Institutional Accountability of Nonstate Actors in the UNFCCC: Exit, Voice, and Loyalty

J. Kuyper, K. Bäckstrand, H. Schroeder

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

15 Citations (Scopus)


How are nonstate actors within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) held to account? In this article, we introduce the concept of “institutional accountability” to complement the wider literature(s) on accountability in climate governance. Within institutional frameworks, actors employ rules, norms, and procedures to demand justifications from one another. In light of those justifications, actors then use “exit, voice, or loyalty” to positively or negatively sanction each other. To depict the dynamics of institutional accountability, we analyze the role of nonstate actors in the nine constituency groups of the UNFCCC. We outline the constituency structure and the population of observer organizations. We then identify examples where nonstate actors employed institutional rules in tandem with exit, voice, or loyalty to foster accountability. In making this analysis we draw upon three years of on-site participation at UNFCCC meetings, document analysis, and more than 40 semi-structured interviews with state and nonstate actors. We conclude by discussing the scope and conditions under which institutional accountability may occur in other issue areas of global governance. © 2016 Policy Studies Organization
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)88-109
JournalReview of Policy Research
Issue number1
Early online date28 Nov 2016
Publication statusPublished - 09 Jan 2017

Bibliographical note

Cited By :7

Export Date: 19 September 2018


References: Bäckstrand, K., Accountability of networked climate governance: The rise of transnational climate partnerships (2008) Global Environmental Politics, 8 (3), pp. 74-102; Balboa, C., Mission interference: How competition confounds accountability for environmental nongovernmental organizations (2017) Review of Policy Research, 34, pp. 110-131; Barry, B., Review article: Exit voice and loyalty (1974) British Journal of Political Science, 4 (1), pp. 79-107; Betsill, M.M., Corell, E., NGO influence in international environmental negotiations: A framework for analysis (2001) Global Environmental Politics, 1 (4), pp. 65-85; Betsill, M.M., Corell, E., (2008) NGO diplomacy: The influence of non-governmental organizations in international environmental negotiations, , Cambridge, MA, MIT Press; Betsill, M.M., Dubash, N.K., Paterson, M., van Asselt, H., Vihma, A., Winkler, H., Building productive links between the UNFCCC and the broader global climate governance landscape (2015) Global Environmental Politics, 15 (2), pp. 1-10; Bomberg, E., Mind the (mobilization) gap. Comparing climate activism in the United States and the European Union (2012) Review of Policy Research, 29 (3), pp. 408-430; Bond, P., (2012) Politics of climate justice: Paralysis above, movement below, , Scottsville, South Africa, University of KwaZulu Natal Press; Campbell, L.M., Corson, C., Gray, N.J., MacDonald, K.I., Brosius, J.P., Studying global environmental meetings to understand global environmental governance: Collaborative event ethnography at the tenth conference of the parties to the convention on biological diversity (2014) Global Environmental Politics, 14 (3), pp. 1-20; (2007) What's missing from the climate talks? Justice!, ,, Press release, 14 December. Retrieved from; Derman, B., Climate governance, justice, and transnational civil society (2014) Climate Policy, 14 (1), pp. 23-41; Dowding, K., John, P., Mergoupis, T., van Vugt, M., Exit, voice and loyalty: Analytic and empirical developments (2000) European Journal of Political Research, 37, pp. 469-495; Fisher, D., Galli, A., Civil society (2015) Research handbook on climate governance, pp. 297-308. , In, K. Bäckstrand, &, E. Lövbrand, (Eds.),, London, Edgar Elgar; Friedman, E.J., Hochstetler, K., Clark, A.-M., (2005) Sovereignty, democracy and global civil society: State-society relations at UN world conference, , New York, State University of New York Press; Gates, S., Hill, J., Democratic accountability and governmental innovation in the use of non-profit organizations (1995) Review of Policy Research, 14 (1-2), pp. 137-148; Gerlak, A.K., Resistance and reform: Transboundary water governance in the Colorado River Delta (2015) Review of Policy Research, 32 (1), pp. 100-123; Grant, R., Keohane, R.O., Accountability and abuses of power in world politics (2005) American Political Science Review, 99 (1), pp. 29-44; Green, J., (2014) Rethinking private authority. Agents and entrepreneurs in global environmental governance, , Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press; Hadden, J., Explaining variation in transnational climate change activism: The role of inter-movement spill-over (2014) Global Environmental Politics, 14 (2), pp. 7-25; Hadden, J., (2015) Networks in contention. The divisive politics of climate