The Power of Social Networks: How the
UNFCCC Secretariat Creates Momentum
for Climate Education
(cid:129)
Nina Kolleck, Mareike Well, Severin Sperzel,
and Helge Jörgens*
Astratto
Despite the relevance of education-specific negotiations under the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the influential role of the
secretariat therein, research in this area is still scarce. We contribute to closing this re-
search gap by exploring how the UNFCCC secretariat becomes involved in and has latent
influence on the education-specific debates surrounding global climate conferences and
the related information exchange on Twitter. Our analysis extends previous findings by
combining theories and methods in novel ways. Specifically, we apply social-network
theory and derive data from participant observations and Twitter, which enables us to
analyze the role and influence of the UNFCCC treaty secretariat within education-specific
negotiations. We find that the secretariat increases its influence by strategically establish-
ing links to actors beyond the negotiating parties and show that it occupies a central and
influential position within the education-specific communication networks in UNFCCC
negotiations.
In recent years, scholars have increasingly turned their attention to the impact of
international public administrations (IPAs)—that is, the bureaucratic bodies of
international organizations (M. Bauer et al. 2016; S. Bauer 2006; Biermann and
Siebenhüner 2009b; Johnson 2014). Within this research strand, a particular
focus has been the secretariats of multilateral environmental conventions as
potentially influential actors in world politics (Biermann and Siebenhüner
2009UN; Jinnah 2014).
* This work was supported by the German Research Foundation (DFG) under Grants KO 4997/
1-1, JO 1142/1-1, KO 4997/4-1, and JO 1142/2-1, as well as by the Center for Research Coop-
eration of the Freie Universität Berlin. We thank Barbara Saerbeck, Outi Ruuska, Christoph
Knill, Arthur Benz, Michael Bauer, Ronny Patz, Klaus Goetz, Andrea Liese, Per-Olof Busch,
and the members of the DFG Research Unit “International Public Administration” for valuable
comments, and the two anonymous reviewers for their thoughtful and detailed comments and
suggestions.
Global Environmental Politics 17:4, novembre 2017, doi:10.1162/GLEP_a_00428
© 2017 by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Published under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
Internazionale (CC BY 4.0) licenza.
106
l
D
o
w
N
o
UN
D
e
D
F
R
o
M
H
T
T
P
:
/
/
D
io
R
e
C
T
.
M
io
T
.
l
/
/
e
D
tu
G
e
P
UN
R
T
io
C
e
–
P
D
l
F
/
/
/
/
1
7
4
1
0
6
1
8
1
8
1
4
1
G
e
P
_
UN
_
0
0
4
2
8
P
D
.
/
l
F
B
sì
G
tu
e
S
T
T
o
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3
Nina Kolleck, Mareike Well, Severin Sperzel, and Helge Jörgens
(cid:129) 107
Studying the role and impact of international treaty secretariats is relevant
because they constitute a least-likely case of IPA influence ( Jörgens et al. 2016).
Their formal mandates emphasize their logistical role within a multilateral trea-
ty system while explicitly prohibiting them from taking an autonomous part in
the negotiations under their treaty or convention. Tuttavia, despite the increas-
ing visibility of international treaty secretariats, and counter to a growing body
of research on their role in global politics, their intentions to exert influence
have scarcely been systematically studied over time, because of methodological
problems in analyzing behavior that is not openly displayed. This article con-
tributes to filling this research gap by combining theories and methods in novel
ways: it proposes social-network theory (SNT) and social-network analysis
(SNA) as an adequate theory and method, rispettivamente, for assessing the latent
influence of international treaty secretariats. Instead of relying on actors’ openly
expressed policy preferences, their self-assessments, or their reputation for being
influential, SNT and SNA infer influence from their relative position in issue-
specific communication networks (Kolleck 2009; Kolleck 2013). Focusing on
the issue of climate change education (CCE), we use longitudinal Twitter data
on the issue-specific communication flows during the yearly Conferences of the
Parties (COPs) from 2009 (COP 15) A 2014 (COP 20). We complement SNT
and SNA with participant observations as means to identify the UNFCCC
secretariat’s potential for autonomous action and the mechanisms through
which this potential is exploited.
While CCE is one of the least prominent topics in academia, it has become
a high-profile project of the UNFCCC secretariat and has steadily risen on the
agenda. Education is considered to be an “essential element for mounting an
adequate global response to climate change” (UNESCO 2015, 3). It can increase
resilience by “helping populations understand and address the impacts of cli-
mate change, E [by] encouraging the changes in attitudes and behaviors need-
ed to help them address the causes of climate change, adopt more sustainable
lifestyles … as well as to adapt to the impact of climate change” (UNESCO
2015, 3). The attention given to education as a tool for ensuring the overall suc-
cess of the UNFCCC has broadened to reach not only a dedicated community
but also a growing number of country representatives and stakeholders. Al
same time, because of its low political saliency relative to other agenda items,
CCE constitutes an issue area where a proactive and influence-seeking role
for IPAs is most probable to materialize. In such a setting, we can expect
government principals to relax control of the activities of international bureau-
crats, thereby opening opportunities for autonomous action (Biermann and
Siebenhüner 2009a, 335). Così, analyzing the role of the climate secretariat
in CCE can shed new light on the influence-seeking strategies of international
bureaucracies in global environmental policy-making.
Despite the relevance of education in international affairs and the crucial
role that IPAs play in this regard, studies on the role of international secretariats
at the interface between education and environmental policy have so far been
l
D
o
w
N
o
UN
D
e
D
F
R
o
M
H
T
T
P
:
/
/
D
io
R
e
C
T
.
M
io
T
.
l
/
/
e
D
tu
G
e
P
UN
R
T
io
C
e
–
P
D
l
F
/
/
/
/
1
7
4
1
0
6
1
8
1
8
1
4
1
G
e
P
_
UN
_
0
0
4
2
8
P
D
.
/
l
F
B
sì
G
tu
e
S
T
T
o
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3
108 (cid:129) The Power of Social Networks
missing. Specifically, studies that analyze the ways that education is set on the
UNFCCC agenda and how different convention stakeholders push education as
a topic in climate change have been lacking.
This article seeks to contribute to this research agenda by studying the role
of the UNFCCC secretariat in the negotiations on CCE. Specifically, we seek to
answer the following research question: how does the UNFCCC secretariat become
involved in and have latent influence on education-specific negotiations and debates
within the UNFCCC?
In analyzing this question, we aim not only to provide new empirical in-
sights into the mechanisms through which international treaty secretariats exert
influence on the processes and outputs of multilateral negotiations by creating
momentum for specific issues, but also to contribute to a better understanding
of how global educational innovations such as CCE are negotiated and taken
forward at a global level. By presenting a methodological approach that uses
Twitter data to analyze the role of the UNFCCC secretariat in negotiations on
CCE, this article shows not only how scholars can study multilateral negotia-
tions in the field of global educational policies, but also how influence on in-
ternational policy outputs can be assessed and understood in other policy areas.
Drawing on SNT as well as on SNA and techniques of participant observation,
this approach explores a secretariat’s role by analyzing its actions, behavior, E
communication strategies, which are reflected in its positions in issue-specific
communication networks ( White 2008). Empirically, we extract information
on the cooperation structures and behaviors of actors involved in the negotia-
tions using data from participant observations at climate change negotiations
from the period 2015–2016, as well as Twitter data covering the UNFCCC COPs
from 2009 A 2014.
The article is divided into five sections. The next section gives a brief over-
view of the role of CCE in the UNFCCC, summarizes the state of the art regard-
ing the role of IPAs in global environmental governance, and introduces SNT as
our theoretical framework. The methodological approach based on participant
observations and the analysis of Twitter data with SNA techniques is described
in the section thereafter. Then we present and discuss the findings. The last
section summarizes the major arguments and outlines prospects for future
research.
