Predicted Paper 3 Global · Q3A · 30-mark essay

Global governance and climate change

"Evaluate the view that global environmental governance has failed to tackle climate change effectively. (30 marks)"

1. What a 30-mark essay wants

This is a 30-mark Section B essay, marked across AO1 (knowledge), AO2 (analysis) and AO3 (evaluation). You must reach and sustain a clear line of argument.

Spec hook. Global governance and the environment; the power and effectiveness of international institutions. There is no source - bring your own knowledge.

Build the answer around three themes. For each, set the strongest case on both sides and reach an interim judgement that points back to your line of argument. Do not save all judgement for the conclusion.

2. The case that governance has failed

The view that global environmental governance has failed rests on three strong points.

No binding force. The Paris Agreement (2015) relies on voluntary Nationally Determined Contributions - states set their own targets, and there is no enforcement if they miss them.
Sovereignty and the national interest. States protect growth and sovereignty first. This is a tragedy of the commons: each state has an incentive to free-ride on the effort of others.
The outcomes. Global emissions have continued to rise and the 1.5 degree target is slipping out of reach, which is the clearest measure of failure.

3. The case that governance has worked

The opposing case is also genuine and must be argued at full strength.

Near-universal participation. The Paris Agreement was signed by almost every state - a level of agreement the binding Kyoto Protocol never reached.
A ratchet and review process. The annual COP summits, five-yearly reviews and transparent reporting keep climate on the agenda and apply naming-and-shaming pressure.
A normative shift and real progress. The cost of renewable energy has fallen sharply, and the Loss and Damage fund shows the regime can still develop.

4. The three themes

Theme	Failed	Worked
Binding force	Voluntary NDCs, no enforcement	Universal membership, transparent review and ratchet
Sovereignty and interest	Free-riding; the national interest wins	The COP process builds pressure and a shared norm
Outcomes	Emissions rising; 1.5 degrees slipping	Renewable costs collapsing; finance flows growing

Line of argument. A defensible line: global environmental governance has built a near-universal framework and shifted the norm, but it has failed at its central task of cutting emissions fast enough, because it cannot override state sovereignty. Effective in process, ineffective in outcome.

5. Writing the answer

State your line of argument briefly in the introduction. Take each theme as a paragraph: the strongest counter-case, then your rebuttal, then an interim judgement. Keep the conclusion short and evaluative - reassert the line, do not summarise.

AO3 discipline. Every theme must reach a judgement that leads to your overall line. A paragraph that lists both sides without deciding scores in the lower bands.