change, , Cambridge, Cambridge University Press; Hale, T., All hands on deck. The Paris Agreement and nonstate climate action (2016) Global Environmental Politics, 16 (3), pp. 12-22; Hirschman, A.O., (1970) Exit, voice, and loyalty: Responses to decline in firms, organizations, and states, , Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press; Johnson, C., Accountability without borders: Problems of sovereignty and responsibility in the global climate regime Review of Policy Research., , (in press); Jordan, A.J., Huitema, D., Hildén, M., van Asselt, H., Rayner, T.J., Schoenefeld, J.J., Boasson, E.L., Emergence of polycentric climate governance and its future prospects (2015) Nature Climate Change, 5, pp. 977-982; Keohane, R.O., Global governance and democratic accountability (2003) Taming globalization: Frontiers of governance, , In, D. Held, &, M. Koenig-Archibugi, (Eds.),, London, Polity Press; Koenig-Archibugi, M., Transnational corporations and public accountability (2005) Global governance and public accountability, , In, D. Held, &, M. Koenig-Archibugi, (Eds.),, Oxford, Blackwell Publishing; Kramarz, T., Park, S., Accountability in global environmental governance: A meaningful tool for action? (2016) Global Environmental Politics, 16 (2), pp. 1-21; Kramarz, T., Park, S., Introduction: The politics of environmental accountability (2017) Review of Policy Research, 34, pp. 4-9; Krasner, S.D., Structural causes and regime consequences: Regimes as intervening variables (1982) International Organization, 36 (2), pp. 185-205; Kuyper, J.W., Bäckstrand, K., Accountability and representation: Nonstate actors in UN climate diplomacy (2016) Global Environmental Politics, 16 (2), pp. 61-81; Macdonald, T., (2008) Global stakeholder democracy: Power and representation beyond liberal states, , Oxford, Oxford University Press; Nasiritousi, N., Hjerpe, M., Buhr, K., Pluralising climate change solutions: Views held and voiced by participants at the international climate negotiations (2014) Ecological Economics, 105, pp. 177-184; Newell, P., Civil society, corporate accountability and the politics of climate change (2008) Global Environmental Politics, 8 (3), pp. 122-153; Olson, J., Whose voices matter? Gender equality in the United Nations framework convention on climate change (2014) Agenda, 28 (3), pp. 184-187; Omelicheva, M., Global civil society and democratizing of world politics. A bona fide relationship or illusory liaison? (2009) International Studies Review, 11, pp. 109-132; Orr, S., Institutional control and climate change activism at COP21 in Paris (2016) Global Environmental Politics, 16 (3), pp. 23-30; Reitan, R., Gibson, S., Climate change or social change. Environmental and leftist praxis and participatory action research (2012) Globalizations, 9 (3), pp. 395-410; Rosenberg, J., More than a question of agency: Privatized project implementation, accountabilities, and global environmental governance (2017) Review of Policy Research, 34, pp. 10-30; Rosenthal, C.S., Rosenthal, J.A., Moore, J., Smith, J., Beyond (and within) city limits. Climate policy in an intergovernmental system (2015) Review of Policy Research, 32 (5), pp. 538-555; Scholte, J.A., Civil society and democratically accountable global governance (2004) Government and Opposition, 39 (2), pp. 211-233; Schroeder, H., Boykoff, M., Spiers, L., Equity and state representations in climate negotiations (2012) Nature Climate Change, 2, pp. 834-836; Schroeder, H., Lovell, H., The role of non-nation-state actors and side events in the international climate negotiations (2012) Climate Policy, 12 (1), pp. 23-37; Slaughter, A.-M., (2004) A new world order, , Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press; Stevenson, H., Dryzek, J.S., (2014) Democratizing global climate governance, , Cambridge, Cambridge University Press; Vormedal, I., The influence of business and industry NGOs in the negotiation of the Kyoto mechanisms: The case of carbon capture and storage in the CDM (2008) Global Environmental Politics, 8 (4), pp. 36-65; Accountability challenges in the transnational regime complex for climate change (2017) Review of Policy Research, 34, pp. 68-87; Willetts, P., (2011) Non-governmental organizations in world politics. The construction of global governance, , London, Routledge; Yamin, F., Depledge, J., (2004) The international climate change regime. A guide to rules, institutions and procedures, , Cambridge, Cambridge University Press; Young, O., (2002) The institutional dimensions of environmental change: Fit, interplay and scale, , Cambridge, MA, MIT Press


  • accountability
  • civil society
  • climate change
  • governance
  • nonstate actors
  • environmental policy
  • governance approach
  • United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change


Dive into the research topics of 'Institutional Accountability of Nonstate Actors in the UNFCCC: Exit, Voice, and Loyalty'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this