Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The International Renewable Energy Agency: a success story in institutional innovation?

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article interprets the role and significance of the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) in global environmental and energy governance. First, we conduct a comparative analysis of IRENA and other recent innovations in global governance, showing that IRENA stands out with regard to the timing of creation, speed of ratification, and focus of the mandate. Second, we identify three mechanisms through which IRENA can promote the global diffusion of renewable energy: (1) by offering valuable epistemic services to its member states, (2) by serving as a focal point for renewable energy in a scattered global institutional environment, and (3) by mobilizing other international institutions to promote renewable energy. Finally, we reflect on the conditions that could make IRENA’s policies a continued success and on the lessons that the experience with IRENA holds for other attempts at innovation in global governance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. ‘China to join International Renewable Energy Agency’, Press release, IRENA, January 14, 2013, http://www.irena.org/News/Description.aspx?NType=N&News_ID=287.

  2. Exceptions are Meyer (2012, 2013) and Van de Graaf (2013).

  3. For a different perspective see Ivanova (2009), who argues that UNEP’s functioning as an “anchor organization” for the global environment has been constrained by its formal status, governance, financing structure, and location.

  4. A similar kind of motivation seems to lie behind the new “Renewables Club” (or, in German, “Club der Energiewende-Staaten”) created on June 1, 2013. According to the German Minister for the Environment, Peter Altmaier, the launch of this club of ten “pioneering” countries shows that “[w]e in Germany do not stand alone with our Energiewende, but are a part of a strong group of leaders.” In other words, this new initiative too appears to be the continuation of domestic politics at the international level. The precise goal of the new Club is still somewhat vaguely defined as “to work together as advocates and implementers of renewable energy at global level,” although the Club is clearly also intended to support IRENA, which itself is a member http://www.bmu.de/N50089-1/.

  5. While there is a large literature on why states ratify environmental treaties, and also some research into the temporality and sequentiality of these ratification processes (e.g., Bernauer et al. 2010), to our knowledge no aggregate data are available to compare the pace of ratification across (environmental) treaties. Therefore, we have only included a few treaties and conventions in Fig. 3. They were selected on the basis of availability of information, importance, and relevance as a point of reference.

  6. The figures come from the organizations’ respective websites. Both annual budgets include voluntary contributions and, in the case of the IEA, revenues from the sale of publications.

Abbreviations

IRENA:

International Renewable Energy Agency

USD:

United States dollar

OPEC:

Organization of Petroleum-Exporting Countries

UN:

United Nations

REN21:

Renewable Energy Policy Network for the 21st Century

UNEP:

United Nations Environment Programme

IEA:

International Energy Agency

EU:

European Union

CCS:

Carbon capture and storage

EPO:

European Patent Office

OECD:

Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development

REEEP:

Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Program

GBEP:

Global Bioenergy Partnership

FAO:

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

UNFCCC:

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

JREC:

Johannesburg Renewable Energy Coalition

References

  • Abbott, K. W., Green, J. F., & Keohane, R. O. (2013). Organizational ecology in world politics: Institutional density and organizational strategies. Paper presented at ISA, San Francisco, April 2013.

  • Aklin, M., & Urpelainen, J. (2013). Political competition, path dependence, and the strategy of sustainable energy transitions. American Journal of Political Science, 57(3), 643–658.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asif, M., & Muneer, T. (2007). Energy supply, its demand and security issues for developed and emerging economies. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 11(7), 1388–1413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baccini, L., & Urpelainen, J. (2012). International institutions and domestic politics: Can preferential trading agreements help leaders promote economic reform? Journal of Politics. http://eprints.imtlucca.it/id/eprint/77

  • Barrett, S. (2009). The coming global climate-technology revolution. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 23(2), 53–75.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bauer, S., Busch, P. O., & Siebenhuener, B. (2009). Treaty secretariats in global environmental governance. In: F. Biermann & S. Bauer (Eds.), International organizations in global environmental governance (pp. 174–191). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernauer, T., Kalbhenn, A., Koubi, V., & Spilker, G. (2010). A comparison of international and domestic sources of global governance dynamics. British Journal of Political Science, 40(3), 509–538.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biermann, F., & Siebenhuener, B. (2009). The role and relevance of international bureaucracies: Setting the stage. In: F. Biermann & B. Siebenhuener (Eds.), Managers of global change: The influence of environmental bureaucracies (pp. 1–14). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Brass, J. N., Carley, S., MacLean, L. M., & Baldwin, E. (2012). Power for development: A review of distributed generation projects in the developing world. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 37, 107–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • British Petroleum. (2013). Statistical review of world energy. Available at http://www.bp.com/statisticalreview.