Climate Change Education and the UNFCCC
Although CCE has not been a prominent topic in negotiations under the
UNFCCC, in recent years it has in fact risen starkly on the agendas of formal
sessions and other events, and it is increasingly recognized as being essential
for successful climate governance (UNFCCC 2014a). Article 6 of the UNFCCC,
which went into force in 1994, lays the foundation for education in the climate
regime, highlighting the importance of educational and public awareness pro-
grams and the need to cooperate on these issues at the international level
l
D
o
w
N
o
UN
D
e
D
F
R
o
M
H
T
T
P
:
/
/
D
io
R
e
C
T
.
M
io
T
.
l
/
/
e
D
tu
G
e
P
UN
R
T
io
C
e
–
P
D
l
F
/
/
/
/
1
7
4
1
0
6
1
8
1
8
1
4
1
G
e
P
_
UN
_
0
0
4
2
8
P
D
.
/
l
F
B
sì
G
tu
e
S
T
T
o
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3
Nina Kolleck, Mareike Well, Severin Sperzel, and Helge Jörgens
(cid:129) 109
(UNFCCC 1992, 17). The implementation of this article has subsequently been
facilitated by a series of work programs: Parties adopted the New Delhi Work
Programme on Article 6 In 2002, and the Doha Work Programme in 2012,
thereby also instigating a Dialogue on Article 6, which is held annually and
brings together parties and other stakeholders to exchange best practices on
the implementation of Article 6, or “Action for Climate Empowerment.” In
2014, ministers adopted the Lima Declaration on Article 6 of the Convention.
In 2015, Article 12 of the Paris Agreement was adopted, thereby firmly entrench-
ing education, training, and public awareness as tools for achieving the goals of
that agreement. Article 12 stipulates that “Parties shall cooperate in taking mea-
sures, as appropriate, to enhance CCE, training, public awareness, public partic-
ipation and public access to information, recognizing the importance of these
steps with respect to enhancing actions under this Agreement” (UNFCCC
2016B, 30).
State of the Art and Theoretical Approach
International Public Administrations in Multilateral
Environmental Negotiations
In their seminal comparison of nine international environmental bureaucracies,
Biermann, Siebenhüner, and colleagues (2009) laid out the groundwork for un-
derstanding the mechanisms of secretariat influence, by highlighting the impor-
tance of problem structure, polity, people, and procedures. In particular, Essi
showed that besides an IPA’s “polity”—that is, the “legal, institutional, and fi-
nancial framework that has been set … by states as their principals” (Biermann
et al. 2009, 51)—an IPA’s leadership and staff, their attitudes, and their strategic
actions account for varying degrees of influence over time (Biermann and
Siebenhüner 2009a). Building on Biermann et al.’s findings, Jinnah added rela-
tional variables that also condition secretariat influence, emphasizing the im-
portance of the positioning of secretariats in the wider governance network
(Jinnah 2014, 50–55).
A series of studies have substantiated these findings, suggesting that the
role of environmental treaty secretariats may be shifting from rather passive
servants of a treaty’s negotiating parties to active and influence-seeking actors
in their own right ( Jinnah 2010; Jinnah 2011; Michaelowa and Michaelowa
2016).
A case in point is the UNFCCC secretariat. In 2009, Busch found that the
climate secretariat was caught in a “straitjacket” of “formal and informal rules”
imposed by the UNFCCC parties that “ruled out any proactive role or autono-
mous initiatives” and led to an “organizational culture that bars staff … from
exercising any leadership vis-à-vis parties and from assuming a more indepen-
dent role” (Busch 2009, 261). Today this characterization no longer seems ac-
curate, since a number of scholars consider that the climate secretariat is
l
D
o
w
N
o
UN
D
e
D
F
R
o
M
H
T
T
P
:
/
/
D
io
R
e
C
T
.
M
io
T
.
l
/
/
e
D
tu
G
e
P
UN
R
T
io
C
e
–
P
D
l
F
/
/
/
/
1
7
4
1
0
6
1
8
1
8
1
4
1
G
e
P
_
UN
_
0
0
4
2
8
P
D
.
/
l
F
B
sì
G
tu
e
S
T
T
o
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3
110 (cid:129) The Power of Social Networks
“breaking out of its straitjacket” (Hickmann 2016; see also Michaelowa and
Michaelowa 2016). In response to the failure to reach a globally binding
post-Kyoto agreement on climate change in 2009 at COP 15 in Copenhagen
(Dimitrov 2010; Giddens 2011), and confronted with a negotiation stalemate
in the following years, the UNFCCC secretariat abandoned its passive stance.
Invece, it took on a more proactive role by bringing nonstate actors that are
supportive of the secretariat’s policy preferences into the UNFCCC negotiations
(Chan et al. 2015).
Tuttavia, while indication is growing that international treaty secretariats
deliberately seek to stretch their mandate as a means to feed their own policy
interpretations into the negotiations ( Jörgens et al. 2017), only limited system-
atic and comparative knowledge exists regarding treaty secretariats’ influence
over time. Although the lack of longitudinal studies has been pointed out in
the past (Biermann et al. 2009), systematic studies that assess the influence of
secretariats over time using primary data are still scarce. So far, the most ambi-
tious studies have relied on qualitative interviews and secondary data ( Jinnah
2014) or on descriptive statistical analyses (Michaelowa and Michaelowa 2016).
Methodologically, studies of secretariat influence are mostly based on doc-
ument analysis and interviews with secretariat staff and other stakeholders. Questo
approach is problematic, because secretariats do not officially state their prefer-
ences or strategies for influence. To preserve a reputation for impartiality on
which their authority, and thus their potential influence, depends, treaty secre-
tariats can be expected to downplay their role in international negotiations,
thereby potentially leading scholars to underestimate their actual impact.
Inoltre, IPA research based on interviews and document analysis carries
the risk of conflating the impact of environmental bureaucracies with that of
the international organization or the international regime they are part of
(Biermann et al. 2009, 45–46; Jinnah 2011, 25).
Social-Network Theory (SNT)
SNT distances itself from the assumptions of both methodological individual-
ism and methodological structuralism by focusing on the interactions between
structure and agency. Actors are not regarded as islands, but as being embedded
in social structures—hence, the structure and properties of the environment
must also be placed at the center of empirical analyses. SNT’s focus on the em-
beddedness of actors in policy-related networks enables us to better address the
proactive and alliance-building role of secretariats that recent studies have iden-
tified and to overcome some of the aforementioned methodological challenges
that have confronted previous research.
Synthesizing different theoretical constructs in traditional SNT, Borgatti
and Lopez-Kidwell have developed an underlying generic theory: the network
flow model (Borgatti and Lopez-Kidwell 2011, 40). This model assumes that
many variants of network theorizing, such as the seminal works by Granovetter
l
D
o
w
N
o
UN
D
e
D
F
R
o
M
H
T
T
P
:
/
/
D
io
R
e
C
T
.
M
io
T
.
l
/
/
e
D
tu
G
e
P
UN
R
T
io
C
e
–
P
D
l
F
/
/
/
/
1
7
4
1
0
6
1
8
1
8
1
4
1
G
e
P
_
UN
_
0
0
4
2
8
P
D
.
/
l
F
B
sì
G
tu
e
S
T
T
o
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3
Nina Kolleck, Mareike Well, Severin Sperzel, and Helge Jörgens
(cid:129) 111
(1973), Burt (1982), and Coleman (1998), are elaborations of the same under-
lying theory. Resting on this “conceptual universe” (Borgatti and Lopez-Kidwell
2011, 44), the authors point out two kinds of relational phenomena: the back-
cloth and the traffic of a network. The backcloth provides the underlying infra-
structure that enables or constrains the traffic, which again refers to what flows
through the network (per esempio., information on CCE). The backcloth here is made up
of similarities, social relations, or Twitter activities concerning CCE under the
UNFCCC. As such, it serves as the conduit through which the traffic or new in-
formation flows (Borgatti and Lopez-Kidwell 2011, 44). Per esempio, informa-
tion exchange is possible on the basis of co-membership in a convention body,
which in turn can facilitate certain relations, such as trusting a co-member,
which may further increase the probability of information exchange.
