Governance evaluation reveals moderate efficacy and regional disparities among transnational climate initiatives in South Asia, highlighting the need for improved institutional planning.
Climate change is a complex global challenge that necessitates a unified international approach, transcending state and sector boundaries. This study delves into the efficacy of transnational climate change governance ( TCCG ) initiatives in the post-Paris era, with a specific focus on South Asia. The research utilizing the ‘Functional-Output-Fit’ model, evaluates the productivity of these initiatives based on observable and measurable outcomes. Despite the proliferation of initiatives following the Paris Agreement, the study finds a notable dearth of initiatives specifically targeting South Asia. Moreover, there is intra-regional disparities in country representation within climate initiatives, emphasizing the importance of equal participation and collaboration among all regional stakeholders. The findings suggest that a significant proportion of the initiatives in the region have shown positive output performance, indicating overall progress. However, variations exist across different action areas. The analysis of functional and organizational characteristics reveals that while many initiatives demonstrate moderate effectiveness in achieving their intended outcomes, there is room for improvement in certain areas such as policy planning, institutionalization, and target setting to enhance their overall impact. The study makes a significant contribution to the scientific understanding of transnational climate governance in South Asia by providing valuable insights into the representation, focus areas, and effectiveness of climate initiatives in the region. It further highlights that additional research is necessary to delve deeper into the factors contributing to the broader discrepancies in participation and implementation of transnational climate initiatives, particularly in the global south and specifically in South Asia.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kaif et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: