The International Negotiations Survey is a research program with the aim to advance interdisciplinary knowledge using questionnaire data collected at international negotiations.
Questionnaires and publications
Questionnaires used during the previous UNFCCC conferences
Questionnaires used 2016
Questionnaires used 2015
Questionnaires used 2014
Questionnaires used 2013
Survey of support providers’ NAMA preferences
This online questionnaire, open during fall 2013, surveyed opinions on the best use of public finance in international support of NAMAs. The questionnaire was part of the research project “GovNAMAs”, financed by the Swedish Energy Agency, to improve knowledge on how to successfully match design and support of NAMAs. For questions, contact Mathias Fridahl (email@example.com).
The results from this dataset have been published in Fridahl, M., Hagemann, M., Röser, F., and Amars, L. (2015). A Comparison of Design and Support Priorities of Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions. Journal of Environment and Development.
For previous years’ questionnaires, please contact us.
Publications that analyse the International Negotiations Survey data
Peer reviewed publications
Pre- and Post-Paris Views on Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage
Fridahl, M. (2019).
In: Pires, J. C. & Gonçalves, A. L. (eds.) Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage: Using Natural Resources for Sustainable Development. New York: Elsevier.
Making climate governance global: how UN climate summitry comes to matter in a complex climate regime
Lövbrand, E., Hjerpe, M. and Linnér, B.-O. (2017).
Environmental Politics, 26(4): 580–599.
Socio-political prioritization of bioenergy with carbon capture and storage
Fridahl, M. (2017).
Energy Policy, 104: 89–99.
Assessing the European Union’s global climate change leadership: from Copenhagen to the Paris Agreement
Parker, C., Karlsson, C. and Hjerpe, M. (2017).
Journal of European Integration, 39(2): 239–252.
Climate Change Leaders and Followers: Leadership Recognition and Selection in the UNFCCC Negotiations
Parker, C., Karlsson, K. and Hjerpe, M. (2015).
International Relations, 29(4): 434–454.
Normative arguments for non-state actor participation in international policymaking processes: Functionalism, neocorporatism or democratic pluralism?
Nasiritousi, N., Hjerpe, M. and Bäckstrand, K. (2016).
European Journal of International Relations, 22(4): 920–943.
Views on alternative forums for effectively tackling climate change
Hjerpe, M. and Nasiritousi, N. (2015).
Nature Climate Change, 5: 864–867.
Perspectives on the Green Climate Fund: possible compromises on capitalization and balanced allocation
Fridahl, M. and Linnér. B.-O. (2015).
Climate and Development, 8(2): 105–109.
A Comparison of Design and Support Priorities of Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions
Fridahl, M., Hagemann, M., Röser, F. and Amars, L. (2015).
Journal of Environment and Development, 24(2): 237–264.
Pluralising climate change solutions? Views held and voiced by participants at the international climate change negotiations
Nasiritousi, N., Hjerpe, M. and Buhr, K. (2014).
Ecological Economics, 105: 177–184.
Agreement, significance, and understandings of historical responsibility in climate change negotiations.
Friman, M., and Hjerpe, M. (2015).
Climate Policy, 15(3): 302–320.
The roles of non-state actors in climate change governance: understanding agency through governance profiles
Nasiritousi, N., Hjerpe, M. and Linnér, B.-O. (2014).
International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 16: 109–126.
Climate Change Politics through a Global Pledge-and-Review Regime: Positions among Negotiators and Stakeholders
Buhr, K., Roth, S. and Stigson, P. (2014).
Sustainability, 6(2): 794–811.
Expectations on corporate climate action under regulatory uncertainty
Buhr, K. and Hjerpe, M. (2012).
International Journal of Climate Change Strategies and Management, 4(4): 403–419.
Fragmented Climate Change Leadership: Making Sense of the Ambiguous COP-15 Outcome
Parker, C., Karlsson, C., Hjerpe, M. and Linner, B.-O. (2012).
Environmental Politics, 21(2): 268–286.
The Legitimacy of Leadership in International Climate Change Negotiations
Karlsson, C., Parker, C., Hjerpe, M. and Linnér. B.-O. (2012).
Ambio, 41(S1): 46–55.
A Registry for Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions: Goals, Outcomes and Institutional Requisites
Linnér, B.-O. and Pahuja, N. (2012).
Ambio, 41, (S1): 56–67.
Looking for Leaders: Perceptions of Climate Change Leadership among Climate Change Negotiation Participants
Karlsson, C., Parker, C., Hjerpe, M. and Linner, B.-O. (2011).
Global Environmental Politics, 11, 1: 89–107.
Functions of COP side-events in climate change governance
Hjerpe, M. and Linnér, B.-O. (2010). Climate Policy, 10 2: 167–180.
Reports and working papers
The function of side events at the Conference of the Parties to The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
Hjerpe M., Linnér B., Simonsson L., Wråke, M. and Zetterberg, L. (2008).
Linköping: Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research CSPR Report 08:2. IVL report. B, 1804.
Common ground for effort sharing? Preferred principles for distributing climate mitigation efforts.
Hjerpe, M., Löfgren, Å., Linnér, B.-O., Hennlock, M., Sterner, T. and Jagers, S. (2011).
University of Gothenburg Publications Electronic Archive.