observed here. First, prior to CP.11 in Montreal in
2005, there were no explicit references to indigenous knowledge in the decisions considered in
this study, only the more general term of traditional knowledge was used occasionally. It is
interesting to note here as well that at CP.11, decision 2 relevant to the mandate of the Nairobi
WP, makes explicit reference to the significant changes occurring in the Arctic, identifies
adaptation as a high priority for all countries and states the importance of local and indigenous
knowledge for adaptation for the first time.
68
Table 4.3. References to traditional or indigenous peoples, practices and knowledge in the texts examined in this thesis
Decision
Work
stream*
Decision title
Quote
Focus
Theme
Annex,
Decision 2,
CP.7/2001
Framework for capacity
building in developing
countries
All aspects of the
Convention
Facilitation
Annex,
Decision 28,
CP.7/2001
Guidelines for the
preparation of NAPAs
Adaptation
NAPAs
Facilitation
Decision 2,
CP.11/2005
Five-year programme of
work of the SB-STA on
impacts, vulnerability
and adaptation to
climate change
Adaptation
Nairobi WP
Facilitation
Decision 2,
CP.13/2007
Reducing emissions
from deforestation in
developing countries:
approaches to stimulate
action
"11. Existing national institutions have an
important role to play in supporting capacitybuilding activities in developing countries. Such
centres can incorporate traditional skills,
knowledge and practices, to provide
appropriate services in developing countries and
facilitate information sharing[...]" (p.9)
"10. This section will also provide an overview
of climate variability and observed and projected
climate change and associated actual and
potential adverse effects of cc. This overview
will be based on existing and ongoing studies
and research, and/or empirical and historical
information as well as traditional knowledge"
(p.11)
"Recognizing and encouraging the activities
relating to impacts, vulnerability and adaptation
to climate change undertaken by Parties and
relevant international and regional organizations
and institutions, and the importance of local and
indigenous knowledge" (p.5)
"Recognizing also that the needs of local and
indigenous communities should be addressed
when action is taken to reduce emissions from
deforestation and forest degradation in
developing countries" (p.8)
Mitigation
-
Facilitation
Decision 1,
CP.16/2010
The Cancun
Agreements: Outcome
"Noting resolution 10/4 of the UNHRC on
human rights and climate change, which
All aspects
of the
-
Facilitation
69
of the work of the AHWG-LTCA under the
Convention
recognizes that the adverse effects of climate
change have a range of direct and indirect
implications for the effective enjoyment of
human rights and that the effects of climate
change will be felt most acutely by those
segments of the population that are already
vulnerable owing to geography, gender, age,
indigenous or minority status, or disability"
(p.2)
"7. Recognizes the need to engage a broad range
of stakeholders at the global, regional, national
and local levels, be they government, including
subnational and local government, private
business or civil society, including youth and
persons with disability, and that gender equality
and the effective participation of women and
indigenous peoples are important for effective
action on all aspects of climate change" (p.3-4)
"12. Affirms that enhanced action on adaptation
should be undertaken in accordance with the
Convention, should follow a country-driven,
gender-sensitive, participatory and fully
transparent approach, taking into consideration
vulnerable groups, communities and ecosystems,
and should be based on and guided by the best
available science and, as appropriate, traditional
and indigenous knowledge, with a view to
integrating adaptation into relevant social,
economic and environmental policies and
actions, where appropriate" (p.4)
"20. Decides to hereby establish an Adaptation
Committee to promote the implementation of
enhanced action on adaptation in a coherent
Convention
All aspects of the
Convention
Facilitation
Adaptation
Adaptation
Committee,
NAPs,
Loss &
Damage
Facilitation
Adaptation
Adaptation
Committee
Facilitation
70
Appendix I,
Decision 1,
CP.16/2010
Guidance and
safeguards for policy
approaches and positive
incentives on issues
relating to reducing
emissions from
deforestation and forest
degradation in
developing countries;
and the role of
conservation,
manner under the Convention, inter alia, through
the following functions: […] (b) Strengthening,
consolidating and enhancing the sharing of
relevant information, knowledge, experience and
good practices, at the local, national, regional
and international levels, taking into account, as
appropriate, traditional knowledge and
practices" (p.5-6)
"72. Also requests developing country Parties,
when developing and implementing their
national strategies or action plans, to address,
inter alia, the driver of deforestation and forest
degradation, land tenure issues, forest
governance issues, gender considerations and the
safeguards identified in paragraph 2 of appendix
I to this decision, ensuring the full and effective
participation of relevant stakeholders, inter alia
indigenous peoples and local communities"
(p.13)
"Taking note of the relevant provisions of the
United Nations Declaration on the Rights of
Indigenous Peoples" (p.15)
"2. (c) Respect for the knowledge and rights of
indigenous peoples and members of local
communities, by taking into account relevant
international obligations, national circumstances
and laws, and noting that the UN GA has
adopted the United Nations Declaration on the
rights of Indigenous Peoples" (p.26)
"2. (d) The full and effective participation of
relevant stakeholders, in particular indigenous
peoples and local communities, in the actions
referred to in paragraphs 70 and 72 of this
Mitigation
(REDD)
-
Facilitation
Mitigation
(REDD)
-
Facilitation
Mitigation
(REDD)
-
Facilitation
Mitigation
(REDD)
-
Facilitation
71
Decision 2,
CP.17/2011
sustainable management
of forests and
enhancement of forest
carbon stocks in
developing countries
Outcome of the work of
the AH-WG-LTCA
under the Convention
Annex,
Decision 3,
CP.17/2011
Launching of the Green
Climate Fund
Decision 5,
CP.17/2011
National adaptation
plans
decision" (p.26)
"93. Also affirms that the Adaptation Committee
was established to promote the implementation
of enhanced action on adaptation in a coherent
manner under the Convention, as provided by
the Cancun Adaptation Framework, inter alia
through the following functions: [...] (b)
Strengthening, consolidating and enhancing the
sharing of relevant information, knowledge,
experience and good practices, at the local,
national, regional and international levels, taking
into account, as appropriate, traditional
knowledge and practices" (p.19)
"71. The Board will develop mechanisms to
promote the input and participation of
stakeholders, including private-sector actors,
civil society organizations, vulnerable groups,
women and indigenous peoples, in the design,
development and implementation of the
strategies and activities to be financed by the
Fund" (p.66)
"3. Further agrees that enhanced action on
