Abstract Sites of global environmental governance (GEG), like the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change Conference of Parties (UNFCCC COP), are critical spaces where state and nonstate actors grapple with our planet’s most pressing challenges. Failure to address the unequal impacts of the climate crisis has led scholars and decision makers to call for more transparent, inclusive, and accountable decision-making processes. However, the ever-increasing number and variety of participants has failed to translate into more equitable outcomes. How do institutional structures and relations of power at sites of GEG privilege certain actors and shape participant experiences? This article argues for a retheorization of access in GEG. Based on collaborative event ethnography at COP26, we find that discriminatory design, technological disparities, and recognitional injustice hamper meaningful sustained access, reify power disparities, and undermine inclusion. Integrating critical disability studies, we show how the COVID-19 pandemic drew into sharper focus the distinctions among inclusion, access, and accessibility that structure GEG and can offer lessons for addressing these inequities.
Baker et al. (Thu,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: