International cooperation for the decarbonization of energy-intensive industries: unlocking the full potential
Creators: name: Otto, Simon
name: Oberthür, Sebastian
Publisher: name: Taylor & Francis
Year: 2024
Subjects: subject: Medicine
subject: Genetics
subject: FOS: Biological sciences
subject: Pharmacology
subject: Environmental Sciences not elsewhere classified
subject: Ecology
subject: Biological Sciences not elsewhere classified
subject: Cancer
subject: Statistics
subject: FOS: Mathematics
subject: Science Policy
subject: Hematology

description: This article investigates the state of global governance for the deep decarbonization of energy-intensive industries (EIIs) and identifies key options for mobilizing the so far underexploited potential of this global governance. Focusing on four main EIIs (i.e. iron and steel, cement and concrete, chemicals, and aluminium) the analysis is advanced in three steps. First, we establish the theoretical potential of international institutions to address the main barriers to EII decarbonization focusing on six main governance functions. Second, the article provides an up-to-date account of the global governance landscape for EII decarbonization and the contribution it has made to addressing the main barriers. This assessment also identifies major gaps and underexploited potentials of global governance. Finally, we systematically appraise key options for advancing global governance for EII decarbonization based on clear assessment criteria (membership, institutional capacity, legitimacy, feasibility). The major findings are that: (a) global governance has advanced significantly in the 2020s across all governance functions, in particular through the emergence of several initiatives focused on industrial decarbonization, including the recent Climate Club; (b) key priorities for advancing global EII decarbonization concern rules for collective action, means of implementation, landscape orchestration/coordination, and a more equal coverage of different sub-sectors and regions. We argue that the main barrier to addressing these priorities is rooted in (geo)politics rather than a lack of suitable institutions. Consequently, the global governance for EII decarbonization may best be advanced through incrementally developing existing rather than creating major new institutions. Although global governance for the decarbonization of energy-intensive industries has advanced considerably, key governance gaps remain regarding rules for market creation and addressing carbon leakage, means of implementation and inter-institutional coordination.The main barrier to addressing the contested issue of carbon leakage is rooted in (geo)politics driven by resurging great power rivalry and protectionist industrial policies.Existing international institutions seem well placed to incrementally advance on the other gaps through promoting market creation, means of implementation and landscape orchestration.Such incremental advances can realize tangible benefits and thereby help prepare the ground for addressing competition and carbon leakage once a political window of opportunity arises. Although global governance for the decarbonization of energy-intensive industries has advanced considerably, key governance gaps remain regarding rules for market creation and addressing carbon leakage, means of implementation and inter-institutional coordination. The main barrier to addressing the contested issue of carbon leakage is rooted in (geo)politics driven by resurging great power rivalry and protectionist industrial policies. Existing international institutions seem well placed to incrementally advance on the other gaps through promoting market creation, means of implementation and landscape orchestration. Such incremental advances can realize tangible benefits and thereby help prepare the ground for addressing competition and carbon leakage once a political window of opportunity arises.