adaptation should be undertaken in accordance
with the Convention, should follow a countrydriven, gender-sensitive, participatory and fully
transparent approach, taking into consideration
vulnerable groups, communities and ecosystems,
and should be based on and guided by the best
available science and, as appropriate, traditional
Adaptation
Adaptation
Committee
Facilitation
Mitigation
AND
Adaptation
(GCF)
-
Assistance
Adaptation
NAPs
Facilitation
72
Decision 6,
CP.17/2011
Nairobi work
programme on impacts,
vulnerability and
adaptation to climate
change
Decision 3,
CP.18/2012
Approaches to address
loss and damage
associated with cc
impacts in developing
countries that are
particularly vulnerable
to the adverse effects of
cc to enhance adaptive
capacity
Decision 15,
Doha work programme
and indigenous knowledge, and by gendersensitive approaches, with a view to integrating
adaptation into relevant social, economic and
environmental policies and actions, where
appropriate" (p.80)
"4. Also requests the secretariat to organize, in
collaboration with Nairobi work programme
partner organizations and other relevant
organizations, the following workshops,
informed by the information contained in annex
I to the report of the SB-STA on its thirty-fourth
session and subsequent views of Parties, and to
include indigenous and traditional knowledge
and practices for adaptation and gendersensitive tools and approaches as cross-cutting
issues: (a) A technical workshop [...] on water
and climate change impacts and adaptation
strategies; (b) A technical workshop on
ecosystem-based approaches for adaptation to
climate change [...]" (p.3)
"7. Acknowledges the further work to advance
the understanding of and expertise pm loss and
damage, which includes, inter alia, the
following: (a) Enhancing the understanding of:
[…] (iii) How loss and damage associated with
the adverse effects of cc affects those segments
of the population that are already vulnerable
owing to geography, gender, age, indigenous or
minority status, or disability, and how the
implementation of approaches to address loss
and damage can benefit those segments of the
population" (p.22-23)
"Also reaffirming the importance of taking into
Adaptation
Nairobi WP
Facilitation
Adaptation
Loss &
Damage
Facilitation
Mitigation
-
Facilitation
73
CP.18/2012
on Article 6 of the
Convention
Annex,
Decision 15,
CP.18/2012
Doha work programme
on Article 6 of the
Convention
account gender aspects and the need to promote
the effective engagement of children, youth, the
elderly, women, persons with disabilities,
indigenous peoples, local communities and nongovernmental organizations in activities related
to Article 6 of the Convention" (p.17)
"9. Implementation of Article 6 of the
Convention has a broad range of stakeholders,
including, governments, the private sector,
IGOs, NGOs and other international
organizations, decision makers, scientists, the
media, teachers, the general public, youth,
women, people with disabilities and indigenous
peoples among others" (p.20)
AND
Adaptation
(Education,
training
and public
awareness)
Mitigation
AND
Adaptation
(Education,
training
and public
awareness)
-
Facilitation
*relevant adaptation work streams are only specified here if two conditions are met: (1) the quote is pulled from one (or more) of the adaptation
work stream decisions listed in Table 4.2, and (2) the quote refers explicitly to one (or more) of the adaptation work streams
Decisions that strictly focus on “urgent and immediate adaptation priorities”
Decisions that were rendered after the UNFCCC began to gradually expand its scope by increasingly focusing on “medium- to
long-term adaptation priorities”
74
Second, starting at CP.16 in Cancun, the frequency with which references to indigenous
peoples, knowledge and practices are made increases significantly. For instance, prior to CP.16,
only two explicit references to indigenous peoples or knowledge are made and only one in the
context of adaptation. From CP.16 onward, a total of thirteen explicit references are made; four
in the context of adaptation specifically and an additional three in the context of all aspects of the
Convention. When compared to the frequency of reference of other groups however, the
frequency in reference to indigenous peoples still seems relatively small overall. For instance, 13
explicit references to women and gender were found in the texts examined in this study in the
context of UNHRC Resolution 10/4, whereas only four explicit references to indigenous peoples
were found in the same context.
A third interesting trend that can be seen in Table 4.3 relates to human rights. Those
references to indigenous peoples that explicitly refer to international developments in human
rights (including the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and Resolution 10/4
of the United Nations Human Rights Council on human rights and climate change) are done only
in a context of mitigation, particularly REDD, or in the context of all aspects of the Convention
in general. Given the logic of human rights, it seems somewhat inconsistent that the discourse
would not extend reference to human rights, indigenous peoples, and climate change to also
include the context of adaptation specifically. This inconsistency has a silencing effect over the
human rights argument for formal adaptation support for indigenous peoples through the
Convention. It is hypothesised here that the absence of an explicit reference of the sort can be
linked to its incompatibility with the guiding principles of the Convention, as will be considered
in the following chapter.
75
Finally, the last trend that is noteworthy here related a shift in the kinds of knowledge
that are deemed as appropriate sources of information to guide actions through the Convention;
the shift from a purely scientific approach to adaptation, to one that also values traditional and
indigenous knowledge and practices. This trend is apparent in the changing language used to
refer to the kinds of best available knowledge that action and decisions in the Convention should
be based on. Though this trend has already been noted by researchers (see for instance Huq &
Toulmin 2006, Ayers et al. 2010)
76
Figure 4.7. Adaptation discourse in CP decisions, and references to indigenous peoples, practices and knowledge
77
4.3. SUMMARY
In conclusion, the results detailed in this chapter mark three key discursive trends that are
apparent in the discourse that have meaning and effect relevant to indigenous peoples adaptation
support. These three shifts include, (1) the gradual shift in the ultimate objective of the
Convention, and the understanding of the role of adaptation; (2) discursive expansions based on
progress in terms of human rights that allow for a growing role of non-state actors in the
Convention’s processes, while also respecting the state-centricity of decision-making power
within the institution; and (3) the shift from a purely scientific (technocratic) approach to
adaptation, to one where local and practical knowledge are also valued. The implications of these
shifts, and the discursive trends that have been detailed here, are considered in the next chapter.