  • Burke, P. J. (2010). Income, resources, and electricity mix. Energy Economics, 32(3), 616–626.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cass, L. R. (2012). The symbolism of environmental policy: Foreign policy commitments as signaling tools. In: P. G. Harris (Ed.), Environmental change and foreign policy: Theory and practice (pp. 41–56) London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chayes, A., & Chayes, A. H. (1995). The new sovereignty: Compliance with international regulatory agreements. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheon, A., & Urpelainen, J. (2012). Oil prices and energy technology innovation: An empirical analysis. Global Environmental Change, 22(2), 407–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cole, W. M. (2005). Sovereignty relinquished? Explaining commitment to the international human rights covenants, 1966–1999. American Sociological Review, 70(3), 472–495.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colgan, J. D. (2013). The emperor has no clothes: The limits of OPEC in the global oil market. International Organization (forthcoming).

  • Collier, P., & Venables, A. J. (2012). Greening Africa? Technologies, endowments and the latecomer effect. Energy Economics, 34(S1), S75–S84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dai, X. (2005). Why comply? The domestic constituency mechanism. International Organization, 59(2), 363–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeRose, A. M., La Vina, A. G., & Hoff, G. (2003). The outcomes of Johannesburg: Assessing the world summit on sustainable development. SAIS Review, 23(1), 53–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Downs, G. W., Rocke, D. M., & Barsoom, P. N. (1996). Is the good news about compliance good news about cooperation? International Organization, 50(3), 379–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Downs, G. W., Rocke, D. M., & Barsoom, P. N. (1998). Managing the evolution of multilateralism. International Organization, 52(2), 397–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Florini, A. (2011). The International Energy Agency in global energy governance. Global Policy, 2(s1), 40–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gallup. (2011). Fewer Americans, Europeans view global warming as a threat. Entry available at http://www.gallup.com/poll/147203/Fewer-Americans-Europeans-View-Global-Warming-Threat.aspx.

  • Gilligan, M. J. (2004). Is there a broader-deeper trade-off in international multilateral agreements? International Organization, 58(3), 459–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirschl, B. (2009). International renewable energy policy: Between marginalization and initial approaches. Energy Policy, 37(11), 4407–4416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IEA. (2010). IEA activities on renewable energy: An update. Available at http://www.iea.org/IEAnews/0310/REN_Brochure.pdf.

  • IRENA. (2009). Statute of the International Renewable Energy Agency. Available at http://www.irena.org/menu/index.aspx?mnu=cat&PriMenuID=13&CatID=126.

  • IRENA. (2011). Decision regarding the work programme and budget for 2011. Available at http://www.irena.org/DocumentDownloads/WP2011/A_1_DC_8.pdf.

  • IRENA. (2013a). Decision regarding the work programme and budget for 2013. Available at http://www.irena.org/DocumentDownloads/WP2013.pdf.

  • IRENA. (2013b). Report of the fourth meeting of the council of the International Renewable Energy Agency: List of participants. Available at http://www.irena.org/documents/uploadDocuments/4thCouncil/C_4_SR_1.pdf.

  • Ivanova, M. (2009). UNEP as anchor organization for the global environment. In: F. Biermann, S. Bernd & S. Anna (Eds.), International organizations in global environmental governance (pp. 151–173). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalkuhl, M., Edenhofer, O., & Lessmann, K. (2012). Learning or lock-in: Optimal technology policies to support mitigation. Resource and Energy Economics, 34(1), 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karlsson-Vinkhuyzen, S. I. (2010). The United Nations and global energy governance: Past challenges, future choices. Global Change, Peace and Security, 22(2), 175–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ki-Moon, B. (2011). Sustainable energy for all: A vision statement by Ban Ki-Moon, Secretary-General of the United Nations, November 2011.