For the theoretical framework used in this article, this network theoretical
perspective is important because it allows us to neatly distinguish between the
structural conditions (per esempio., the network density), the actual flows (per esempio., informa-
tion exchange concerning CCE), and the resources that enable and foster issue-
specific negotiations (per esempio., in-session workshops or more institutionalized
working groups and standing committees). In questo articolo, we extend the existing
literature by using the flow model to examine latent influence, assuming that
influence and information flows are rarely apparent and cannot be analyzed
with direct questionnaires (Borgatti and Lopez-Kidwell 2011, 45).
From this theoretical perspective, treaty secretariats have the ability to act
as intermediaries (Kent 2014, 209). They are in a position to create momentum
and thus to influence the course and outcome of international environmental
negotiations. Creating momentum can be seen as a specific way to have latent
influence, by setting essential impulses to influence the stream of information.
Hence, our analysis also goes beyond the existing literature by conceptualizing
influence in relational terms. Influence-seeking actors are, despite “different in-
terests and perceptions of problem(S) and solution(S), … interdependent of
each other,” and thus need to interact with other actors to acquire resources
(Verweij et al. 2013, 1036–1037). The network flow model can explain differ-
ences in an actor’s (cioè., an individual or collective actor’s) success regarding
their performance or achieved rewards. In this understanding, an actor acquires
resources, opportunities, or ideas through various relations that directly increase
or decrease the actor’s success (Borgatti and Lopez-Kidwell 2011)—for instance,
with respect to shaping debates on the implementation of CCE under the
UNFCCC.
The advantage resulting from an actor’s embeddedness in a relational
neighborhood has been conceptualized in different ways. Where Granovetter
(1973) argues that the network structure or “context” in which an actor is em-
bedded matters, others stress the importance of the actor’s position. Burt (1982)
developed such a conceptualization of positional advantage as a source of social
capital. In his study on structural holes, he finds that an actor increases his or
her social capital by being in a unique position, allowing only this actor to
l
D
o
w
N
o
UN
D
e
D
F
R
o
M
H
T
T
P
:
/
/
D
io
R
e
C
T
.
M
io
T
.
l
/
/
e
D
tu
G
e
P
UN
R
T
io
C
e
–
P
D
l
F
/
/
/
/
1
7
4
1
0
6
1
8
1
8
1
4
1
G
e
P
_
UN
_
0
0
4
2
8
P
D
.
/
l
F
B
sì
G
tu
e
S
T
T
o
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3
112 (cid:129) The Power of Social Networks
connect several clusters in the network. By exploiting structural holes and acting
as a broker between clusters, this actor has an informational advantage and
increased leeway for maneuver (Christopoulos and Ingold 2015; Sabatier and
Jenkins-Smith 1993). In this article we seek to contribute to this literature by
applying its theoretical fundaments to the empirical analysis of the latent influ-
ence of international treaty secretariats in climate education policy.
Methodological Approach
Methodologically, we implement a sequential mixed design, in which qualita-
tive and quantitative data are gathered and analyzed in consecutive steps
(Creswell 2009, 208), to allow both sets of inferences to be combined in a
consistent “meta-inference” (Borgatti and Ofem 2011, 18). Whereas quantitative
SNA is used to analyze the information flows and specific roles of actors therein,
through qualitative participant observations we seek to gain insights into the
behavior of treaty secretariats.
In the following discussion, we demonstrate how Twitter data can be
analyzed with quantitative SNA to trace and visualize a Twitter network’s struc-
ture. We then demonstrate how we conducted qualitative participant observa-
tions to gain insights into the ways in which the UNFCCC secretariat facilitates
multilateral negotiations and pushes education as a crucial topic under the
UNFCCC.
Analysis of Twitter Data and SNA
In recent years, Twitter has increasingly been used for communication by polit-
ically influential individuals (per esempio., Conover et al. 2011; Dubois and Gaffney
2014; Williams et al. 2015), as well as for information distribution and calls
for action by nonprofit advocacy organizations (Guo and Saxton 2014). While
participating in negotiations, we observed that Twitter has become an important
tool for convention stakeholders to exchange information. We suggest that
analyzing Twitter data with SNA can provide us with a more comprehensive
picture of the UNFCCC secretariat’s role during multilateral negotiations.
Although its main fields of application continue to be in the natural and
computational sciences (Borgatti et al. 2009; Lazer et al. 2009), researchers in-
creasingly use SNA in the social sciences to analyze information flows in online
networks (per esempio., Ingold and Leifeld 2014; Smith et al. 2014). Following Ingold
and Leifeld, we assume that SNA is well suited to studying the role of public
administrations. Most importantly, we argue that using SNA allows us to assess
actors’ influence on the basis of communication networks (Jörgens et al. 2016;
Kolleck 2014; Kolleck 2016; Uhl et al. 2017; Xu et al. 2014).
Through Twitter’s openly accessible application program interface, it is not
possible to obtain data from the past. Così, for the purpose of our case study,
we purchased nonprotected tweets from “discovertext” for the period from
l
D
o
w
N
o
UN
D
e
D
F
R
o
M
H
T
T
P
:
/
/
D
io
R
e
C
T
.
M
io
T
.
l
/
/
e
D
tu
G
e
P
UN
R
T
io
C
e
–
P
D
l
F
/
/
/
/
1
7
4
1
0
6
1
8
1
8
1
4
1
G
e
P
_
UN
_
0
0
4
2
8
P
D
.
/
l
F
B
sì
G
tu
e
S
T
T
o
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3
Nina Kolleck, Mareike Well, Severin Sperzel, and Helge Jörgens
(cid:129) 113
Figura 1
Left: One Example Tweet by the UNFCCC Secretariat During COP 20 Regarding Climate
Education. Right: The Resulting “Graph” According to Our Approach.
2009 A 2014, covering the entire duration (2 weeks ± 2 days) of six annual
multilateral climate change conferences: UNFCCC COP 15, COP 16, COP 17,
COP 18, COP 19, and COP 20.1
On Twitter, information flows are represented by “tweets” (short mes-
sages). Twitter users can interact with each other in three basic ways: Primo, “re-
tweets” (cioè., forwarding another user’s tweet without additional comments);
second, “mentions” (a tweet that contains another user’s @username); or third,
direct “replies” (a reaction to a specific tweet of another user). For SNA, we con-
ceptualize Twitter users as nodes and their interactions as relations between the
nodes. If Twitter user A retweets a tweet of user B, the direction of the arrow is
from B to A; if user C mentions user D, the arrow points from C to D; and if user
C is mentioned in a tweet that is retweeted by user A, then the arrow is directed
from A to C (see Mejova et al. 2015). In the example tweet in Figure 1, @unfccc
and @MarincKorolec are nodes in our network. Here, UNFCCC is “mentioning”
Marcin Korolec, the Polish minister of environment.
To identify the actors with the greatest influence in Twitter communica-
zioni, we applied the measure of eigenvector centrality. Eigenvector centrality
is essential for detecting not only how an actor controls information flows,
but also how an actor has access to the resources necessary for achieving an in-
fluential position (Ibarra 1993). It indicates how “prominent” an actor is in a
rete; questo è, an actor is important if it is linked to other important actors.
Hence, an actor who is connected to various other actors in the network does
not automatically have a high eigenvector centrality. Invece, an actor’s eigen-
vector centrality is only high if the contacts also have a high eigenvector central-
ità. Such an actor may have only a few, but very important, relations (Leontief
1941; Seeley 1949). In contrast to betweenness centrality, which has frequently
been used to study the centrality of actors through assessing the likelihood that
1. We acquired data according to filter criteria such as: #unfccc OR #article6 OR contains:unfccc
OR article6 OR “article 6” OR “article six.” In total, we gathered a total of 1,599,162 tweet.
l
D
o
w
N
o
UN
D
e
D
F
R
o
M
H
T
T
P
:
/
/
D
io
R
e
C
T
.
M
io
T
.
l
/
/
e
D
tu
G
e
P
UN
R
T
io
C
e
–
P
D
l
F
/
/
/
/
1
7
4
1
0
6
1
8
1
8
1
4
1
G
e
P
_
UN
_
0
0
4
2
8
P
D
.
/
l
F
B
sì
G
tu
e
S
T
T
o
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3
114 (cid:129) The Power of Social Networks
an actor will receive information (Smith et al. 2014, 163–164), eigenvector
centrality is particularly suitable for larger networks, such as the social networks
of online communities.
Participant Observations
Participant observations allowed us to substantiate the findings derived from
Twitter data and review our assumptions on influence-seeking strategies. Data
were collected through participation in negotiations and events between 2015
E 2016, as well as through the analysis of documents (official reports, decla-
rations, and speeches). The essential advantages of this method are that re-
searchers are able to record information in real time and to gain insights into
how negotiations develop (see also Bogdan and Biklen 1992; Creswell 2009,
179; Merriam 1998).
We conducted participant observations during COP 21 In 2015 and at the
Subsidiary Body of Implementation (SBI) sessions 42 E 44, In 2015 E
2016, rispettivamente. A particular emphasis was placed on the events of “Educa-
tion Day” (Dicembre 4, 2015, COP 21) and the Third and Fourth Dialogues on
Article 6/Action for Climate Empowerment, which took place respectively dur-
ing the 42nd and 44th SBI sessions ( June 2–3, 2015, SBI 42; May 15–18, 2016,
SBI 44; henceforth referred to as the “Third/Fourth Dialogues”). Observations
were recorded using an observational protocol in which descriptive notes were
separated from reflective ones. Coding of the data comprised four steps, follow-
ing Creswell (2009, 181–186): Primo, a list of all topics that arose in the data was
compiled. Secondo, similar topics were clustered together and abbreviated as a
code. Third, the appropriate text segments were assembled according to the
codes. And fourth, the list of codes was reduced and turned into larger catego-
ries. Finalmente, the data were assembled and compared.
Following this process, we analyzed the ways in which the identified cat-
egories and their interconnectedness addressed larger network-theoretical per-
spectives and how they related to our findings from the quantitative SNA.
Through this mixing of methods, we aimed to cross-validate our data and gain
a more encompassing and valid understanding of the role of the secretariat in
the negotiations on Article 6.
Findings
Analysis of Twitter Data
In the course of preparing the data for this article, we isolated all education-
specific tweets from our dataset, which encompassed a total of 1,599,162 tweet,
by applying the keywords “education” and “article6” or “article 6,” plus the cor-
responding replies. In total, we found 3,232 mentions, 768 replies, 3,693 Rif-
tweet, as well as 1,465 singular tweets that were neither retweets or replies,
l
D
o
w
N
o
UN
D
e
D
F
R
o
M
H
T
T
P
:
/
/
D
io
R
e
C
T
.
M
io
T
.
l
/
/
e
D
tu
G
e
P
UN
R
T
io
C
e
–
P
D
l
F
/
/
/
/
1
7
4
1
0
6
1
8
1
8
1
4
1
G
e
P
_
UN
_
0
0
4
2
8
P
D
.
/
l
F
B
sì
G
tu
e
S
T
T
o
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3
Nina Kolleck, Mareike Well, Severin Sperzel, and Helge Jörgens
(cid:129) 115
Tavolo 1
Total Number of Education-Specific Tweets Across the Yearly Conferences of the
Parties (COPs)
Year
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Total
COP
COP 15
COP 16
COP 17
COP 18
COP 19
COP 20
Total
469
610
719
1,632
2,136
3,592
9,158
l
D
o
w
N
o
UN
D
e
D
F
R
o
M
H
T
T
P
:
/
/
D
io
R
e
C
T
.
M
io
T
.
nor contained a mention of another user. Tavolo 1 shows the total number of
tweets for each COP.2
The increase of Twitter data on education surrounding the UNFCCC over
the years shows that CCE has been discussed increasingly on Twitter. Questo
development is important because the growing number of tweets suggests the
relevance of Twitter for scientific analyses. Tuttavia, it is not an indicator that
this topic has gained weight or of the influence of specific actors. Concurrent
with the growing relevance of Twitter, the number of tweets on other topics
has also increased.
To analyze the role of convention stakeholders with regard to education,
we used the techniques of SNA. Tavolo 2 presents the overall network analytical
metrics of our dataset for each COP. Centralization refers to the average degree of
centralization of all nodes. With a value close to 1, this measure already indi-
cates that a small number of users with high centrality values dominate the flow
of information in the Twitter network. Allo stesso tempo, the networks show very
low density values (density refers to the proportion of existing ties to the total
number of possible ties) and high diameter values (cioè., the longest distance be-
tween two network participants). Both the density and the diameter assess the
speed of information flows within social networks, and thus suggest that the
nodes in the network are only loosely connected and that information exchange
is rather slow.
To decide whether or not actors are influential, we used eigenvector
centrality. A generally accepted numerical eigenvector centrality score does not
exist. Tuttavia, it can be assumed that an actor is central or influential if its
2. In our analysis, tweet, replies, mentions, and retweets were not weighted differently.
l
/
/
e
D
tu
G
e
P
UN
R
T
io
C
e
–
P
D
l
F
/
/
/
/
1
7
4
1
0
6
1
8
1
8
1
4
1
G
e
P
_
UN
_
0
0
4
2
8
P
D
.
/
l
F
B
sì
G
tu
e
S
T
T
o
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3
116 (cid:129) The Power of Social Networks
Tavolo 2
Network Metrics of the Education-Specific Twitter Communication Across
Different COPs
COP 15
COP 16
COP 17 COP 18 COP 19 COP 20
Twitter users
Relations between users
Centralization
Density
Diameter
183
147
0.97
336
330
0.99
520
487
0.98
1,079
1,524
1
1,383
1,471
1
2,605
3,734
1
0.0044
0.0029
0.0018
0.0013
0.0008
0.0006
3
8
3
6
3
10
eigenvector value is higher than those of other actors within a given network.
Hence, we assume that the five actors with the highest eigenvector centrality
scores have the highest potential to have latent influence. Another indicator
for influence can be seen in high eigenvector centrality scores over time—that
È, during nearly all of the conferences analyzed for this article.
Figura 2 visualizes the Twitter network in relation to selected COPs. Nodes
represent Twitter users that post, reply, or retweet a tweet containing the term
“education,” “article6,” or “article 6”; the links between the nodes depict their
relations.
l
D
o
w
N
o
UN
D
e
D
F
R
o
M
H
T
T
P
:
/
/
D
io
R
e
C
T
.
M
io
T
.
l
/
/
e
D
tu
G
e
P
UN
R
T
io
C
e
–
P
D
l
F
/
/
/
/
1
7
4
1
0
6
1
8
1
8
1
4
1
G
e
P
_
UN
_
0
0
4
2
8
P
D
.
/
l
F
B
sì
G
tu
e
S
T
T
o
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3
Figura 2
Education-Specific Twitter Network of All Selected COPs
Each node’s size is proportional to its eigenvector centrality, visualized using the Force Atlas 2 algorithm in Gephi.
Nina Kolleck, Mareike Well, Severin Sperzel, and Helge Jörgens
(cid:129) 117
The data were visualized using Gephi’s Force Atlas 2 algorithm. To deter-
mine the nodes’ sizes, we calculated the eigenvector centrality for each Twitter
account and COP using R and the igraph package. If a Twitter account was not
present during a specific COP, we set an eigenvector centrality of 0. Next we
weighted the mean value for each account by its appearance at each COP. In
this way we could take account of the fact that some Twitter accounts appear
very prominently during one COP, but do not participate in climate education
discussions in any other COPs. In Figure 2 and Table 3, only the five most highly
rated nodes are labeled. These results suggest that the UNFCCC is one of the
most dominant actors within the Twitter network, along with other actors active
in the debate on climate change education (such as international organizations,
individuals, and youth associations). Esther Agbarakwe (@estherclimate), who
is Special Adviser to the Nigerian minister of environment, and Camilla Born,
Tavolo 3
Top Five Accounts in Terms of Their Eigenvector Centrality Values
Twitter Account
Self-Given “Account Description”
Eigenvector
Present at COPs
@estherclimate
@camillaborn
@unfccc (former:
un_climatetalks)
@350
@climatewed
Founder & Director, Nigerian
Youth Climate Coalition (NYCC),
Social Climate Researcher, Climate
Policy Expert and an Advocate for
Sustainable Development.
