Disclosing or obscuring? The politics of transparency in global climate governance

Aarti Gupta*, Michael Mason

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

27 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Transparency is increasingly evoked within public and private climate governance arrangements as a key means to enhance accountability and improve environmental outcomes. We review assumed links between transparency, accountability and environmental sustainability here, by identifying four rationales underpinning uptake of transparency in governance. We label these democratization, technocratization, marketization and privatization, and assess how they shape the scope and practices of climate disclosure, and to what effect. We find that all four are discernible in climate governance, yet the technocratic and privatization rationales tend to overtake the originally intended (more inclusive, and more public-good oriented) democratization and marketization rationales for transparency, particularly during institutionalization of disclosure systems. This reduces transparency's potential to enhance accountability or trigger more environmentally sustainable outcomes.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)82-90
JournalCurrent Opinion in Environmental Sustainability
Volume18
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Feb 2016

Fingerprint

transparency
global climate
politics
climate
governance
accountability
democratization
privatization
responsibility
institutionalization
sustainability

Cite this

@article{ac36123c187845939dfe410698645025,
title = "Disclosing or obscuring? The politics of transparency in global climate governance",
abstract = "Transparency is increasingly evoked within public and private climate governance arrangements as a key means to enhance accountability and improve environmental outcomes. We review assumed links between transparency, accountability and environmental sustainability here, by identifying four rationales underpinning uptake of transparency in governance. We label these democratization, technocratization, marketization and privatization, and assess how they shape the scope and practices of climate disclosure, and to what effect. We find that all four are discernible in climate governance, yet the technocratic and privatization rationales tend to overtake the originally intended (more inclusive, and more public-good oriented) democratization and marketization rationales for transparency, particularly during institutionalization of disclosure systems. This reduces transparency's potential to enhance accountability or trigger more environmentally sustainable outcomes.",
author = "Aarti Gupta and Michael Mason",
year = "2016",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.cosust.2015.11.004",
language = "English",
volume = "18",
pages = "82--90",
journal = "Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability",
issn = "1877-3435",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

Disclosing or obscuring? The politics of transparency in global climate governance. / Gupta, Aarti; Mason, Michael.

In: Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, Vol. 18, 01.02.2016, p. 82-90.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Disclosing or obscuring? The politics of transparency in global climate governance

AU - Gupta, Aarti

AU - Mason, Michael

PY - 2016/2/1

Y1 - 2016/2/1

N2 - Transparency is increasingly evoked within public and private climate governance arrangements as a key means to enhance accountability and improve environmental outcomes. We review assumed links between transparency, accountability and environmental sustainability here, by identifying four rationales underpinning uptake of transparency in governance. We label these democratization, technocratization, marketization and privatization, and assess how they shape the scope and practices of climate disclosure, and to what effect. We find that all four are discernible in climate governance, yet the technocratic and privatization rationales tend to overtake the originally intended (more inclusive, and more public-good oriented) democratization and marketization rationales for transparency, particularly during institutionalization of disclosure systems. This reduces transparency's potential to enhance accountability or trigger more environmentally sustainable outcomes.

AB - Transparency is increasingly evoked within public and private climate governance arrangements as a key means to enhance accountability and improve environmental outcomes. We review assumed links between transparency, accountability and environmental sustainability here, by identifying four rationales underpinning uptake of transparency in governance. We label these democratization, technocratization, marketization and privatization, and assess how they shape the scope and practices of climate disclosure, and to what effect. We find that all four are discernible in climate governance, yet the technocratic and privatization rationales tend to overtake the originally intended (more inclusive, and more public-good oriented) democratization and marketization rationales for transparency, particularly during institutionalization of disclosure systems. This reduces transparency's potential to enhance accountability or trigger more environmentally sustainable outcomes.

U2 - 10.1016/j.cosust.2015.11.004

DO - 10.1016/j.cosust.2015.11.004

M3 - Article

VL - 18

SP - 82

EP - 90

JO - Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability

JF - Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability

SN - 1877-3435

ER -