2025/05/08 by Antoinette Scherz, Laura García‐Portela · 2 voices · 1 citation
Environmental Science · Social Sciences · #Climate Change and Geoengineering #Climate Change Communication and Perception #Feminist Epistemology and Gender Studies
paper · pdf · doi:10.1080/13698230.2025.2499360
openalex publication_date 2025/05/08 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/02
Addressing global challenges like climate change requires both national action and international collaboration. However, it remains unclear under what conditions international institutions, such as the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), can legitimately demand compliance from individuals and states in regulating climate change. One might assume that their legitimacy is derived from the epistemic authority of climate scientists, supporting a belief-based account of political legitimacy. However, the pervasive role of non-epistemic values in climate science challenges this view, necessitating an alternative source of legitimacy. In this paper, we argue that will-based accounts – such as democratic or public reason approaches – better reconcile the technocratic role of climate scientists with democratic decision-making in establishing the legitimacy of international climate institutions. Specifically, we contend that institutions like the UNFCCC should derive their legitimacy from the appropriate role of climate scientists as trustees, who must be held accountable through mechanisms governed by public reason.