Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Expert networks as science-policy interlocutors in the implementation of a monitoring reporting and verification (MRV) system

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Frontiers in Energy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Paris Agreement, which entered into effect in 2016, emphasizes a definite timeline for communicating and maintaining successive nationally determined contributions (NDCs) that it plans to achieve in addressing climate change. This calls for the development of a measurement, reporting and verification (MRV) system and a Capacity-building Initiative for Transparency (CBIT). Though such actions are universally accepted by the Parties to the Paris Agreement, earlier studies have shown that there remain technological, social, political and financial constrains which will affect the development and deployment of such a system. In this paper, using a case study on MRV implementation in Bogor City in Indonesia, how the above-mentioned challenges can be overcome is outlined through a technological and policy innovation process where scientists and technologists (collectively referred as expert networks) can join hands with local governments and national policy makers in designing, development and implementation of an MRV system that meets the local, national and global requirements. Through the case study it is further observed that expert networks can act as interactive knowledge generators and policy interlocutors in bridging technology with policy. To be specific, first, a brief history of the international context of MRV and CBIT is outlined. Next, the theoretical underpinning of the study is contextualized within the existing theories related to public policy and international relations. Finally, the case study is outlined and investigated where the engagement of an expert-network and policy makers in the design, development and implementation of an MRV tool is showcased.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. UNFCCC. (2015). Adoption of the Paris Agreement. 2016–04–10, https://doi.org/unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/l09r01.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  2. UNFCCC. Handbook on Measurement, Reporting and Verification for developing country Parties. 2014, https://doi.org/unfccc.int/files/national_reports/annex_i_natcom_/application/pdf/non-annex_i_mrv_-handbook.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bellassen V, Stephan N, Afriat M, Alberola E, Barker A, Chang J P, Chiquet C, Cochran I, Deheza M, Dimopoulos C, Foucherot C, Jacquier G, Morel R, Robinson R, Shishlov I. Monitoring, reporting and verifying emissions in the climate economy. Nature Climate Change, 2015, 5(4): 319–328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Baker D J, Richards G, Grainger A, Gonzalez P, Brown S, DeFries R, Held A, Kellndorfer J, Ndunda P, Ojima D, Skrovseth P E, Souza C Jr, Stolle F. Achieving forest carbon information with higher certainty: a five-part plan. Environmental Science & Policy, 2010, 13(3): 249–260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. GEF. Capacity-building Initiative for Transparency (CBIT). 2016–03–11, https://doi.org/www.thegef.org/topics/capacity-building-initiativetransparency-cbit

  6. Chalmers D A. Decision networks and quasi-citizens: who deliberates, where? Policy Studies, 2015, 36(3): 345–358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Kunseler E M, Tuinstra W. Navigating the authority paradox: practising objectivity in environmental expertise. Environmental Science & Policy, 2017, 67: 1–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Rietig K. ‘Neutral’ experts? How input of scientific expertise matters in international environmental negotiations. Policy Sciences, 2014, 47(2): 141–160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Stoutenborough J W, Bromley-Trujillo R, Vedlitz A. How to win friends and influence people: climate scientists’ perspectives on their relationship with and influence on government officials. Journal of Public Policy, 2015, 35(2): 269–296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Overpeck J T, Meehl G A, Bony S, Easterling D R. Climate data challenges in the 21st century. Science, 2011, 331(6018): 700–702

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Korhonen-Kurki K, Brockhaus M, Duchelle A E, Atmadja S, Thu Thuy P, Schofield L. Multiple levels and multiple challenges for measurement, reporting and verification of REDD +. International Journal of the Commons, 2013, 7(2): 344–366

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Lee T M, Markowitz E M, Howe P D, Ko C Y, Leiserowitz A A. Predictors of public climate change awareness and risk perception around the world. Nature Climate Change, 2015, 5(11): 1014–1020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Widerberg O, Pattberg P. International cooperative initiatives in global climate governance: raising the ambition level or delegitimizing the UNFCCC? Global Policy, 2015, 6(1): 45–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Stavins R. A challenge for the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement. 2015–01–14,https://doi.org/www.robertstavinsblog.org/2015/02/02/a-challenge-for-the-2015-paris-climate-agreement/

    Google Scholar 

  15. Miles E L, Snover A K, Whitely Binder L C, Sarachik E S, Mote P W, Mantua N. An approach to designing a national climate service. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2006, 103(52): 19616–19623

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Hoppe R, Wesselink A, Cairns R. Lost in the problem: the role of boundary organisations in the governance of climate change. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 2013, 4(4): 283–300

