Centrum för klimatpolitisk forskning (CSPR) har genomfört en utvärdering av Linköpings universitets (LiU) klimatarbete. I de detta brief pekar vi på de mest akuta utmaningarna med nuvarande klimatarbete och presenterar fyra rekommendationer för hur LiU:s klimatarbete kan utformas i linje med dess vision om att bidra till en bättre värld (LiU:s vision 2030).  

Despite globally rising inequality levels, consideration of this core aspect of social sustainability is largely missing from climate policy assessments. This way, climate policy risks becoming a missed opportunity for reducing inequalities, instead causing unequally distributed effects. This study responds to calls for greater coherence between social dimensions of sustainable development and climate action. We chart the state of play for inequality matters in climate policy, by examining if and how states propose interventions to address inequality in their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) to the Paris Agreement. Following warnings that vested interests, faulty institutions, and power asymmetries inhibit effective implementation of inequality-mitigating actions related to climate policy, the study also maps the cross-country patterns of proposed inequality interventions to identify how inequalities are addressed by different types of states. The study shows that two thirds of states address inequality in their NDCs and that inequality considerations are especially prominent among countries with lower levels of human development and greater income inequality. We conclude that, while the viability of intervention proposals is uncertain at best, addressing inequalities in the NDCs can serve as a gateway to a more systematic incorporation of inequalities in the Paris Agreement. 

Vid torra år medger vattendomen för Glan att vattennivån kortvarigt kan sjunka så mycket att det får negativa konsekvenser för dricksvattenleveransen i Norrköping. Detta hade enkelt kunnat förebyggas genom reglering i god tid. Men dagens vattendom tillåter inte detta.

Climate adaptation aid represents a climate action with its own risk profile. When donor fragmentation, misaligned objectives, and insufficient localization converge, they create compound risks where interventions meant to strengthen resilience may instead exacerbate vulnerabilities through maladaptation (Reckien et al 2023, Schipper et al 2020). The effectiveness of climate aid depends on navigating tensions between multiple objectives and knowledge systems. Justice considerations, diverse ontologies and epistemologies, and cross-cutting issues like gender and conflict introduce additional complexity that can either generate policy coherence or produce adverse unintended consequences (Srivastava et al 2022, Malloy & Ashcraft 2020, Persson 2009, England et al 2018). Since 2015, Swedish aid authorities have mandated integrated approaches addressing environment, climate, conflict, and gender in all Sida-funded operations for decades, and increasingly since 2015 (Brodén Gyberg & Mobjörk 2021). We analyze Swedish climate adaptation aid in East Africa to examine how these integrated frameworks attempt to govern complexity. Using policy analysis and interviews with aid staff and implementing partners, we explore how cross-cutting perspectives are framed and operationalized. 

Official enviroment and climate aid has increased in recent decades (Brodén Gyberg & Fridahl 2025). This type of aid aims to address climate change, strengthen resilience, reduce vulnerabilities, and combat poverty. However, challenges such as donor fragmentation, lack of coordination, misalignment of objectives, and insufficient localization hinder its effectiveness (Janus et al 2015, Reckien et al 2023, Schipper et al 2020). In some cases, ODA can lead to maladaptation, exacerbating vulnerabilities rather than alleviating them. Although challenges exist, the use of integrated approaches can contribute to policy coherence, sustainability and effectivness, limiting adverse unintended consequences (Persson 2009, England et al 2018). Swedish aid authorities have integrated environment and climate, conflict, and gender into its aid operations for decades, an ambition that was sharpened in 2015. We present work in progress based on an analysis of Swedish climate adaptation aid in Eastern Africa, exploring the preconditions for governing complexity and fostering transfomative adaptation through the use of integrated approaches. We analyze how the ambitions for integrating cross-cutting issues are framed and legitimized in central policy documents and how aid practitioners navigate the opportunities and challenges with these ambitions. 

Climate change and inequalities are intrinsically linked, both in terms of unequal responsibilities for causing emissions, and who bears the brunt of its effects. The impact of and consequences for inequalities also need to be considered when policy responses to climate change are designed, but such consideration is hitherto underdeveloped in both research and practice. In this article, the construction of interlinkages between climate action and inequalities states’ Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) to the Paris Agreement is put under scrutiny. In light of growing calls to enhance coherence between the 2030 Agenda and the climate goals, and as a counterweight to the oftentimes technocratic accounts of policy coherence, this study examines how states problematize climate action and inequalities by studying both how interactions are portrayed, and which interventions are suggested to address them. As states gear up for the consideration of a next round of NDCs, this study contributes a critical analysis of how cross-cutting issues are incorporated and identifies opportunities and challenges for inclusion and assessment of inequalities in the NDC process of the Paris Agreement.

The Paris Agreement places states' nationally determined contributions (NDCs) at the center of global climate politics. While previous research on the NDC has provided important suggestions for enhanced legitimacy and effectiveness of global climate governance, I examine the NDC not in terms of its content, but as an instrument for governing climate conduct in the post-Paris regime. By analyzing state submissions to post-Paris NDC negotiations, I identify five functions of the NDC: Progress Tracker, Trust-Builder, Influencer, Differentiator, and Gatekeeper. While the first three functions are informed by a techno-managerial rationality that posits effective climate action as a project of increased information-sharing, the last two highlight underlying political struggles of responsibility and fairness which are not necessearily solvable through intensified collaboration. I argue that these diverging views on the function of the NDC will become increasingly prominent as we move toward the first round of the global stocktake in 2023. 

The 2015 Paris Agreement is often depicted as a turning point for global climate governance. Following years of diplomatic gridlock, it laid the foundations for a new global climate regime that invites states to partner with nonstate actors in the transition to the low-carbon society. This article critically examines the political rationalities that inform the pluralization of climate politics after Paris and the turn toward cooperative modes of governing. Drawing on an analysis of initiatives led by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change that were launched to engage nonstate actors in the evolving Paris regime, we identify a global governmentality that mobilizes nonstate actors as active and responsible partners in the quest for rapid and deep decarbonization. In its search for cooperative and efficient forms of problem management, we argue, this form of rule nurtures a global space free from friction and opposition where businesses, investors, and industry are elevated as the real partners of government.