78
CHAPTER 5. DISCUSSION
This chapter seeks to interpret the potential barriers and opportunities that the discursive
characteristics detailed in the previous chapter might entail for indigenous peoples at differing
scales. Accordingly, this chapter revisits sub questions (b) & (c); respectively: what does the
discourse (characterized in chapter 4) imply for indigenous populations at the national, regional
and international levels; and is it possible for indigenous people to access adaptation support
and/or exert influence onto the discourse, and if so, to what extent? In this context, brief
prognosis of indigenous peoples’ participation in the adaptation discourse, and access to
adaptation funding through the UNFCCC is considered, followed by a short discussion of the
research limitations and further research needs.
5.1. DISCURSIVE IMPLICATIONS: BARRIERS, OPPORTUNITIES, AND PROGNOSIS
Some of the discursive trends that have been identified in this study, particularly those
that relate to framings of acceptable or appropriate forms of knowledge to guide action through
the Convention, may have positive implications for indigenous peoples globally. For instance,
the gradual shift in approaches promoted through the Convention, from one relying exclusively
on scientific and technocratic processes, to being increasingly sensitive and open to traditional
and indigenous knowledge and practices for adaptation has had normative effects. This
expansion in the types of knowledge that are deemed appropriate to guide adaptation action
through the institution, as reflected in the decision texts examined in this study, is now being
carried out by its relevant bodies. For example, in April of 2014 the Adaptation Committee and
the Nairobi Work Programme held a workshop with relevant experts and stakeholders to explore,
79
among other things, the available tools for the use of traditional and indigenous knowledge and
practices for adaptation, and the needs of local and indigenous communities. The workshop
produced a report providing recommendations identified by the participants for consideration
and implementation by the Parties (UNFCCC 2014). These recommendations serve to guide the
decision making-process and actions taken through the Convention, as stipulated in the mandates
of the groups that operate under the SB-STA and SBI, and discussed in the previous chapter.
Institutional processes of the sort that engage constituents whose needs and interests may
otherwise be silenced in national negotiation discourses (Cabré 2011), and that produce
recommendations endorsing new norms and best practices are believed to influence state
behaviour through their constitutive and regulative effects (Barnett & Finnemore 2004), in this
case by setting international expectations about future decision pathways for adaptation, and by
encouraging countries to report on these issues in NCs, NAPAs, and NAPs. Noting that the
outputs of such processes are increasingly directed at all Parties to the Convention, and not just
developing country Parties, the extent to which these institutional exercises translate into
meaningful action and implementation at the national and local level however, remains
dependent on external factors to the institution, such pressures from domestic politics
(Dombrowski 2010, Gupta 2010).
Additionally, if the past trends are any indication of the future, it should be expected that
the explicit consideration of the needs of indigenous peoples, their practices, and knowledge will
likely to continue to increase in adaptation-related CP decisions. Based on past trends of
parallelism between UNFCCC discourses, the release of IPCCC assessment reports that were
identified in this study, as well as by others (Huq & Toulmin 2006, Ayers et al. 2010, Gupta
2010), it can be hypothesized here that the recent release of the IPCC AR5 has the potential to
80
facilitate this trend with its enhanced recognition of indigenous issues. For instance, the release
of AR3 that framed adaptation as a development issue was analogous to the inception of
approaches to adaptation through the Convention at CP.7 (Huq & Toulmin 2006, Ayers et al.
2010), while the publication of AR4 that found that climate change was unavoidable was parallel
to the establishment of the shared vision for long term cooperative action, and the growing role
of adaptation in the Convention at CP.13 (Ayers et al. 2010). Accordingly, in AR5 and related
bodies of literature, it is becoming increasingly apparent that marginalized and poor populations
at all scales are showing a heightened vulnerability to the impacts of climate change, while
recognition that traditional and indigenous knowledge may have important lessons and
applications for approaches to adaptation are also increasing (Nakashima et al. 2012, IPCC 2014,
UNFCCC 2014). It is therefore suggested here that this trend may continue to develop in the
future and contribute to further advancing indigenous issues in the Convention.
The discourse analysis conducted in this study also revealed discursive elements and
trends that have imposed barriers for the participation of indigenous peoples, and for their access
to adaptation funding, at multiple levels. In the case of the former for instance, the combined
effect of the structure of the discourse, the underlying principles that guide it, the scale at which
it functions, is the greatest discursive barrier to the participation of indigenous peoples in the
UNFCCC negotiation process found in this study. Indeed, the state-centric structure of the
discourse and the allocation of decision-making power in the institution, bound by the principles
of contemporary international relations, frame the responsibility for adaptation of sub-national
populations as being in the legal jurisdiction of national governments, and not the international
community. It would therefore be in conflict with the territorial integrity of states and their
81
absolute right to sovereignty to suggest that what are considered sub-national populations be
given equal voting rights to those of nation-states in an intergovernmental institution of the sort.
A recent study examining the differences and similarities in the types of influences that
affect indigenous peoples’ participation in the UNFCCC negotiation process in comparison to
that of the UNCBD supports this assertion. The study found that the greatest obstacle to the
participation of indigenous peoples in either case is the intergovernmental nature of the
negotiations process involved in these institutions, whereby, as stated throughout this thesis,
unless they are included in official delegations by their respective national governments,
indigenous peoples can only participate in the process as non-state observers. The significant
differences in the participation of indigenous peoples in these two Rio Conventions is said to
stem from other factors, including an earlier recognition by the scientific community of the
relevance of traditional and indigenous knowledge to biodiversity conservation, and of
indigenous peoples as stakeholders in the process (formally recognized in 1992 in the UNCBD
vs. in 2005 in the UNFCCC), effectively leading to the establishment of a more open structure to
the participation of indigenous peoples in the UNCBD (Betzold & Flesken 2014).
Discursive frames in the adaptation discourse have also limited adaptation funding
options for indigenous peoples through the institution. Firstly, all funding flows through the
Convention are unidirectional; the flow from Annex I to non-Annex I parties only. This means
that only projects from developing nations that are Parties to the Convention can access funding
through the UNFCCC including those relating to indigenous peoples. Indigenous groups living
in developed nations on the other hand, can in no way access adaptation funding through the
institution, and this is very unlikely to change given the guiding principles of the Convention,
particularly the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities
82
that established responsibilities between states, and not within them (in line with the principles of
sovereignty). These discursive frames, along with the legal disclaimer to the LDCF discussed in
the previous chapter, make the future creation of a distinct fund through the Convention to
finance indigenous peoples’ adaptation to climate change in all countries extremely unlikely.
Second, in order to access funding, proposed projects from non-Annex I parties must meet the
specific requirements of the funds, have institutional support, and compete with other nations for
the little funding that is available. Groups that are often politically and socio-economically
marginalized then, such as indigenous peoples, may experience greater difficulties in accessing
this funding (Fankhauser & Burton 2011).
Though the discourse analysis preformed in this study uncovered a number of barriers for
the meaningful participation of indigenous peoples in the UNFCCC and their ability to access
adaptation funding through the institution, it also revealed a few potential opportunities to
formally enhance the process to make it more inclusive of, and liable to indigenous peoples,
though it is difficult to say whether the Parties to the Convention would be willing to endorse it.
Indeed, the rules of fund boards composition and membership, and Convention committees and
work programmes (see for instance Decision 2, paragraph 101, CP.17/2011), could be amended
to include two additional seats; one for an indigenous representative from an Annex-I Party, and
another from a non-Annex I Party. This more formal approach could help make UNFCCC
processes seem more accountable to indigenous peoples and their realities, by contributing to
advance indigenous issues as seen by indigenous peoples throughout the institution’s bodies
through recommendations to the CP, while keeping with the guiding principles of the
Convention. Given that there is no disclaimer of precedent in the decisions examined that would
83
explicitly restrict this kind of amendment, it can be assumed here that this could be done, should
the Parties to the Convention agree to do so.
Another potential pathway to increase accountability to indigenous peoples and
indigenous participation in the UNFCCC that would be less intrusive and more likely to be
acceptable to Parties than the suggestion above, is pulled from the experience of indigenous
peoples’ participation in the UNCBD, as discussed by Betzold and Flesken (2014). Indeed,
although indigenous peoples do not have voting rights outside their respective national
delegations, IPOs are often invited by working groups to co-chair meetings and intervene in
debates that cover topics relating to traditional and indigenous knowledge for biodiversity
conservation, and hence contribute to making formal recommendations to the Parties to that
Convention. In effect, as discussed earlier in this chapter, the UNFCCC adaptation related
working groups have only just begun to follow this path, as demonstrated through it recent Bonn
meeting on indigenous knowledge for adaptation chaired by the Adaptation Committee and
Nairobi Work Programme (UNFCCC 2014).
Finally, it should be reiterated here that the though indigenous peoples are apparently
more active in the UNCBD in comparison to the UNFCCC, the reasons for this are not
exclusively dependent on institutional structure and official institutional discourse, and so it may
be difficult to streamline lessons from one institution to the other in this context. Indeed, the
same study by Betzold & Flesken (2014), mentioned a few times in this section, found that the
significant difference in the number of participating indigenous peoples organizations (IPOs) in
delegations in both institutions (6 IPOs in the UNFCCC vs. over 50 in the UNCBD) may stem
from a number of factors, including IPO perceptions, interests and priorities, where they may
find issues of biodiversity to be more relevant and important to them. Accordingly, indigenous
84
peoples, though they are found to be highly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change in
the scientific literature, may not necessarily perceive their role in global climate change
adaptation governance, or access to its outputs, as a priority. This could explain in part the
apparent preferred focus of IPOs in the UNFCCC on mitigation efforts in the context of REDD
rather than adaptation efforts in general.
5.2. RESEARCH LIMITATIONS AND FURTHER RESEARCH NEEDS
Given the nature of this project, the discourse considered in this study was limited to the
official adaptation discourse in CP decisions so that the project could be manageable in the
context of a Master’s degree. Because this study examines only one of the multiple competing
discourses taking place within the institution itself, the conclusions made in this thesis should be
seen as a starting point for a larger research programme rather than an end point in and of itself.
A great deal of research is still needed in the area to expose the numerous concurrent and
opposing discourses that are taking place within the bounds of the institution, assess their effects,
and evaluate how and if these discourses translate into effective action, in order to clearly
understand the true implications for indigenous peoples at multiple scales. This could include for
instance, national negotiation positions and group-based negotiation discourses, discourses in the
permanent bodies, work programs, expert groups and committees, civil society observers and
media discourses, and discourses within NCs, NAPAs and NAPs. The embedded discourses
from other relevant institutions in the international climate change regime such as the IPCC, the
World Bank, the UNCBD and UNCCD, and multilateral arrangements such as the Hyogo
Framework, among many others, could also be analysed for their effects. Furthermore, this type
of study design could also be applied to discourses at lower levels of governance, ranging from
85
the municipal and community levels to the regional levels. Comparative analyses between these
discourses could then be attempted.
In addition, the discourse analysis method used in this study could also be strengthened
by complementing the analysis with ethnographic interviews of the various participants involved
in the discourse, and/or of the various groups that are targeted by it. The data from these
interviews could help reveal the ways in which participants navigate specific discourses, help
clarify when, how and why they challenge them, and to what degree of success. Collectively,
studies of the sort could help provide a new and different lens through which to evaluate policy
approaches to climate change, assess their effects, and evaluate their effectiveness.
