Recognizing that no central authority can combat climate change, scholars have pointed to the potential of polycentric governance in tackling climate change. Yet, empirical evidence for such a claim is scarce, particularly in the Global South. This study analyzes the characteristics, promises, and pitfalls of polycentric governance to promote climate mitigation efforts in three Indian states. Our contribution is twofold: (1) conceptually, we propose a framework to investigate the promises and pitfalls of polycentric climate governance in a federalist system with a particular focus on aspects of scaling and institutionalization, and (2) empirically, we compare solar power development across three Indian states with favorable conditions for solar power but varying performance. Based on a qualitative analysis of interviews and documents, we show how state governments with different party backgrounds have been vital in implementing policy changes and overcoming political barriers. Still, very few bottom-up initiatives exist and were successfully institutionalized.

The Paris Agreement ushered in an era of climate governance underpinned by a polycentric theory of change, emphasizing experimentation, collaboration, and innovation while downplaying political contestation, power asymmetries, and the need for regulatory action by the state. This article explores the roles the state plays in polycentric climate governance, focusing on the tension between the regulatory state, where authorities set, monitor, and enforce rules, and the orchestrating state, which facilitates collaboration with nonstate actors to induce behavioral change. Using decarbonization in Sweden as an illustrative case study, the article synthesizes the results of two research projects evaluating the promises and limits of polycentric climate governance. The results problematize the view that Sweden is a forerunner in climate governance, suggesting that while the Swedish government has mobilized support from important industries and cities in favor of decarbonization, that support may be insufficient to achieve necessary societal transformation for deep decarbonization. Finally, the study reflects on the conditions necessary for polycentric governance to effectively decarbonize society, highlighting the pivotal role of the regulatory state.

In this article, we examine how young climate activists make use of the United Nations (UN) constituency system to give voice to children and youth in global climate governance. Our study is based on a mapping of accredited youth nongovernmental organizations (YOUNGO) as well as fieldwork at two UN Climate Change Conferences, where we conducted interviews, observed events, and analyzed plenary interventions. Informed by constructivist accounts of political representation, the article pays attention to the performative relationship between institutionalized means of youth representation and “the represented.” When analyzing our material, we asked who speaks for youth, how youth are spoken of, and how institutions shape representative speech. Our study identifies three subject positions that offer competing interpretations of who youth are as a political community and what they want. Rather than taking youth’s demands and interests as a starting point for representative politics, the article illustrates how the UN constituency system actively constructs youth and effectively molds young climate activists into professional insiders.