@PowerShiftUK coordinator for the
@ukycc. Particular interests include
climate change, geography, theatre,
politics and saving the world.
UN_ClimateTalks provides
information and personal points of
view on the latest developments in
the climate change negotiations.
Join a global movement that’s
inspiring the world to rise to the
challenge of the climate crisis.
350=safe upper limit of CO2 in
atmosphere.
#ClimateWednesday is weekly tweet
conversations by @NigYCC on
climate change and related matters
that aim at building a climate-smart
generation in Africa.
0.133205
0.084862
0.057648
0.048233
0.048098
4
3
4
3
2
l
D
o
w
N
o
UN
D
e
D
F
R
o
M
H
T
T
P
:
/
/
D
io
R
e
C
T
.
M
io
T
.
l
/
/
e
D
tu
G
e
P
UN
R
T
io
C
e
–
P
D
l
F
/
/
/
/
1
7
4
1
0
6
1
8
1
8
1
4
1
G
e
P
_
UN
_
0
0
4
2
8
P
D
.
/
l
F
B
sì
G
tu
e
S
T
T
o
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3
118 (cid:129) The Power of Social Networks
Policy Advisor at E3G (NGO for sustainable development) are rated with higher
eigenvector centralities than the UNFCCC. Both @estherclimate and @unfcc
appeared at four of the six COPs.
Due to its relational position connecting different stakeholders, the UN
climate secretariat was in an ideal position to make itself heard and affect the
way in which other stakeholders related to each other in Twitter communica-
zioni. This finding is also illustrated in Figure 3, which depicts the development
of the education-specific negotiations over time. Not only do more and more
actors engage in communication on education with the UNFCCC on Twitter,
they are also increasingly well connected to each other. As noted, the UNFCCC
account was present in the Twitter network during four of the observed COPs.
Overall, our analyses demonstrate the high potential of the climate secre-
tariat to influence the communication flows on Twitter over time. While these
findings enable us to draw conclusions on a structural level, they do not provide
any insights into how the secretariat has exploited its favorable relational posi-
tion to influence the debates on education. Così, in a second step, we used
participant observations to gain a better understanding of how the climate
secretariat used its central position in issue-specific information flows to shape
climate education programs within the UNFCCC.
Participant Observations
We divided secretariat activities concerning CCE into three large categories:
normative leadership, facilitation, and outreach. The following results of our
l
D
o
w
N
o
UN
D
e
D
F
R
o
M
H
T
T
P
:
/
/
D
io
R
e
C
T
.
M
io
T
.
l
/
/
e
D
tu
G
e
P
UN
R
T
io
C
e
–
P
D
l
F
/
/
/
/
1
7
4
1
0
6
1
8
1
8
1
4
1
G
e
P
_
UN
_
0
0
4
2
8
P
D
.
/
l
F
B
sì
G
tu
e
S
T
T
o
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3
Figura 3
Development of the Education-Specific Twitter Networks over Time.
The Data from Figure 2 Are Separated into Parts. Left: COPs 15–16; Center: COPs 17–18; Right: COPs 19–20; Red
dot: UNFCCC
Each node’s size represents its eigenvector centrality for the whole time period.
Nina Kolleck, Mareike Well, Severin Sperzel, and Helge Jörgens
(cid:129) 119
observations demonstrate with which mechanisms the secretariat aims to
exploit its favorable central position. Primo, its activities are aimed at providing
normative leadership, which is substantiated by the following aspects (or codes):
(cid:129) Elevating the importance of Article 6 vis-à-vis other articles of the convention and
linking education to the wider goals of the UNFCCC
To elevate the importance of education as a tool for achieving the goals of the
UNFCCC, the secretariat repeatedly stressed that Article 6 should be given a
meaningful name that reflects its content and importance, not merely identified
using the number of the article. In a speech delivered at the Third Dialogue
(climateconference 2015a), former executive secretary Figueres stated that she
had been “incredibly frustrated” that the term “Article 6” “doesn’t do justice
to the importance of this article” (climateconference 2015a). She thus presented
the participants of the Third Dialogue with the following challenge: “Can we
commit that … you will come up with something … that is truly in accordance
with what we are doing here?" (climateconference 2015a). The momentum
created for the issue of education, training, and public awareness was well
received among the participants of the dialogue, and pursuant to this strong
impulse, the new term “Action for Climate Empowerment” was agreed upon
(UNFCCC 2016c). Così, by challenging a term that suggested a marginal role
for CCE, the secretariat contributed to the equal linguistic treatment of educa-
tional issues vis-à-vis other issues under the Convention (climateconference
2015UN; climateconference 2015b).
(cid:129) Setting goals for, and increasing ambitions regarding, the implementation of Article 6
The secretariat aimed at increasing the ambition in relation to CCE by empha-
sizing that it should be mainstreamed into education at a general level. To this
end, Figueres stressed that not only is improving the understanding of climate
change in curricula critical, “but it needs to be embedded in the DNA of today’s
very education concept” (UNFCCC n.d. [2015UN]).
Secondo, the secretariat played an important role in facilitating and provid-
ing an enabling environment for discussing CCE activities, by
(cid:129) Defining the process of consultation and negotiations
(cid:129) Providing UNFCCC-wide platforms for educational issues
CCE was brought to the attention of all COP participants beyond the narrow
“education community” through side events convened by the secretariat
(UNFCCC n.d. [2015B]; UNFCCC 2016a).
(cid:129) Addressing challenges in the process, providing procedural support
During the dialogues, stakeholders had the chance to voice their concerns and
discuss the challenges that limit the implementation of Article 6. Among the
challenges named were a lack of high-level political support for CCE, the need
l
D
o
w
N
o
UN
D
e
D
F
R
o
M
H
T
T
P
:
/
/
D
io
R
e
C
T
.
M
io
T
.
l
/
/
e
D
tu
G
e
P
UN
R
T
io
C
e
–
P
D
l
F
/
/
/
/
1
7
4
1
0
6
1
8
1
8
1
4
1
G
e
P
_
UN
_
0
0
4
2
8
P
D
.
/
l
F
B
sì
G
tu
e
S
T
T
o
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3
120 (cid:129) The Power of Social Networks
for indicators of CCE, the insufficient cooperation between relevant actors, E
the necessity to link CCE to the labor sector to improve capacity in adaptation
and mitigation (UNFCCC 2015, 7–8). As a response to these concerns, the sec-
retariat provided support by, Per esempio, partnering with the UN Alliance on
Climate Change Education, Training and Public Awareness in developing guide-
lines for national focal points for Article 6 (UNFCCC 2014b, 6); fostering high-
level political support; and providing tools for the enhanced coordination of
actors.
Third, an important conduit for secretariat influence was outreach activities,
which comprised diverse aspects, including:
(cid:129) Joint initiatives with international organizations (IOs), thus connecting to wider
governance frameworks
At COP 18 In 2012, the secretariat launched the “UN Alliance” with six other
IOs, among them FAO, UNEP, and UNESCO. By 2017 the membership of the
UN Alliance had increased to thirteen IOs. The objectives of the UN Alliance
were to build synergies between the IOs, support UNFCCC parties in the their
efforts regarding Article 6, and establish a link between the work of the member
organizations and the UNFCCC (UNFCCC n.d. [2016D]). In this way, IL
UNFCCC secretariat fulfilled multiple functions:
It was at the center of the coordination of CCE in twelve other IOs. It also
linked the activities under Article 6 to other governance frameworks, E
thereby enhanced the visibility of CCE well beyond the climate change regime.