86
CHAPTER 6. CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the UNFCCC is, in all likelihood, probably not the most effective or
appropriate institution to address indigenous peoples’ adaptation to climate change given its rigid
country-driven, intergovernmental decision-making structure, and the kinds of policy discourses
that can be negotiated and produced in this context. Indeed, the critical discourse analysis of
official CP and CMP decision performed in this study revealed a number of elements in the
embedded discourse on climate change adaptation that have limited the potential opportunities
for indigenous peoples to participate in the UNFCCC process in a meaningful way, as well as
their capacity to access adaptation funding. These limiting factors include, along with the
institution’s state-centric decision-making arrangement, the unidirectional flow of funds within
the institution from developed to developing countries, the level of institutional capacity required
to access adaptation funding, the initial absence of the explicit recognition of indigenous peoples
as stakeholders in the discourse on climate change adaptation in the institution, and the sole
consideration of technocratic approaches to adaptation in the first decade of the Convention’s
existence. In such a context, the discourse has had silencing effects on the realities of indigenous
peoples, as well as other sub-national constituents. As suggested by Betzold and Flesken (2014),
the absence of references to indigenous peoples in the earlier years of the UNFCCC may be the
result of mutually reinforcing trends involving an institutional discourse that silences, and
general lack of interest in, or prioritization of, adaptation efforts by indigenous peoples and IPOs,
in comparison to REDD and biodiversity conservation for instance.
This study has also shown however, that the UNFCCC has been improving over time and
is becoming more accountable to, and inclusive of, indigenous peoples with regards to climate
87
change adaptation, although much more could still be done. The discursive trends that have been
found to contribute to an increase in the visibility of indigenous peoples and indigenous issues in
the discourse on adaptation stem from a combination of factors. These include the gradual
expansion of the objectives of the Convention to encompass adaptation measures as well as
mitigation, the explicit reiteration since 2005 and increasingly since 2010 that indigenous
peoples are relevant stakeholders in the Convention that are both vulnerable to the adverse
effects of climate change and holders of traditional knowledge that may hold key insights for
adaptation, and the gradual shift of approaches promoted through the Convention from being
purely scientific to approaches where local and practical knowledge is also valued. Given the
documented trends of parallelisms between the content of such international environmental
policy discourses and trends in the scientific literature on the matter (see for instance Huq &
Toulmin 2006, Ayers et al. 2010, Betzold & Flesken 2014), it can be assumed here that the role
of indigenous knowledge for adaptation, and the participation of indigenous peoples in
adaptation-related matters in the Convention is likely to continue to increase in the future. The
extent to which this occurs however, and the path that inevitably ends up being taken, ultimately
rests in the hands of state governments.
This study has also identified potential measures that could be taken to further enhance
accountability to, and participation of indigenous peoples in the discourse on adaptation in the
UNFCCC. For instance, although a disclaimer to the establishment of the LDCF(see Decision
3/CP.11) was found to limit opportunities to develop a fund for the purpose of facilitating
indigenous peoples’ participation similar to the Voluntary Fund for Indigenous and Local
Communities in the UNCBD, no disclaimers were found to restrict the potential to create seats
for indigenous representatives from both Annex I and non-Annex I nations in the Conventions
88
work programmes, committees, groups, and/or fund boards. In addition, as Betzold and Flesken
(2014) advance, the UNFCCC could also take example and pull from measures implemented in
the UNCBD and seek to establish its own mechanisms to promote indigenous participation
through opportunities to co-chair meetings, intervene in debates, and participate in expert panels
for instance.
As the core component of the global climate change regime, the normative influences that
the UNFCCC emanates have the potential to help constitute what nations perceive as appropriate
responses to climate change. Though the consideration of indigenous peoples in the discourse on
adaptation in the Convention has been growing gradually over the last decade, and even more so
since 2010, a relatively significant amount of work still needs to be done in this regard to help
make the institution more engaging for indigenous peoples as it has been criticised for lagging
behind other Rio Conventions on this matter. However, the political weight of the UNFCCC and
KP has been qualified as being much greater than that of its sister Conventions, the UNCBD and
UNCCD; where small steps in the UNFCCC may be considerably more valuable than big steps
in the UNCBD for instance (Betzold & Flesken 2014), and so should not be belittled for its
recent achievements in creating a discursive space for the consideration of indigenous knowledge
and peoples in the institution. However, there are limits to the geographical extent of possible
adaptation funding for indigenous peoples; those originating from developed nations are
extremely unlikely to ever have access to these funds through the institution. Adaptation funding
for indigenous peoples from developed countries will need to come from alternate sources.
89
REFERENCES
Alvesson M, Kärreman D (2011) Decolonializing discourse: Critical reflections on
organizational discourse analysis. Human Relations 64:1121-1146
Ayers J, Alam M, Huq S (2010) Global adaptation governance beyond 2012: Developing
country perspectives. In: Biermann F, Pattberg P, Zelli F (eds) Global Climate
Governance Beyond 2012: Architecture, Agency and Adaptation. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, UK
Ayers JM, Huq S (2009) Supporting Adaptation to Climate Change: What Role for Official
Development Assistance? Development Policy Reveiw 27:675-662
Barnett M, Finnemore M (2004) Rules for the World: International Organizations in Global
Politics, Vol. Cornell University Press, Ithica, NY
Berrang-Ford L, Dingle K, Ford JD, Lee C, Lwasa S, Namanya DB, Henderson J, Llanos EA,
Carcamo C, Edge VL (2012) Vulnerability of indigenous health to climate change: A
case study of Uganda's Batwa Pygmies. Social Science & Medicine 75:1067-1077
Berrang-Ford L, Ford JD, Lesnikowski A, Poutiainen C, Barrera M, Heymann JS (2014) What
drives national adaptation? A global assessment. Climatic Change 124:441-450
Berrang-Ford L, Ford JD, Paterson J (2011) Are we adapting to climate change? Global
Environmental Change 21:25-33
Betzold C, Flesken A (2014) Indigenous peoples in international environmental negotiations:
Evidence from biodiversity and climate change. In: Kaime T (ed) International Climate
Change Law and Policy: Cultural Legitimacy in Adaptation and Mitigation. Routledge,
New York, NY
Biagini B, Bierbaum R, Stults M, Dobardzic S, McNeeley SM (2014) A typology of adaptation
actions: A global look at climate adaptation actions financed through the Global
Environment Facility. Global Environmental Change 25:97-108
Blommaert J, Bulcaen C (2000) Critical Discourse Analysis. Annual Review of Anthrophology
29:447-466
Blommaert J, Bulcan C (2000) Critical Discourse Analysis. Annual Review of Anthropology
29:447-466
Bodansky DM (1995) The Emerging Climate Change Regime. Annual Review of Energy and
Environment 20:425-461
Boykoff MT (2008a) Lost in translation? United States television news coverage of
anthropogenic climate change, 1995-2004. Climatic Change 86:1-11
90
Boykoff MT (2008b) The cultural politics of climate change discourse in UK tabloids. Political
Geography 27:549-569
Boykoff MT, Goodman MK, Curtis I (2010) Cultural Politics of Climate Change: Interactions in
Everyday Spaces. In: Boykoff MT (ed) The Politics of Climate Change: A Survey.
