Wissenschaft hat einen großen Anteil daran, internationale Umweltprobleme auf die politische Tagesordnung zu bringen und Maßnahmen zu ihrer technischen Lösung zu entwerfen. Dies gilt sowohl für den Abbau der Ozonschicht als auch für den Klimawandel. So relevant die Generierung von wissenschaftlichen Erkenntnissen in diesen Feldern ist, so komplex ist die Interaktion zwischen Wissenschaft und Politik und so schwierig ist es, Verlässliches darüber zu sagen. Thomas Hickmann analysiert das Verhältnis von Wissenschaft und Politik in internationalen Umweltregimen aus einer neuen Perspektive. Er untersucht nicht den Einfluss wissenschaftlicher Erkenntnisse auf die Politik, sondern rückt die Frage in den Fokus, inwieweit Regierungen Einfluss auf die Wissenschaft nehmen, um nationale Interessen durchzusetzen. Diese Perspektive wurde in der Forschung bislang weitgehend vernachlässigt, weshalb eine systematische Analyse dieser Frage in der Literatur fehlt.

The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) is a prominent example of the mix of public and private authority in global climate policy-making. While national governments hold the supreme authority in the CDM, the oversight and daily supervision of the project-based mechanism have been delegated via an intergovernmental body to private corporations that evaluate the environmental performance of individual CDM projects. By focusing on the CDM as a particular instance of private authority in global climate governance, this article analyses the consequences associated with the delegation of authority to private actors. The article critically assesses the role of private auditing corporations, labelled Designated Operational Entities, in the regulatory framework of the CDM and points to serious trade-offs which accompany the privatisation of authority. The article's findings suggest that the promise of innovative modes of governance to increase the effectiveness of international regulation is seriously compromised by the profit-seeking behaviour of private actors. Hence, the article underscores the need to reconsider the balance between public and private authority in global (climate) governance.

Numerous scholars have lately highlighted the importance of cities in the global response to climate change. However, we still have little systematic knowledge on the evolution of urban climate politics in the Global South. In particular, we lack empirical studies that examine how local climate actions arise in political-administrative systems of developing and emerging economies. Therefore, this article adopts a multilevel governance perspective to explore the climate mitigation responses of three major cities in South Africa by looking at their vertical and horizontal integration in the wider governance framework. In the absence of a coherent national climate policy, Johannesburg, Cape Town, and Durban have developed distinct climate actions within their jurisdictions. In their effort to address climate change, transnational city networks have provided considerable technical support to these cities. Yet, substantial domestic political-economic obstacles hinder the three cities to develop a more ambitious stance on climate change.