Conference Agenda

Responding rapidly and equitably to climate change poses significant challenges for decision-makers around the world. Established political systems, including those currently embedded in the European Green Deal, have failed to deliver appropriate policy responses at sufficient speed and scale. At the same time, democratic institutions are increasingly challenged by democratic backsliding and rising populism, with action on climate change drawing particularly strong critique. And the long-term, global, and ‘super wicked’ nature of climate change is prompting people to rethink what we mean when we talk about liberal democracies protecting vulnerable people from the tyranny of the majority, and if democracy is fit-for-purpose for the climate challenge. Yet to date, there is no agreement on what elements of democracy need to be strengthened to reinforce democracy and achieve transformative climate action. In this paper, we seek to contribute to these debates by presenting the concept of ‘climate democracy’, defined as effective democratic governance that creates effective, equitable and legitimate climate policies by integrating participatory and deliberative elements with existing structures of representative democracy. Such an approach combines a sound evidence base with meaningful citizen engagement and high levels of accountability. This article will discuss which democratic elements are most important for climate action, how climate democracy differs from related concepts, such as energy democracy and ecological democracy, and why a new definition is warranted and useful.

The 2019-2024 EU political term was a relatively productive one for climate policymaking in the European Parliament. Both the European Climate Law and (the vast majority of) the Fit for 55 package soared through committee and plenary negotiations and completed inter-institutional negotiations with the Council. This legislative success can be explained through several political factors, one of which being the “green wave” following the 2019 European election. However, in the wake of the 2024 election, the Greens lost seats while far right political groups increased their seat count. The purpose of this paper is to undertake a qualitative exploration of the Parliament’s ENVI committee. In this paper, I ask the research question, how did the intra-institutional organs of the ENVI committee facilitate successful negotiations of the Fit for 55 package and, importantly, have these practices carried over into the 2024-2029 session? This paper draws on interviews conducted with 30 Members of the European Parliament and their assistants. Applying a principal-agent theoretical framework, I find that agents within the ENVI committee, including rapporteurs, the committee chair, and the vice chairs, simultaneously represented multiple principle interests during the von der Leyen I Commission. In the context of Fit for 55, I argue that these patterns of delegation contributed to effective negotiations both within the ENVI committee as well as in inter-institutional settings. Findings also suggest that some principal-agent relationships are under strain in the 2024-2029 political term, as a result of election results in both the Parliament and the member states.

Public participation in environmental governance is believed to have the potential to address the limitations of representative democracy towards climate change (Levin et al., 2012; Caluwaerts & Reuchamps, 2015; Pickering, 2023). However, empirical research reveals that participation does not always enhance environmental policy decisions and outcomes (De Vente et al., 2016). From existing literature, we know that design features are vital for high quality participation (Reed, 2008; Newig et al., 2013). Yet, little attention has been given to the effect of factors external to the participation process driving or impeding its quality (e.g., democratic standards, national means, the existence of climate policy frameworks, etc) (Newig & Fritsch, 2009; Drazkiewicz et al., 2016; Jager et al., 2020). Therefore, we seek to identify several types of factors (e.g., procedural, legal, contextual, etc.) that shape the quality of participation for its successful application in environmental governance. To this end, we will first assess comparatively the quality of the public consultations conducted by member states during the elaboration of their National Energy and Climate Plans (NECPs), drawing on data from two sets of draft and final submissions (2018–2019 and 2023–2024). Secondly, we will employ multiple regression analysis to identify the different types of factors that may drive or hinder high-quality public participation in various contexts. The findings will offer insights for designing more effective, context-sensitive participation mechanisms in environmental governance.

A growing number of deliberative spaces such as citizens’ assemblies, juries, planning cells, and deliberative polls, have emerged in an attempt to address deficits of legitimacy within government and representative institutions by including ordinary citizens in the decision-making process. In recent years, political attention has turned to citizens’ assemblies and other deliberative methods of public participation in climate change after their successful application in several European countries. Over the past 15 years, Ireland has developed a reputation internationally as a pioneer in the use of citizens’ assemblies in national policymaking. Ireland was among the first countries to run a national citizens’ assembly on climate change, and more recently it also was one of the first countries to run citizens’ assemblies for adults and for children and young people on the same topic in parallel, on the topic of biodiversity loss. This paper will examine the impact of these two parallel citizens’ assemblies on environmental governance and on wider society, paying particular attention to the intergenerational dimension of their deliberations and impact. It will draw on desk research and expert interviews with policymakers and stakeholders being conducted within the framework of the Horizon Europe RETOOL project.

Addressing the climate emergency requires deep and rapid social and economic transformations that will have significant impacts on citizens’ lives. To improve the quality and acceptability of climate policies, and to minimise social backlash, it is necessary to engage the public in decision making. In recent years, citizens’ assemblies have become a popular approach to public participation. Climate assemblies are frequently cited for their potential to shift climate policy and political debates. Yet, our knowledge of the impacts of these processes on climate governance remains fragmented.

This paper investigates the evolving practice of climate and ecological citizens’ assemblies and their impact on climate governance, based on the analysis of national climate assemblies in Europe. Through comparative review of third-party evaluations of the impact of several climate assemblies, and semi-structured interviews with key climate policy stakeholders and deliberative democracy practitioners involved in the organisation of the assemblies, we elucidate pathways to impact and explore the embedding of assemblies and the institutionalisation of deliberative participation across Europe. Thus, this paper contributes to our understanding of the relationship between distinct democratic innovations and broader climate governance.