The climate patient is sick, and the treatment isn't working.
Earth's climate is in crisis. Despite decades of international summits, ambitious targets, and countless warnings from scientists, global carbon emissions continue to reach record highs. The crisis isn't just worsening—our response to it is failing. In "Pathologies of Climate Governance," scholar Paul G. Harris approaches this failure as a medical doctor would, diagnosing the fundamental pathologies that prevent humanity from effectively treating its planetary fever. This examination reveals that the illness stems not from a single cause, but from interconnected failures in international relations, national politics, and even aspects of human nature itself 1 2 .
Harris defines "pathologies" as the systematic, recurring obstacles that prevent effective climate action. Rather than focusing solely on technical solutions, he investigates why our governance systems—the political and social structures we've built to address collective problems—have proven inadequate for this existential challenge. The book dissects these failures across three interconnected levels: the international system of states, the domestic politics within countries, and the psychosocial aspects of human behavior 1 2 .
Sovereign states prioritizing national interests over global cooperation
Domestic political barriers preventing implementation of climate policies
Psychological and behavioral barriers to addressing long-term threats
The global system of sovereign states, each prioritizing its national interest, creates the first major pathology. For over a quarter-century, climate governance relied primarily on top-down measures—internationally agreed conventions and protocols that set allowable greenhouse gas emissions for individual countries 7 .
Internationally negotiated treaties like the Kyoto Protocol established binding emissions targets for developed countries based on principles of historical responsibility and differentiated capabilities 7 .
The Paris Agreement introduced Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), where each country designs its own climate plans rather than accepting internationally mandated targets 7 .
More recently, the focus has shifted to bottom-up measures—nationally determined contributions where each country sets its own targets 7 . While this approach has generated wider participation, it has also proven inadequate for the scale of the problem. The international state system itself precludes the aggressive, coordinated global action needed, as nations remain locked in debates about fairness, historical responsibility, and economic competition 7 .
Beneath the international level, domestic politics in key nations create another layer of obstruction. Harris conducts a detailed examination of climate politics across diverse countries, including the United States, China, Canada, Australia, Brazil, India, Russia, Japan, and the European Union 2 .
This analysis reveals how unique political structures, economic priorities, and ideological conflicts in each country create distinct barriers to meaningful climate action:
Deep political polarization has turned climate change into a partisan issue, preventing consistent policy 4 .
Faces challenges balancing rapid economic development with environmental protection 4 .
Policy coordination across member states creates challenges for unified climate action.
While most vulnerable, have limited power in international negotiations 2 .
These national-level pathologies demonstrate that even when international agreements are reached, implementation often fails at the domestic level where economic interests and short-term political calculations frequently override long-term environmental concerns.
Perhaps the most profound pathology lies in human psychology and social structures. Harris explores how human nature, overconsumption, and global capitalism conspire to drive and perpetuate the climate crisis 2 .
Compounding this, consumer capitalism encourages overconsumption and continuous economic growth, creating structural barriers to reducing emissions without addressing fundamental economic models 2 .
Of global emissions linked to 100 companies
Resource extraction since 1970
Annual GDP growth required to maintain current system
The history of international climate negotiations represents a crucial natural experiment in global problem-solving. Harris dissects this decades-long experiment, analyzing its methodology and outcomes to understand why it has failed to curb the climate crisis.
Methodology: Internationally negotiated treaties, notably the Kyoto Protocol, established binding emissions targets for developed countries based on principles of historical responsibility and differentiated capabilities 7 .
Methodology: The Paris Agreement introduced Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), where each country designs its own climate plans rather than accepting internationally mandated targets 7 .
Between current trajectory and Paris goals
Harris's analysis concludes that while both methodologies have created important frameworks for cooperation, the fundamental structure of the international system—based on national sovereignty and competing interests—inherently limits effective collective action on a global scale 7 .
To properly diagnose the failures of climate governance, Harris employs several essential analytical tools from political science and international relations.
Examines the systems of principles, norms, rules, and procedures that guide state behavior on climate change, such as the UNFCCC.
Analyzes how the principle of national sovereignty creates tensions between global problem-solving and state independence.
Investigates how internal political structures, interest groups, and public opinion shape national positions in international negotiations.
Assesses issues of fairness, equity, and responsibility between developed and developing nations in burden-sharing.
Explores how human psychology, consumption patterns, and social organization contribute to both the cause and persistence of the crisis.
Despite this grim diagnosis, Harris concludes with a hopeful prescription. He suggests remedies for overcoming governance hurdles at international and national levels and provides ideas for individuals to align their interests with the global environment 1 .
Creating more flexible and adaptive governance structures that can respond more quickly to scientific findings.
Designing climate policies that deliver co-benefits at the national level, such as green jobs, energy security, and public health improvements.
Creating new economic models that don't rely on endless material growth and overconsumption.
Supporting cities, regions, and corporations in taking climate action when national governments are paralyzed.
Encouraging citizens to see themselves as part of a global community with responsibilities to both distant strangers and future generations.
As Harris's work demonstrates, understanding why we have failed is the first crucial step toward finding a cure. For concerned citizens, the book provides not just a diagnosis but also a hopeful path toward a more effective treatment for our ailing planet.