 Good afternoon and thank you for this wonderful opportunity to share with you my research. I will share a little presentation I prepared for this occasion. So today I want to discuss the role of international organizations in climate governance. To this end I have analyzed climate change as a collective action problem. A collective action problem appears when an individual interest usually encompassing a short-term perspective conflicts with a collective interest that usually embraces a long-term perspective. I am sure that many of you are acquainted with Ostrom's seminal work on governing the commons. However, her findings were confined to local resources, confined to small spaces. The question that immediately arises is, how are we going to translate collective action in larger scales? What characteristics are there, opportunities, and limits? So the Center for Collective Action Research, CECAR, for where I work, have developed an analytical framework to study large-scale collective action problems. And the principal characteristics are the following. For instance, the first one refers to anonymity. If we take climate change as an example, it involves a wide-varied range of actors that are not locally confined and therefore the likelihood of cooperation diminishes. Onimity, the deep ends, since actors are located across geographical scales, but also includes a temporal element, present and future generations. Action is less likely to occur in large-scale action problems due to several forms of heterogeneity, including difference, for instance, in identity, socioeconomic status, and power asymmetries. Heterogeneity may involve different perceptions of even of the responsibility towards the problem. And I think this becomes clearly illustrated in the evolution of the climate change regime. The problem with heterogeneity is that it diminishes trust and the opportunity to engage in collective action, the weakens as well. In this scenario, transparency frameworks are fundamental at global and regional levels because the success of collective action rests heavily on the possibility to verify what all actors are doing, the mechanisms used to implement their obligations and the challenges to achieve common goals. Large-scale collective action problems also highlights the problems of uncertainty and risk regarding the extent and consequences of the problem. If we look through to the science of climate change, it diminishes, among others, for instance, ocean rising, coastal erosion, changes in marine and terrestrial ecosystems, and increasing extreme weather conditions. Imaginaries of our future include scenarios where humanity is not going to be able to survive if mitigation and adaptation policies are not implemented. Finally, the burden of taking action is necessarily collective, but the global emphasis and the long-term perspective of climate change could transform it into something that is distant. The needs for global collective action could increase the percent of futility regarding personal, national, or even regional efforts. So I argue that collective action will be fostered when situationality is achieved. And situationality is a process of a spatial or local confinement of global trends. Once it is linked to a local situation, an idea becomes an action. But how we achieve this situationality? Concerning situationality, my research focuses on climate change in the Arctic because of the fundamental role of the cryosphere in the regulation of climate. An interesting political and legal development concerns the construction of the Arctic as an international legal region. We know that law and space are intimately connected. So the legal delimitation of space will create local, national, regional, jurisdictional boundaries. Those boundaries will definitely affect the reach of the law. Basically the Arctic as a distinctive region is for most a political construction that combines several areas under national jurisdiction and areas beyond national jurisdiction. I am particularly interested in the role of international organization in fostering collective action and the role in embracing multiple legal scales and multiple actors. So I argue that international organizations, for instance, such as the Arctic Congress prompts the development of a regulatory unit beyond the national state, in this case the Arctic. Many international organizations become a platform to accommodate diverse and even conflicting interests, not only of states, but also of diverse actors, including for instance indigenous communities, industry representatives, civil society organizations. Taking the Arctic Council again as an example, it has a tripartite structure that includes states, indigenous participants, and observers. This structure, it is once again the flexibility to engage several scales from local to global, from public to private. The ability to trigger collective action is then linked to the organizational structure of the institution, but also with the regulatory capacities. And these regulatory capacities can be roughly classified as lawmaking activities, data collection, analysis and dissemination, monitoring and supervision, and finally dispute settlement mechanisms. The organizations I studied concerning climate governance in the Arctic are those that you can see in your screen, and I focus on their structure as well as the regulatory capacities. The Arctic Council, the European Union and BIAAC, for instance, has took as a basis for their work the reports of the IPCC in order to advance and disseminate further scientific reports. Additional scientific reports to some extent, for instance, addresses the problems of anonymity by identifying in a regional scale the actors and the economic sectors that contribute to climate change, and those that are specifically affected by it. Depending on the detail level, also hard and soft law standards could effectively counteract the problems of large-scale collective action problems. For instance, the technical guidance and binding regulations established under those species of the International Maritime Organization, IMO, concerning shipping activities in the Arctic is a perfect example on this matter. It establishes clear boundaries regarding the region, in this case the Arctic, which actors are going to take action, how risks are going to be managed. Overall, I think that breaking complexity is a necessary first step. International organizations bring the necessary situationality to global trends. The structure of international organizations is also relevant. The participation, for instance, of local authorities such as in BIAAC or indigenous communities like in the Arctic Council facilitates the translation of global goals into regional and local settings. Now some concluding remarks. Well, situationality is yet to be achieved in climate governance in the Arctic. This stems mainly from the legal status of Arctic institutions. The Arctic Council, for instance, is the central forum for adopting regional policies for climate change. However, its soft law status, budget and low political commitment of its member states, precluded from becoming a regulatory institution. Without this transition into a treaty-based organization with extended powers, the situation may not change. While data collection and dissemination is certainly important, the time has come to focus on policy and further binding regulation. The spatial constraints faced by the European Union affect situationality negatively. Since the European Union has limited regulatory and supervisory capacities in the Arctic, its policy has been modest, despite its continuous efforts of the European Union to build an Arctic identity. There is also a general assumption that police-centric governance systems or cooperation between international institutions coordinates different legal regimes that are related who develop consistent and compatible obligations and decrease regulatory gaps. However, in the absence of formal or informal corporations, there could be a room for potential confusion, duplication and even conflicts. So thank you very much for your attention and I am looking forward to answering your questions.