    Google Scholar 

  17. Szarka J. From Climate advocacy to public engagement: an exploration of the roles of environmental non-governmental organisations. Climate (Basel), 2013, 1(1): 12–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Duwe M. The climate action network: a glance behind the curtains of a transnational NGO network. Review of European Community & International Environmental Law, 2001, 10(2): 177–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Scholz V. How GIZ supports partner countries in the preparation of their INDCs. 2016–05–25, https://doi.org/unfccc.int/files/bodies/application/pdf/giz-presentation-briefing_on_indc_support-final.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  20. Bulkeley H, Andonova L B, Betsill M M, Compagnon D, Hale T. Theoretical perspectives on transnational governance. In: Transnational Climate Change Governance. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2014, 38–60

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Ranson M, Stavins R N. Linkage of greenhouse gas emissions trading systems: learning from experience. Climate Policy, 2016, 16 (3): 284–300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Bodansky D M, Hoedl S A, Metcalf G E, Stavins R N. Facilitating linkage of climate policies through the Paris outcome. Climate Policy, 2016, 16(8): 956–972

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Sabatier P A. An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein. Policy Sciences, 1988, 21(2–3): 129–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Weible C M, Pattison A, Sabatier P A. Harnessing expert-based information for learning and the sustainable management of complex socio-ecological systems. Environmental Science & Policy, 2010, 13(6): 522–534

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Star S L, Ruhleder K. Steps toward an ecology of infrastructure: design and access for large information spaces. Information Systems Research, 1996, 7(1): 111–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Star S L, Griesemer J R. Institutional ecology, ‘translations’ and boundary objects: amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907–39. Social Studies of Science, 1989, 19(3): 387–420

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Gieryn T F. Boundary-work and the demarcation of science from non-science: strains and interests in professional ideologies of scientists. American Sociological Review, 1983, 48(6): 781–795

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Hoppe R. Scientific advice and public policy: expert advisers’ and policymakers’ discourses on boundary work. Poiesis & Praxis: International Journal of Ethics of Science and Technology Assessment, 2009, 6(3–4): 235–263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Slinger J H, Hilders M, Juizo D. The practice of transboundary decision making on the incomati river: elucidating underlying factors and their implications for institutional design. Ecology and Society, 2010, 15(1): 1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Djalante R, Thomalla F, Sinapoy M, Carnegie M. Building resilience to natural hazards in Indonesia: progress and challenges in implementing the Hyogo Framework for Action. Natural Hazards, 2012, 62(3): 779–803

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Lewis B D. Urbanization and economic growth in Indonesia: good news, bad news and (possible) local government mitigation. Regional Studies, 2014, 48(1): 192–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Government_of_Indonesia. Presidential Decree of the President of Republic of Indonesia. 2011, https://doi.org/sipuu.setkab.go.id/PUUdoc/17271/Keppres0252011.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  33. Stone D. Transfer agents and global networks in the ‘transnationalization’ of policy. Journal of European Public Policy, 2004, 11(3): 545–566

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  34. Morizane J, Enoki T, Hase N, Setiawan B. Government policies and institutions for climate change mitigation and its monitoring, evaluation, and reporting. In: Kaneko S, Kawanishi M. eds. Climate Change Policies and Challenges in Indonesia. Tokyo: Springer Japan, 2016, 27–54

  35. Sugiarto B A. Developing innovative MRV system to support the realization of eco/green campus IPB. In: The 7th International Forum for Sustainable Asia and the Pacific (ISAP2015), Yokohama, Japan, 2015, https://doi.org/www.iges.or.jp/isap/2015/pdf/pl-8/PL8_2_BimaAryaSugiarto.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  36. Boer R. Developing innovative MRV system to support the realization of eco/green campus IPB. In: The 7th International Forum for Sustainable Asia and the Pacific (ISAP2015), Yokohama, Japan, 2015

    Google Scholar 

  37. Green_Television (Producer). Forum on Eco City Bogor through Green Innovation. 2015–10–14, https://doi.org/greentv.ipb.ac.id/videos/forum-on-eco-city-bogor-through-green-innovation/

  38. Fujita T. International collaborative research for innovative modelling and monitoring for low carbon society and eco-cities in Indonesia’. In: The 7th International Forum for Sustainable Asia and the Pacific (ISAP2015), Yokohama, Japan, 2015

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Social and Environmental System Research, National Institute for Environmental Studies, Tsukuba, Japan

    Remi Chandran, Tsuyoshi Fujita, Minoru Fujii, Shuichi Ashina, Kei Gomi & Seiya Maki

  2. Centre for Climate Risk and Opportunity Management in Southeast Asia and Pacific (CCROM-SEAP), Bogor Agricultural University (IPB), Bogor, Indonesia

    Rizaldi Boer & Muhammad Ardiansyah

Authors
  1. Remi Chandran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tsuyoshi Fujita
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Minoru Fujii
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Shuichi Ashina
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Kei Gomi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Rizaldi Boer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Muhammad Ardiansyah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Seiya Maki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Remi Chandran.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chandran, R., Fujita, T., Fujii, M. et al. Expert networks as science-policy interlocutors in the implementation of a monitoring reporting and verification (MRV) system. Front. Energy 12, 376–388 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11708-018-0559-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11708-018-0559-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation