Vegard Heggelund Tørstad

• Tørstad, Vegard (2020). Participation, ambition and compliance: can the Paris Agreement solve the effectiveness trilemma? Environmental Politics. ISSN 0964-4016. 29(5), s. 761–780. doi: 10.1080/09644016.2019.1710322.
• Tørstad, Vegard; Sælen, Håkon & Bøyum, Live Standal (2020). The domestic politics of international climate commitments: which factors explain cross-country variation in NDC ambition? Environmental Research Letters. ISSN 1748-9326. 15(2). doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/ab63e0. Fulltekst i vitenarkiv
• Sælen, Håkon; Tørstad, Vegard; Holz, Christian & Nielsen, Tobias Dan (2019). Fairness conceptions and self-determined mitigation ambition under the Paris Agreement: Is there a relationship? Environmental Science and Policy. ISSN 1462-9011. 101, s. 245–254. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2019.08.018. Fulltekst i vitenarkiv
• Tørstad, Vegard (2018). Håndhevelse og Legitimitet: En Integrativ Vurdering av Parisavtalens Effektivitet. Internasjonal Politikk. ISSN 0020-577X. 76(1), s. 47–72. doi: 10.23865/intpol.v76.660. Vis sammendrag

  Denne artikkelen drøfter hvilke kriterier som er relevante for å måle klimaavtalers effektivitet, og evaluerer Parisavtalen i lys av disse. Tilnærmingsmåten er både deduktiv og induktiv, i den forstand at artikkelen både drøfter hva eksisterende teori kan fortelle om effektiviteten til Parisavtalen – og samtidig bruker Parisavtalen som et referansepunkt for å utvide det eksisterende analyseapparatet på klimaavtalers effektivitet. I motsetning til mye av det som så langt har blitt hevdet om prospektene til Parisavtalen, argumenterer denne artikkelen for at utsiktene for avtalens effektivitet er lovende på nåværende tidspunkt. Det er hovedsakelig tre grunner til det. For det første nyter avtalen bred støtte og deltakelse. For det andre er avtalen relativt ambisiøs. For det tredje sender avtalen tydelige signaler om universalitet, endrede økonomiske incentiver og viktigheten av ikke-statlige aktører, noe som kan bidra til at dens implementering fasiliteres.

• Tørstad, Vegard & Sælen, Håkon (2017). Fairness in the climate negotiations: what explains variation in parties’ expressed conceptions? Climate Policy. ISSN 1469-3062. 18(5), s. 642–654. doi: 10.1080/14693062.2017.1341372. Fulltekst i vitenarkiv Vis sammendrag

  How to differentiate efforts and obligations fairly between countries has been among the most central and controversial issues in climate negotiations. This article analyses countries’ fairness conceptions as expressed in position documents submitted during negotiations leading to the Paris Agreement. A regression analysis investigates which country characteristics predict relative support for three fundamental fairness principles – Responsibility, Capability and Rights (needs). The most consistent and important explanatory variable turns out to be whether a country is included in Annex I to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), which lists developed countries. This finding is compatible with the hypothesis that parties invoke fairness principles with the goal of advancing their own interests: non-Annex I parties wanted this particular scheme of differentiation to be upheld in the Paris Agreement, whereas Annex I parties advocated its removal. Notably, the outcome in Paris omits references to Annex I. However, the Agreement does contain multiple references to ‘developed’ versus ‘developing’ countries, hence introducing a more subtle and ambiguous differentiation than before. Post-Paris, seemingly technical discussions have encountered ‘roadblocks’ that partially derive from how the Agreement resolved the issue of differentiation between developed and developing countries. It therefore appears that negotiators will have to continue to deal with this issue, even though it may take on a new dynamic now that the Annex I division has less force. Looking for pragmatic solutions tailored to each substantive agenda point will be likely more fruitful than discussions at the level of fairness principles aiming for one overarching solution.

Se alle arbeider i Cristin

• Tørstad, Vegard (2021). The Importance of Climate Thresholds in Domestic Politics.
• Ursin, Lars & Tørstad, Vegard (2021). Ekspertintervjuet: Dette står på spill i Glasgow. [Internett]. Energi og Klima.
• Wiborg, Vegard Sjurseike & Tørstad, Vegard (2021). The Effects of Mitigation Uncertainty under Pledge-and-Review: Evidence from the Lab.
• Tørstad, Vegard & Wiborg, Vegard Sjurseike (2021). Mitigation Ambiguity and Prudence in Climate Pledges.
• Tørstad, Vegard (2021). Judicialization and legitimacy: The effects of GATT/WTO dispute settlement reform on states’ legitimacy perceptions .
• Tørstad, Vegard (2021). Managing Multilateral Climate Negotiations.
• Wiborg, Vegard Sjurseike & Tørstad, Vegard (2021). The Effects of Mitigation Uncertainty under Pledge-and-Review: Evidence from the Lab.
• Tørstad, Vegard & Wiborg, Vegard Sjurseike (2021). Mitigation Ambiguity and Prudence in Climate Pledges.
• Tørstad, Vegard (2021). Can Transparency Strengthen the Legitimacy of International Institutions? Evidence from the UN Security Council.
• Sælen, Håkon; Tørstad, Vegard & Bøyum, Live Standal (2019). Domestic drivers of international climate ambition - Which factors explain cross-country variation NDC ambition? .
• Tørstad, Vegard (2018). Nå skal regelboka skrives. Klassekampen. ISSN 0805-3839.
• Tørstad, Vegard (2017). I en kano i Bonn. Klassekampen. ISSN 0805-3839.
• Sælen, Håkon & Tørstad, Vegard (2017). Fairness and ambition in international climate negotiations – is there a tradeoff?
• Tørstad, Vegard (2016). En global klimaavtale – hvorfor nå? Dagsavisen - Nye Meninger.
• Bøyum, Live Standal & Tørstad, Vegard (2016). Eit klima for endring. Klassekampen. ISSN 0805-3839.
• Tørstad, Vegard (2016). Obama-doktrinen. Klassekampen. ISSN 0805-3839.
• Tørstad, Vegard (2015). Klimabløff. Dagsavisen. ISSN 1503-2892.
• Tørstad, Vegard (2016). What’s Fair – and Why? An Empirical Analysis of Distributive Fairness in the Climate Negotiations. CICERO.

Se alle arbeider i Cristin