Finalmente, it created incentives for UNFCCC parties to increase their actions with
regard to Article 6, since these became relevant to their memberships in other
IOs.
(cid:129) Focusing high-level attention on educational issues
Rallying support from prominent actors, such as COP presidents or ministers of
the environment, has been an important element in creating momentum for
CCE. Per esempio, Education Day was launched by the French ministers for en-
vironment and education, and COP 20 President Manuel Pulgar-Vidal gave a
keynote speech at this event (UNFCCC n.d. [2015C]). This form of symbolic
but high-level support has fostered awareness of activities under Article 6. An-
other illustration of the importance of high-level support is the Lima Ministerial
Declaration on Education and Awareness Raising. It was initiated by Polish and
Peruvian party representatives and promoted by former COP presidents.
(cid:129) Youth and subnational networks
Just as the secretariat connected with the highest political level, it also garnered
support for CCE at the grassroots level, which became manifest in its engage-
ment with, Per esempio, youth organizations and subnational networks. IL
secretariat created opportunities for young people to participate in COPs,
in the forms of high-level youth briefings by the executive secretary or of
l
D
o
w
N
o
UN
D
e
D
F
R
o
M
H
T
T
P
:
/
/
D
io
R
e
C
T
.
M
io
T
.
l
/
/
e
D
tu
G
e
P
UN
R
T
io
C
e
–
P
D
l
F
/
/
/
/
1
7
4
1
0
6
1
8
1
8
1
4
1
G
e
P
_
UN
_
0
0
4
2
8
P
D
.
/
l
F
B
sì
G
tu
e
S
T
T
o
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3
Nina Kolleck, Mareike Well, Severin Sperzel, and Helge Jörgens
(cid:129) 121
“Young and Future Generations Day” (UNFCCC n.d. [2015D]). Inoltre, in an
attempt to enhance the “public participation” component of Article 6, IL
secretariat used different means to address a transnational community of
nonstate actors (United Nations n.d. [2015]; see also Hickmann 2016).
Discussion and Implications
In questo articolo, we circumvented the problem of secretariats’ apparent impartial-
ity by analyzing one secretariat’s behavior and strategies with SNT, SNA, E
participant observations. We demonstrated that the UN climate secretariat pos-
sessed a potentially influential role and broker position, due to its relational
position, connecting stakeholders from different subnetworks. The activities ac-
companying the ongoing negotiations and development of Article 6, Quale
have steadily risen on the UNFCCC agenda, illustrate this influential role. Both
participant observations and analyses of Twitter data confirmed that the
UNFCCC secretariat strategically connected with other actors and seemed to
be increasingly able and willing to transcend its formally restricted mandate,
attempting to frame debates in line with its policy preferences. In caso di
the education-specific negotiations, the secretariat showed an interest in extend-
ing and fostering educational aspects under the UNFCCC through the social me-
dia platform Twitter. Inoltre, the UNFCCC secretariat was successful in
increasing the relevance of education in the UNFCCC negotiations. UNFCCC
parties are now bound by the Paris Agreement to advance their actions on
formazione scolastica.
The topic of CCE has provided the climate secretariat with opportunities
to bring in its own values, problem perceptions, and policy preferences, thereby
indirectly shaping the ways the fight against climate change is operationalized at
global and national levels. More generally, focusing on a topic with relatively
low political saliency has enabled the secretariat to gain autonomy from its prin-
cipals, to actively seek a brokerage role in the CCE-related climate negotiations,
and to increase its overall acceptance as a partially autonomous actor within the
UNFCCC negotiations.
Information flows are rarely apparent and can often not be revealed with
direct questionnaires. Hence, our study also extends the existing literature by
using SNT and by conceptualizing influence in relational terms. Inoltre,
we have contributed to the literature on SNT by applying it to a new empirical
context and combining quantitative SNA of Twitter data with qualitative partic-
ipant observations. Both the Twitter analysis and the participant observations
lend further support to the argument that international treaty secretariats may
be gradually moving from a rather technocratic and facilitative role to playing a
proactive and influential part in international climate governance. In particular,
we found evidence that with respect to CCE, the climate secretariat has increased
its political influence by strategically establishing links to actors beyond the for-
mal negotiation parties, and thereby gathering support for its preferred policy
l
D
o
w
N
o
UN
D
e
D
F
R
o
M
H
T
T
P
:
/
/
D
io
R
e
C
T
.
M
io
T
.
l
/
/
e
D
tu
G
e
P
UN
R
T
io
C
e
–
P
D
l
F
/
/
/
/
1
7
4
1
0
6
1
8
1
8
1
4
1
G
e
P
_
UN
_
0
0
4
2
8
P
D
.
/
l
F
B
sì
G
tu
e
S
T
T
o
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3
122 (cid:129) The Power of Social Networks
outcomes. Together with normative leadership exerted directly vis-à-vis negoti-
ators, the secretariat has played a key role in increasing momentum for educa-
tion under the UNFCCC.
This brings us back to some of the mechanisms of influence laid out by
Biermann and Siebenhüner (2009UN) as well as by Jinnah (2014). We showed
empirically that in the case of CCE, influence is likely due to the UNFCCC
secretariat’s social embeddedness and its unique position in global governance
networks. In this way, we go beyond the existing literature in demonstrating
empirically that the social embedding of secretariats plays a fundamental
role—at least in the case of CCE. Tuttavia, as our analysis shows, the relational
conditions for secretariat influence can be further differentiated. In our case, IL
chances for influence were based, in particular, on four mechanisms employed
by the UNFCCC secretariat: strategically connecting to other influential actors,
enabling knowledge and communication flows, exploiting a unique position in
global networks to diffuse the concept of education among many actors, E
exerting normative leadership to accentuate concepts such as CCE and raise
ambition for their implementation.
Although we showed that the UNFCCC secretariat plays a central role in
shaping the educational agenda in the UNFCCC, our analysis was confined to
the observations made during selected negotiations as well as the interpretation
of Twitter data. Generalization of these conditions will require additional em-
pirical evidence on the influence of treaty secretariats. Future research could ex-
tend these findings by collecting data on the information exchange and
communication flows of convention stakeholders using network-analytical sur-
veys at regular intervals, with the aim of capturing all relevant relations concern-
ing the exchange of information over time. Although we have provided first
empirical results regarding the role of the UNFCCC secretariat in education-
specific negotiations, many questions still remain open. Per esempio, it would
be interesting to complement the results from SNA and participant observations
by analyzing tweets and negotiation texts with qualitative methods such as
qualitative content analysis or discourse analysis. What are the roles of the dif-
ferent convention stakeholders in advancing education as an agenda item?3
Have educational matters gained weight in these documents over time? A
better understand how educational issues are used and shaped by the secretar-
iats of multilateral conventions, further systematic empirical studies are urgently
necessario.
Riferimenti
Bauer, Michael, Christoph Knill, and Steffen Eckhard. 2016. International Bureaucracy:
Challenges and Lessons for Public Administration Research. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave
Macmillan.
3. We thank the anonymous referees for their advice in this regard.
l
D
o
w
N
o
UN
D
e
D
F
R
o
M
H
T
T
P
:
/
/
D
io
R
e
C
T
.
M
io
T
.
l
/
/
e
D
tu
G
e
P
UN
R
T
io
C
e
–
P
D
l
F
/
/
/
/
1
7
4
1
0
6
1
8
1
8
1
4
1
G
e
P
_
UN
_
0
0
4
2
8
P
D
.
/
l
F
B
sì
G
tu
e
S
T
T
o
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3
Nina Kolleck, Mareike Well, Severin Sperzel, and Helge Jörgens
(cid:129) 123
Bauer, Steffen. 2006. Does Bureaucracy Really Matter? The Authority of Intergovernmen-
tal Treaty Secretariats in Global Environmental Politics. Global Environmental
Politics 6 (1): 23–49.
Biermann, Frank, and Bernd Siebenhüner. 2009UN. The Influence of International Bureau-
cracies in World Politics: Findings from the MANUS Research Programme. In
Managers of Global Change: The Influence of International Environmental Bureaucracies,
edited by Frank Biermann and Bernd Siebenhüner, 319–350. Cambridge: MIT
Press.
Biermann, Frank, and Bernd Siebenhüner. 2009B. Managers of Global Change: The Influ-
ence of International Environmental Bureaucracies. Cambridge, MA: CON Premere.
Biermann, Frank, Bernd Siebenhüner, Steffen Bauer, Per-Olof Busch, Sabine Campe,
Klaus Dingwerth, Torsten Grothmann, Robert Marschinski, and Mireia Tarradell.
2009. Studying the Influence of International Bureacuracies: A Conceptual
Framework. In Managers of Global Change: The Influence of International Environmental
Bureaucracies, edited by Frank Biermann and Bernd Siebenhüner, 37–74.
Cambridge, MA: CON Premere.
Bogdan, Robert, and Sari Knopp Biklen. 1992. Qualitative Research for Education: An
Introduction to Theory and Methods, 2nd ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Borgatti, Stephen, and Virginie Lopez-Kidwell. 2011. Network Theory. In The SAGE
Handbook of Social Network Analysis, edited by John Scott and Peter Carrington,
40–54. London, UK: SAGE.
Borgatti, Stephen, Ajay Mehra, Daniel Brass, and Giuseppe Labianca. 2009. Network
Analysis in the Social Sciences. Scienza 323 (5916): 892–895.
Borgatti, Stephen, and Brandon Ofem. 2011. Overview: Social Network Theory and Anal-
ysis. In Social Network Theory and Educational Change, edited by Alan Daly, 17–30.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
Burt, Ronald. 1982. Toward a Structural Theory of Action: Network Models of Social Structure,
Perception and Action. New York: Academic Press.
Busch, Per-Olof. 2009. The Climate Secretariat: Making a Living in a Straitjacket. In
Managers of Global Change: The Influence of International Environmental Bureaucracies,
edited by Frank Biermann and Bernd Siebenhüner, 245–264. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.
Chan, Sander, Harro van Asselt, Thomas Hale, Kenneth Abbott, Marianne Beisheim,
Matthew Hoffmann, Brendan Guy, Niklas Höhne, Angel Hsu, Philipp Pattberg,
Pieter Pauw, Céline Ramstein, and Oscar Widerberg. 2015. Reinvigorating Interna-
tional Climate Policy. A Comprehensive Framework for Effective Nonstate Action.
Global Policy 6 (4): 466–473.
Christopoulos, Dimitrios, and Karin Ingold. 2015. Exceptional or Just Well Connected?
Political Entrepreneurs and Brokers in Policy Making. European Political Science
Review 7 (3): 475–498.
climateconference. 2015UN. Article 6 Becomes Action for Climate Empowerment—ACE.
Available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzuoiX4ygaM&feature=youtu.be,
accessed December 20, 2016.
climateconference. 2015B. Christiana Figueres Asking for a New for Article 6 del
Convention. Available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUobVu0Mky4&
feature=youtu.be, accessed December 20, 2016.
Coleman, James. 1998. Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital. American
Journal of Sociology 94: 95–120.
l
D
o
w
N
o
UN
D
e
D
F
R
o
M
H
T
T
P
:
/
/
D
io
R
e
C
T
.
M
io
T
.
l
/
/
e
D
tu
G
e
P
UN
R
T
io
C
e
–
P
D
l
F
/
/
/
/
1
7
4
1
0
6
1
8
1
8
1
4
1
G
e
P
_
UN
_
0
0
4
2
8
P
D
.
/
l
F
B
sì
G
tu
e
S
T
T
o
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3
124 (cid:129) The Power of Social Networks
Conover, Michael, Jacob Ratkiewicz, Matthew Francisco, Bruno Gonçalves, Alessandro
Flammini, and Filippo Menczer. 2011. Political Polarization on Twitter. In Procedi-
ings of the Fifth International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, 89–96. Menlo
Park, CA: AAAI Press.
Creswell, John. 2009. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods
Approaches, 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
Dimitrov, Radoslav. 2010. Inside UN Climate Change Negotiations: The Copenhagen
Conferenza. Review of Policy Research 27 (6): 795–821.
Dubois, Elizabeth, and Devin Gaffney. 2014. The Multiple Facets of Influence. Identify-
ing Political Influentials and Opinion Leaders on Twitter. American Behavioral
Scientist 58 (10): 1260–1277.
Giddens, Anthony. 2011. The Politics of Climate Change, 2nd ed. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
Granovetter, Segno. 1973. The Strength of Weak Ties. American Journal of Sociology 78 (6):
1360–1380.
Guo, Chao, and Gregory Saxton. 2014. Tweeting Social Change: How Social Media Are
Changing Nonprofit Advocacy. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 43 (1): 57–79.
Hickmann, Thomas. 2016. The Evolution of the UNFCCC Secretariat: How the Climate
Secretariat Is Breaking Out of Its Straitjacket. Unpublished paper presented at the
57th Annual Convention of the International Studies Association (ISA), Atlanta,
GA, March 16–19.
Ibarra, Herminia. 1993. Network Centrality, Energia, and Innovation Involvement: Deter-
minants of Technical and Administrative Roles. Academy of Management Journal
36 (3): 471–501.
Ingold, Karin, and Philip Leifeld. 2014. Structural and Institutional Determinants of In-
fluence Reputation: A Comparison of Collaborative and Adversarial Policy Net-
works in Decision Making and Implementation. Journal of Public Administration
Research and Theory 26 (1): 1–18.
Jinnah, Sikina. 2010. Overlap Management in the World Trade Organization: Secretar-
iat Influence on Trade-Environment Politics. Global Environmental Politics 10 (2):
54–79.
Jinnah, Sikina. 2011. Marketing Linkages. Secretariat Governance of the Climate-
Biodiversity Interface. Global Environmental Politics 11 (3): 23–43.
Jinnah, Sikina. 2014. Post-Treaty Politics: Secretariat Influence in Global Environmental
Governance. Cambridge, MA: CON Premere.
Johnson, Tana. 2014. Organizational Progeny: Why Governments Are Losing Control over the
Proliferating Structures of Global Governance, 1st ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Jörgens, Helge, Nina Kolleck, and Barbara Saerbeck. 2016. Exploring the Hidden Influ-
ence of International Treaty Secretariats: Using Social Network Analysis to Analyse
the Twitter Debate on the “Lima Work Programme on Gender.” Journal of European
Public Policy 23 (7): 979–998.
Jörgens, Helge, Nina Kolleck, Barbara Saerbeck, and Mareike Well. 2017. Orchestrating
(Bio-)Diversity. The Secretariat of the Convention of Biological Diversity as an
Attention-Seeking Bureaucracy. In International Bureaucracy: Challenges and Lessons
for Public Administration Research, edited by Michael Bauer, Christoph Knill, E
Steffen Eckhard, 73–95. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Kent, Avidan. 2014. Implementing the Principle of Policy Integration: Institutional Inter-
play and the Role of International Organizations. International Environmental
Agreements 14 (3): 203–224.
l
D
o
w
N
o
UN
D
e
D
F
R
o
M
H
T
T
P
:
/
/
D
io
R
e
C
T
.
M
io
T
.
l
/
/
e
D
tu
G
e
P
UN
R
T
io
C
e
–
P
D
l
F
/
/
/
/
1
7
4
1
0
6
1
8
1
8
1
4
1
G
e
P
_
UN
_
0
0
4
2
8
P
D
.
/
l
F
B
sì
G
tu
e
S
T
T
o
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3
Nina Kolleck, Mareike Well, Severin Sperzel, and Helge Jörgens
(cid:129) 125
Kolleck, Nina. 2009. Business Power for Sustainable Development: The Role of
Discourses. RGSA Journal 3 (2): 108–123.
Kolleck, Nina. 2013. How Corporations Wield Their Power. In Handbook of Global
Companies, edited by John Mikler, 143–152. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Kolleck, Nina. 2014. Qualität, Netzwerke und Vertrauen: Der Einsatz von Netzwerkana-
lysen in Qualitätsentwicklungsprozessen. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft
17 (6): 159–177.
Kolleck, Nina. 2016. Uncovering Influence Through Social Network Analysis: The Role of
Schools in Education for Sustainable Development. Journal of Education Policy
31 (3): 308–329.
Lazer, David, Alex Pentland, Lada Adamic, Sinan Aral, Albert-László Barabási, Devon
Brewer, Nicholas Christakis, Noshir Contractor, James Fowler, Myron Gutmann,
Tony Jebara, Gary King, Michael Macy, Deb Roy, and Marshall Van Alstyne.
2009. Computational Social Science. Scienza 323 (5915): 721–723.
Leontief, Wassily. 1941. The Structure of American Economy, 1919–1929: An Empirical
Application of Equilibrium Analysis. Cambridge, MA: Stampa dell'Università di Harvard.
Mejova, Yelena, Ingmar Weber, and Michael Macy. 2015. Twitter: A Digital Socioscope.
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Merriam, Sharan. 1998. Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education,
2nd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Michaelowa, Katharina, and Axel Michaelowa. 2016. The Growing Influence of the
UNFCCC Secretariat on the Clean Development Mechanism. International Environ-
mental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics 17 (2): 247–269.
Sabatier, Paul, and Hank Jenkins-Smith. 1993. Policy Change and Learning: An Advocacy
Coalition Approach. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Seeley, John. 1949. The Net of Reciprocal Influence: A Problem in Treating Sociometric
Data. Canadian Journal of Psychology 3 (4): 234–240.
Smith, Jason, Daniel Halgin, Virginie Lopez-Kidwell, Giuseppe Labianca, Daniel Brass,
and Stephen Borgatti. 2014. Power in Politically Charged Networks. Sociale
Networks 36: 162–176.
Uhl, André, Nina Kolleck, and Edgar Schiebel. 2017. Twitter Data Analysis as Contribu-
tion to Strategic Foresight—The Case of the EU Research Project “Foresight and
Modelling for European Health Policy and Regulations” (FRESHER). European
Journal of Futures Research 5 (1).
UNESCO. 2015. Not Just Hot Air: Putting Climate Change Education into Practice. Available
at www.uncclearn.org/sites/default/files/inventory/unesco01_0.pdf, avuto accesso
Marzo 22, 2017.
UNFCCC. 1992. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Report FCCC/
INFORMAL/84. Available at https://unfccc.int/resource/docs/convkp/conveng.pdf,
accessed March 22, 2017.
UNFCCC. 2014UN. Report of the Conference of the Parties on Its Twentieth Session. Part
Two: Action Taken by the Conference of the Parties at Its Twentieth Session. Report
FCCC/CP/2014/10/Add.3. Available at http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2014/
cop20/eng/10a03.pdf, accessed March 22, 2017.
UNFCCC. 2014B. Summary Report on the 2nd Dialogue on Article 6 of the Convention:
Note by the Secretariat. Report FCCC/SBI/2014/15. Available at http://unfccc.int/
resource/docs/2014/sbi/eng/15.pdf, accessed March 22, 2017.
l
D
o
w
N
o
UN
D
e
D
F
R
o
M
H
T
T
P
:
/
/
D
io
R
e
C
T
.
M
io
T
.
l
/
/
e
D
tu
G
e
P
UN
R
T
io
C
e
–
P
D
l
F
/
/
/
/
1
7
4
1
0
6
1
8
1
8
1
4
1
G
e
P
_
UN
_
0
0
4
2
8
P
D
.
/
l
F
B
sì
G
tu
e
S
T
T
o
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3
126 (cid:129) The Power of Social Networks
UNFCCC. 2015. Summary Report on the 3rd Dialogue on Article 6 of the Convention.
Report FCCC/SBI/2015/15. Available at http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/sbi/
eng/15.pdf, accessed March 22, 2017.
UNFCCC. n.d. [2015UN]. Climate Education and Training: Getting Equipped to Shape the
Future. The Article 6 Dialogue. Available at http://newsroom.unfccc.int/lima/article-
6-climate-education-and-training/, accessed March 22, 2017.
UNFCCC. n.d. [2015B]. Education Day, 4 Dicembre 2015. Available at http://unfccc.int/
cooperation_support/education_outreach/overview/items/9192.php, avuto accesso
Marzo 22, 2017.
UNFCCC. n.d. [2015C]. First Education Day to Reach Everyone at COP21. Available at
http://newsroom.unfccc.int/unfccc-newsroom/a-first-education-day-to-reach-
everyone-at-cop21/, accessed March 22, 2017.
UNFCCC. n.d. [2015D]. Youth for Climate Action. Conference of Youth. Available at
http://unfccc.int/cooperation_and_support/education_and_outreach/youth/
items/8966.php, accessed March 22, 2017.
UNFCCC. 2016UN. Action for Climate Empowerment. Available at http://unfccc.int/
files/cooperation_and_support/education_and_outreach/application/pdf/unfccc_
adriana_valenzuela.pdf, accessed March 22, 2017.
UNFCCC. 2016B. Report of the Conference of the Parties on its Twenty-First Session,
held in Paris from 30 November to 13 Dicembre 2015. Report FCCC/CP/2015/
10/Add.1. Available at http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/10a01.
pdf, accessed March 22, 2017.
UNFCCC. 2016C. Review of the Doha Work Programme on Article 6 of the Convention.
Draft Conclusions Proposed by the Chair. Report FCCC/SBI/2016/L.15/Add.1.
Available at http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2016/sbi/eng/l15a01.pdf, avuto accesso
Marzo 22, 2017.
UNFCCC. n.d. [2016D]. United Nations Alliance on Climate Change: Education, Training and
Public Awareness. Available at http://unfccc.int/cooperation_and_support/education_
and_outreach/education_and_training/items/8958.php, accessed March 22, 2017.
United Nations. n.d. [2015]. Lima-Paris Action Agenda Matures into Major Force Driving
Climate Action. Blog Post, Sustainable Development Goals blog, Dicembre 9,
2015. Available at www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/blog/2015/12/lima-paris-
action-agenda-matures-into-major-force-driving-climate-action/, last accessed
Marzo 22, 2017.
Verweij, Stefan, Erik-Hans Klijn, Jurian Edelenbos, and Arwin van Buuren. 2013. Che cosa
Makes Governance Networks Work? A Fuzzy Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis
Di 14 Dutch Spatial Planning Projects. Public Administration 91 (4): 1035–1055.
White, Harrison. 2008. Identity and Control: How Social Formations Emerge, 2nd ed.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Williams, Hywel, James McMurray, Tim Kurz, and Hugo Lambert. 2015. Network Anal-
ysis Reveals Open Forums and Echo Chambers in Social Media Discussions of
Climate Change. Global Environmental Change 32: 126–138.
Xu, Weiai, Yoonmo Sang, Stacy Blasiola, and Han Park. 2014. Predicting Opinion
Leaders in Twitter Activism Networks: The Case of the Wisconsin Recall Election.
American Behavioral Scientist 58 (10): 1278–1293.
l
D
o
w
N
o
UN
D
e
D
F
R
o
M
H
T
T
P
:
/
/
D
io
R
e
C
T
.
M
io
T
.
l
/
/
e
D
tu
G
e
P
UN
R
T
io
C
e
–
P
D
l
F
/
/
/
/
1
7
4
1
0
6
1
8
1
8
1
4
1
G
e
P
_
UN
_
0
0
4
2
8
P
D
.
/
l
F
B
sì
G
tu
e
S
T
T
o
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3