↓ Skip to main content

The Legitimacy of Leadership in International Climate Change Negotiations

Overview of attention for article published in Ambio: A Journal of the Human Environment, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Legitimacy of Leadership in International Climate Change Negotiations
Published in
Ambio: A Journal of the Human Environment, January 2012
DOI 10.1007/s13280-011-0240-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christer Karlsson, Mattias Hjerpe, Charles Parker, Björn-Ola Linnér

Abstract

Leadership is an essential ingredient in reaching international agreements and overcoming the collective action problems associated with responding to climate change. In this study, we aim at answering two questions that are crucial for understanding the legitimacy of leadership in international climate change negotiations. Based on the responses of three consecutive surveys distributed at COPs 14-16, we seek first to chart which actors are actually recognized as leaders by climate change negotiation participants. Second, we aim to explain what motivates COP participants to support different actors as leaders. Both these questions are indeed crucial for understanding the role, importance, and legitimacy of leadership in the international climate change regime. Our results show that the leadership landscape in this issue area is fragmented, with no one clear-cut leader, and strongly suggest that it is imperative for any actor seeking recognition as climate change leader to be perceived as being devoted to promoting the common good.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
South Africa 2 4%
Germany 1 2%
Netherlands 1 2%
Finland 1 2%
United Kingdom 1 2%
Mexico 1 2%
Unknown 44 86%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 47%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 14%
Student > Bachelor 6 12%
Researcher 6 12%
Student > Postgraduate 3 6%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 2 4%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 23 45%
Environmental Science 14 27%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 6%
Arts and Humanities 3 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 6%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 2 4%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 December 2019.
All research outputs
#7,584,431
of 14,480,135 outputs
Outputs from Ambio: A Journal of the Human Environment
#749
of 1,029 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#88,991
of 212,592 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ambio: A Journal of the Human Environment
#18
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,480,135 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,029 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.1. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 212,592 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.