Convention Submission, Review, and Scheduling! All Academic Convention can help with all of your abstract management needs and many more. Contact us today for a quote! Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! Click here for more information.
Association: Name: ISA's 49th ANNUAL CONVENTION, BRIDGING MULTIPLE DIVIDES URL: http://www.isanet.org
Citation: URL: http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p252237_index.html Direct Link: HTML Code:

Pulver, Simone. "Public Debate versus Private Interests: Two Logics of Influence in the International Climate Change Negotiations, 1991-2003" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the ISA's 49th ANNUAL CONVENTION, BRIDGING MULTIPLE DIVIDES, Hilton San Francisco, SAN FRANCISCO, CA, USA, Mar 26, 2008 <Not Available>. 2009-05-23 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p252237_index.html>

Pulver, S. , 2008-03-26 "Public Debate versus Private Interests: Two Logics of Influence in the International Climate Change Negotiations, 1991-2003" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the ISA's 49th ANNUAL CONVENTION, BRIDGING MULTIPLE DIVIDES, Hilton San Francisco, SAN FRANCISCO, CA, USA <Not Available>. 2009-05-23 from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p252237_index.html

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript Abstract: Most analyses would predict little dynamism in conflicts between environmental groups and oil companies over the course of the UN climate negotiations. In terms of material resources and structural influence, the oil industry overwhelms the environmental community. In spite of the mismatch in material and structural power, fossil fuel interests did not dictate the trajectory of international climate policy. Rather, the environmental groups were able, at least initially, to orient the international climate policy process towards environmental concerns. This paper compares the tactics and relative success of the organizational efforts of the environmental and oil industry communities, tracing the extent to which intra-community unity and/or discord respectively enhanced and/or undermined the two communities influence in the international climate change negotiations. The paper highlights the importance of the institutional arrangements of the multilateral climate negotiations for the respective influence of the two non-state actor groups. The paper argues that the public sphere characteristics of the UN climate negotiations—namely that decisions must be justified by rational deliberation of the common good and cannot simply reflect the particular interests of powerful actors—provided environmental supporters of climate protection with an institutional terrain on which they were able to challenge the structural and material influence of private and state actors opposed to action on climate change.

Public Debate vs. Private Interests: The political influence of oil companies and ENGOs in the UN climate debates

Power in the Public Sphere: The UN Climate Negotiations as a Contemporary International Public Sphere