Routledge, London, UK
Boykoff MT, Yulsman T (2013) Political economy, media and climate change: sinews of
modern life. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change 4:359-371
Bucholtz M (2001) Reflexivity and Critique in Discourse Analysis. Critique of Anthropology
21:165-183
Bunn ID (2009) The United Nations and Climate Change: Legal and Policy Developments. In:
Nelson GI, Hronszky I (eds) Sustainability 2009: The Next Horizon
Cabré MM (2011) Issue-linkages to Climate Change Measured through NGO Participation in the
UNFCCC. Global Environmental Politics 11:10-22
Cohen JL (2006) Sovereign Equality vs. Imperial Right: The Battle over the "New World
Order". Constellations: An International Journal of Critical and Democratic Theory
13:485-505
Cunsolo Willox A, Harper SL, Edge VL, Landman K, Houle K, Ford JD, Rigolet Inuit
Community Government (2013) The land enriches the soul: On climatic and
environmental change, affect, and emotional health and well-being in Rigolet,
Nunatsiavut, Canada. Emotion, Space and Society 6:14-24
Dombrowski K (2010) Filling the gap? An analysis of non-governmental organizations
responses to participation and representation deficits in global climate governance.
International Environmental Agreements 10:397-416
Dovers S (2009) Normalizing adaptation. Global Environmental Change 19:4-6
Fairclough N (1992) Intertextuality in Critical Discourse Analysis. Linguistics and Education
4:269-293
Fairclough N (2003) Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research, Vol.
Routledge, New York, NY
Fairclough N (2013) Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language, Vol.
Routledge
Fankhauser S, Burton I (2011) Spending adaptation money wisely. Climate Policy 11:1037-1049
Ford JD (2009) Dangerous climate change and the importance of adaptation for the Arctic's Inuit
population. Environmental Research Letters 4:1-9
91
Ford JD (2012) Indigenous Health and Climate Change. American Journal of Public Health
102:1260-1266
Ford JD, Berrang-Ford L, King M, Furgal C (2010) Vulnerability of Aboriginal health systems
in Canada to climate change. Global Environmental Change - Human and Policy
Dimensions 20:668-680
Ford JD, Cunsolo Willox A, Chatwood S, Furgal C, Haper S, Mauro I, Pearce T (2014) Adapting
to the Effects of Climate Change on Inuit Health. American Journal of Public Health
104:e9-e17
Ford JD, Pearce T (2010) What we know, do not know, and need to know about climate change
vulnerability in the western Canadian Arctic: a systematic literature review.
Environmental Research Letters 5:1-9
Forsyth T (2013) Community-based adaptation: a review of past and future challenges. Wiley
Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change 4:439-446
Foucault M (1982) The Subject of Power. Critical Inquiry 8:777-795
Foucault M, Gordon C (1980) Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writtings 19711977, Vol. Pantheon Books, New York, NY
Fuhrman ER, Oehler K (1986) Discourse Analysis and Reflexivity. Social Studies of Science
16:293-307
Furberg M, Evengard B, Nilsson M (2011) Facing the limit of resilience: perceptions of climate
change among reindeer herding Sami in Sweden. Global Health Action 4
Fussel HM (2009) An updated assessment of the risks from climate change based on research
published since the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report. Climatic Change 97:469-482
Gehring T, Faude B (2013) The Dynamics of Regime Complexes: Microfoundations and
Systemic Effects. Global Governance 19:119-130
Green D, Alexander L, McInnes K, Church J, Nicholls N, White N (2010) An assessment of
climate change impacts and adaptation for the Torres Strait Islands, Australia. Climatic
Change 102:405-433
Green D, Minchin L (2014) Living on Climate-Changed Country: Indigenous Health, WellBeing and Climate Change in Remote Australian Communites. EcoHealth
Gupta J (2010) A history of international climate change policy. Wiley Interdisciplinary
Reviews: Climate Change 1:636-653
Haas PM (2002) UN Conferences and Constructivist Governance of the Environment. Global
Governace 8:73-91
92
Hansen L (2006) Security as Practice: Discourse Analysis and the Bosnian War, Vol. Routledge,
New York, NY
Harper SL, Edge VL, Schuster-Wallace CJ, Berke O, McEwen SA (2011) Weather, Water
Quality and Infectious Gastrointestinal Illness in Two Inuit Communities in Nunatsiavut,
Canada: Potential Implications for Climate Change. EcoHealth 8:93-108
Hjerpe M, Linnér B-O (2010) Functions of COP side-events in climate change governance.
Climate Policy 10:167-180
Hofmeijer I, Ford JD, Berrang-Ford L, Zavaleta C, Carcamo C, Llanos E, Carhuaz C, Edge V,
Lwasa S, Namanya D (2013) Community vulnerability to the health effects of climate
change among indigenous populations in the Peruvian Amazon: a case study from
Panailllo and Nuevo Progreso. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change
957-978
Huq S, Toulmin C (2006) Three eras of climate change. In: Sustainable Development Opinion.
International Institute for Environment and Development, London, UK
IPCC (2013) Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis, Vol. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, UK
IPCC (2014) Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability (Final Draft). In:
Working Group II contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change. IPCC, Yokohama, Japan
Jones R, Bennett H, Keating G, Blaiklock A (2014) Climate Change and the Right to Health for
Maori in Aotearoa/New Zealand. Health and Human Rights Journal 16:54-68
Karns MP, Mingst KA (2004) International Organizations: The Politics and Processes of Global
Governance, Vol. Lynne Rienner Publishers, Boulder, CO
Kennedy P (2006) The Parliament of Man: The Past, Present, and Future of the United Nations,
Vol. Harper Perennial, Toronto, ON
Keohane RO (1984) After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy,
Vol. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ
Keohane RO, Victor DG (2011) The Regime Complex for Climate Change. Perspectives on
Politics 9:7-23
Khan MR, Timmons Roberts J (2013) Adaptation and international climate policy. Wiley
Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change 4:171-189
Klein RJT (2009) Identifying Countries that are Particularly Vulnerable to the Adverse Effects of
Climate Change: An Academic or a Political Challenge? Carbon & Climate Law Review
3:284-291
93
Lesnikowski AC, Ford JD, Berrang-Ford L, Barrera M, Heymann J (2013) How are we adapting
to climate change? A global assessment. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global
Change
Maru YT, Stafford Smith M, Sparrow A, Pinho PF, Dube OP (In Press) A linked vulnerability
and resilience framework for adaptation pathways in remote disadvantaged communities.
Global Environmental Change:1-14
Michonski KE, Levi MA (2010) Harnessing International Institutions to Adress Climate Change.
In. Council on Foreign Relations, New York
Moser SC (2014) Communicating adaptation to climate change: the art and science of public
engagement when climate change comes home. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate
Change 5:337-358
Moss RH, Meehl GA, Lemos MC, Smith JB, Arnold JR, Arnott JC, Behar D, Brasseur GP,
Broomell SB, Busalacchi AJ, Dessai S, Ebi KL, Edmonds JA, Furlow J, Goddard L,
Hartmann HC, Hurrell JW, Katzenberger JW, Liverman DM, Mote PW, Moser SC,
Kumar A, Pulwarty RS, Seyller EA, Turner BL, Washington WM, Wilbanks TJ (2013)
Hell and High Water: Practice-Relevant Adaptation Science. Science 342:696-698
Nakashima DJ, Galloway McLean K, Thulstrup HD, Ramos Castillo A, Rubis JT (2012)
Weathering Uncertainty: Traditional Knowledge for Climate Change Assessment and
Adaptation, Vol. UNESCO, Paris, FR
Orsini A, Morin J-F, Young O (2013) Regime Complexes: A Buzz, a Boom, or a Boost for
Global Governance? Global Governance 19:27-39
Oye KA (1985) Explaining Cooperation Under Anarchy: Hypotheses and Strategies. World
Politics 38:1-24
Parry M, Lowe J, Hanson C (2009) Overshoot, adapt and recover. Nature 458:1102-1103
Pearce TD, Ford JD, Laidler GJ, Smit B, Duerden F, Allrut M, Andrachuk M, Baryluk S, Dialla
A, Elee P, Goose A, Ikummaq T, Joamie E, Kataoyak F, Loring E, Meakin S, Nickels S,
Shappa K, Shirley J, Wandel J (2009) Community collaboration and climate change
research in the Canadian Arctic. Polar Research 28:10-27
Peters GP, Andrew RM, Boden T, Canadell JG, Ciais P, Le Quéré C, Marland G, Raupach MR,
Wilson C (2013) The challenge to keep global warming below 2°C. Nature Climate
Change 3:4-6
Pielke RA, Prins G, Rayner S, Sarewitz D (2007) Lifting the Taboo on Adaptation. Nature
445:597-598
Porras IM (1992) The Rio Declaration: A New Basis for International Cooperation. Review of
European Community & International Environmental Law 1:245-253
94
Roch P, Perrez FX (2006) International Environmental Governance: The Strive Towards a
Comprehensive, Coherent, Effective and Efficient International Environmental Regime.
Colorado Journal of International Environmental Law and Policy 16:1-26
Rydin Y (2005) Geographical Knowledge and Policy: The Positive Contributions of Discourse
Studies. Area 37:73-78
Schipper ELF (2006) Conceptual History of Adaptation in the UNFCCC Process. Review of
European Community & International Environmental Law 15:82-92
Schroeder H (2010) Agency in international climate negotiations: the case of indigenous peoples
and avoided deforestation. International Environmental Agreements-Politics Law and
Economics 10:317-332
Schroeder H, Boykoff MT, Spiers L (2012) Equity and state representations in climate
negotiations. Nature Climate Change 2:834-836
Sherman MH, Ford JD (2014) Stakeholder engagement in adaptation interventions: an evaluation
of projects in developing nations. Climate Policy 14:417-441
Smead R, Sandler RL, Forber P, Basl J (2014) A bargaining game analysis of international
climate negotiations. Nature Climate Change 4:442-445
Smith JB, Schneider SH, Oppenheimer M, Yohe GW, Hare W, Mastrandrea MD, van Ypersele
JP (2009) Assessing dangerous climate change through an update of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) "reasons for concern''. Proceedings
of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 106:4133-4137
Stafford Smith M, Horrocks L, Harvey A, Hamilton C (2011) Rethinking adaptation for a 4◦C
world. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A 369:196-216
Tanzler D, Maas A, Carius A (2010) Climate change adaptation and peace. Wiley
Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change 1:741-750
Tompkins EL, Amundsen H (2008) Perceptions of the effectiveness of the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change in advancing national action on climate
change. Environmental Science & Policy 11:1-13
Turnheim B, Tezcan MY (2010) Complex Governance to Cope with Global Environmental Risk:
An Assessment of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
Science and Engineering Ethics 16:517-533
UNFCCC (2014) Report on the meeting on available tools for the use of indigenous and
traditional knowledge and practices for adaptation, needs of local and indigenous
communities and the application of gender-sensitive approaches and tools for adaptation.
In: Advice SBfSaT (ed). UNFCCC, Bonn, Germany
95
United Nations (1945) Charter of the United Nations and Statute of the International Court of
Justice. In, San Francisco
United Nations (1992) United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. In. United
Nations
Waitt G (2010) Doing Foucauldian Discourse Analysis: Revealing Social Realities. In: Hay I
(ed) Qualitative Research Methods in Human Geograhy. Oxford University Press,
Oxford, UK
Wang B, Pan S-Y, Ke Y-R, Wang K, Wei Y-M (In Press) An overview of climate change
vulnerability: a bibliometric analysis based on Web of Science database. Natural
Hazards:1-18
World Bank (2010) World Development Report 2010: Development and Climate Change. In.
International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / World Bank, Washington, DC
Xiang Y, Meehan S (2005) Financial Cooperation, Rio Conventions and Common Concerns.
Review of European Community & International Environmental Law 14:212-224
Zander KK, Petheram L, Garnett ST (2013) Stay or leave? Potential climate change adaptation
strategies among Aboriginal people in coastal communities in northern Australia. Natural
Hazards 67
Zillman J (2009) A history of climate activities. WMO Bulletin 58:141-150
96
APPENDIX 1- LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
AC
Adaptation Committee
AF
Adaptation Fund
AH-WG-LTCA
Ad Hoc Working Group for Long-Term Cooperative Action
AR3
Third Assessment Report
AR4
Fourth Assessment Report
CDM
Clean Development Mechanism
CMP
Conference of the Parties serving as the Meeting of the Parties to the
Kyoto Protocol
CP
Conference of the Parties
EIT
Economies in Transition
GCF
Green Climate Fund
GEF
Global Environment Facility
IGO
Intergovernmental organization
IO
International organization
IPCC
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
IPO
Indigenous peoples’ organization
IR
International relations
KP
Kyoto Protocol
L&D
Work Programme on Loss and Damage
LDC
Least Developed Countries
LEC EG
Least Developed Countries Expert Group
LDCF
Least Developed Countries Fund
MDB
Multilateral Development Bank
97
Nairobi WP
Nairobi Work Programme on Impacts, Vulnerability and Adaptation
NAP
National Adaptation Plan
NAPA
National Adaptation Programme of Action
NC
National Communication
NGO
Non-governmental organization
OECD
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
REDD
Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation
SB-STA
Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice
SBI
Subsidiary Body for Implementation
SCCF
Special Climate Change Fund
SIDS
Small Island Developing States
UN
United Nations
UNCBD
United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity
UNCCD
United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification
UNCED
United Nations Conference on Environment and Development
UNCHE
United Nations Conference on the Human Environment
UNEP
United Nations Environment Programme
UNFCCC
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
UN GA
United Nations General Assembly
UNHRC
United Nations Human Rights Council
WMO
World Meteorological Organization
98
APPENDIX 2 – LIST OF CODES
Adaptation approaches
Code ID
A1
A2
A3
A4
A5
A6
A7
A8
A9
A10
A11
Referent
Adaptation to the adverse effects of climate change (general)
Adaptation of natural systems
Adaptation of human systems
Adaptation funding
Technology transfers and development
Enhancing resilience
NAPAs
NAPs
Disaster preparedness and management
Adaptation actions and/or strategies
Mainstreaming adaptation into development
Frequency
32
4
7
21
13
7
23
25
7
5
1
Convention funds
Code ID
F1
F2
F3
F4
Referent
Adaptation Fund
LDC Fund
Special Climate Change Fund
Green Climate Fund
Frequency
5
21
8
18
Official Identities: Referent objects and Convention bodies
Code ID
I1
I2
I3
I4
I5
I6
I7
I8
I9
I10
I11
I12
I13
Referent
Developed country parties
Developing country parties
Annex I parties
Annex II parties
non-Annex I parties
LDCs
SIDSs
Developing countries that are particularly vulnerable to climate change
Adaptation Fund Board
Economies in transition
IPCC
GEF
LDC Expert Group
Frequency
15
47
7
17
4
30
9
17
13
3
7
5
22
99
I14
I15
I16
I17
I18
I19
I20
I21
I22
I23
I24
I25
I26
Nairobi Work Programme
Stakeholders
Secretariat
World Bank (IBRD)
Adaptation Committee
Green Climate Fund Board
Technology Executive Committee
Climate Technology Centre and Network
Work Programme on loss and damage
Conference of the Parties
SB-STA
SBI
AH-WG-LTCA
15
9
3
2
28
9
4
3
12
7
6
1
2
Intertextuality
Code ID
Referent
IL
Intertextual link: explicit reference to external texts relevant to the
discourse under consideration
Frequency
29
References to indigenous peoples (and nuances) not made in the context of UNHRC
Resolution 10/4
Code ID
IP1
IP2
IP3
IP4
Referent
Indigenous communities
Indigenous status
Indigenous peoples
Traditional knowledge and/or Indigenous knowledge
Frequency
1
2
5
5
References to vulnerable sub-populations owing to X made in the context of UNHRC
Resolution 10/4
Code ID
IV1
IV2
IV3
IV4
IV5
IV6
Referent
Geography
Gender
Age
Indigenous status
Minority status
Disability
Frequency
2
13
4
3
2
2
Topics, discursive characteristics, and principles
100
Code ID
TC1
TC2
TC3
TC4
TC5
TC6
TC7
TC8
TC9
TC10
TC11
TC12
TC13
TC14
TC15
TC16
TC17
TC18
TC19
TC20
TC21
TC22
TC23
TC24
TC25
TC26
TC27
TC28
TC29
TC30
TC31
TC32
TC33
TC34
TC35
Referent
Accountability
Financial support
Impartiality
Implementation
Operational functions / mandate
Representation / composition
State-centric / country-driven
Technical support / advice
Incentives
Mitigation
Reporting
Capacity-building
Transparency
Voluntary
Access
Needs assessment
Participation
Accreditation
Beneficiaries
Familiarization / workshops
Institutional reviews
Effectiveness / adequacy
Recognition
Finance
Technology development and transfers
Enhancing action and support
Sensitive to
Participatory approaches
Prioritization
Sensitization and knowledge dissemination
Scientific research
Coordination and cooperation
Administration / management
Objectives
Methods
Frequency
11
45
1
28
18
25
61
19
1
17
16
34
3
2
4
12
13
4
3
4
11
1
1
3
21
19
9
10
8
4
6
14
4
10
5
101