  • Kingdon, J. W. (1984). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. Boston: Little, Brown.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krasner, S. D. (1991). Global communications and national power: Life on the Pareto frontier. World Politics, 43(3), 336–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lesage, D., Van de Graaf, T., & Westphal, K. (2010). Global energy governance in a multipolar world. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mansfield, E. D. (1995). Review: International institutions and economic sanctions. World Politics, 47(4), 575–605.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, T. (2012). Global public goods, governance risk, and international energy. Duke Journal of Comparative and International Law, 22, 319–348.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, T. (2013). Epistemic institutions and epistemic cooperation in international environmental governance. Transnational Environmental Law, 2(2), 15–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moravcsik, A. (1997). Taking preferences seriously: A liberal theory of international politics. International organization, 51(04), 513–553.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orsini, A., Morin, J. F., & Young, O. (2013). Regime complexes: A buzz, a boom, or a boost for global governance? Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organizations, 19(1), 27–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Park, J., Conca, K., & Finger, M. (2008). The death of Rio environmentalism. In: J. Park, K. Conca & M. Finger (Eds.), The crisis of global environmental governance: Towards a new political economy of sustainability (pp. 1–12) London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pauwelyn, J., Wessel, R., & Wouters, J. (2012). The stagnation of international law. KU Leuven, Working paper no. 97, October 2012.

  • Pew. (2013). Who’s winning the clean energy race? 2012 edition. Available at http://www.pewenvironment.org/uploadedFiles/PEG/Publications/Report/-clenG20-Report-2012-Digital.pdf.

  • Pidgeon, N., & Fischhoff, B. (2011). The role of social and decision sciences in communicating uncertain climate risks. Nature Climate Change, 1, 35–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poast, P., & Urpelainen, J. (2013). Fit and feasible: Why democratizing states form, not join, international organizations. International Studies Quarterly. doi:10.1111/isqu.12031

  • Raustiala, K., & Victor, D. G. (2004). The regime complex for plant genetic resources. International Organization, 58(2), 277–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • REN21. (2012). Renewables global status report: 2012 update. REN21 Secretariat, Paris.

  • Scheer, H. (2007). Energy autonomy: The economic, social and technological case for renewable energy. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stavins, R. N. (2010). Options for the institutional venue for international climate negotiations. Available at http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/files/Stavins-Issue-Brief-3.pdf.

  • Szarka, J. (2007). Why is there no wind rush in France? European Environment, 17(5), 321–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNEP and EPO. (2013). Patents and clean energy technologies in Africa. Report available at http://www.epo.org/clean-energy-africa.

  • Urpelainen, J. (2012). The strategic design of technology funds for climate cooperation: Generating joint gains. Environmental Science and Policy, 15(1), 92–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van de Graaf, T. (2012). Obsolete or resurgent? The International Energy Agency in a changing global landscape. Energy Policy, 48, 233–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van de Graaf, T. (2013). Fragmentation in global energy governance: Explaining the creation of IRENA. Global Environmental Politics, 13(3), 14–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van de Graaf, T., & Westphal, K. (2011). The G8 and G20 as global steering committees for energy: Opportunities and constraints. Global Policy, 2(s1), 19–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Victor, D. G. (2011). Global warming gridlock: Creating more effective strategies for protecting the planet. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wendt, A. (1999), Social theory of international politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • World Bank. (2012). World Bank financing for renewable energy hits record high. Entry available at http://go.worldbank.org/ITW1FVVIJ0.

  • Worldwatch Institute. (2009). IRENA politics may ‘taint’ agency, advocates say. Eye on Earth. Available at http://www.worldwatch.org/node/6169.

Download references

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to Frank Biermann, Jeff Colgan, Sander Happaerts, Timothy Meyer, and Sarah Van Eynde for commenting on earlier drafts. We also thank the editors of International Environmental Agreements and the anonymous reviewers for their advice. All interviewees are commended for their openness and contribution.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Political Science, Columbia University, 420 W 118th Street, 712 IAB, New York, NY, 10027, USA

    Johannes Urpelainen

  2. Department of Political Science, Ghent University, Universiteitstraat 8, 9000, Ghent, Belgium

    Thijs Van de Graaf

Authors
  1. Johannes Urpelainen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Thijs Van de Graaf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thijs Van de Graaf.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Urpelainen, J., Van de Graaf, T. The International Renewable Energy Agency: a success story in institutional innovation?. Int Environ Agreements 15, 159–177 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-013-9226-1

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-013-9226-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation