Democracy, peer review, and the civilizing force of climate hypocrisy

Does the UNFCCC review process effectively enhance national climate policy performance? While reporting and review have been integral parts of the global climate change regime since its inception, there has been limited scholarly attention to its effectiveness. We propose that the public nature of the review process serves as a "civilizing force," with the potential to induce initially "hypocritical" states to become more compliant over time. However, we posit that the effectiveness of this "civilizing force of hypocrisy" is contingent upon the level of democracy within the state under review, that is, upon the existence of institutionalized mechanisms that empower domestic audiences to hold leaders accountable and punish inconsistent behavior. We test our theoretical argument using data on 58 countries over a period of sixteen years and find support for our expectation. Specifically, our results indicate that a stringent UNFCCC review process enhances national climate policy performance for democratic countries. These findings have significant policy implications, particularly for the institutional design of the review system under the Paris Agreement—the Enhanced Transparency Framework. Our results suggest that non-Annex I democracies stand to improve their national climate policy performance over time if subjected to a stringent review.