Challenges to polycentric climate governance: an analysis from the Conference of the Parties - COP

Abstract

This article critically analyzes the challenges of polycentric climate governance through the lens of the Conferences of the Parties (COPs), addressing their potential and limitations as arenas for political negotiation and the production of multilateral consensus. The main objective is to understand how the polycentric approach has shaped global climate governance and to what extent this perspective has been effective in the face of the complexity and structural inequalities involved in climate change. The rationale lies in the need to investigate the discursive, institutional, and political processes that organize the global response to the climate crisis, especially given the growing asymmetry among actors and the legitimacy crisis of multilateral institutions. The methodology is qualitative, based on a literature review that articulates various authors who address the topic and highlights its interdisciplinary nature. The text examines the role of COPs as performative arenas of dispute among states, corporations, social movements, and civil society organizations, emphasizing both their achievements and the obstacles they face, such as institutional fragmentation, climate colonialism, and the financialization of solutions. We conclude  that although polycentrism represents a relevant alternative to the state-centric model, it does not eliminate structural inequalities, nor does it ensure effective and just global climate action. On the contrary, its instrumentalization may legitimize technocratic and market-driven forms of governance that perpetuate neoliberal logic and normalize climate collapse.