A central analytical task in VCE Politics is evaluating how different categories of global actors respond to global issues. Responses vary enormously in their ambition, effectiveness, and underlying motivations. Students must analyse states, institutions of global governance, and non-state actors — demonstrating understanding of why their approaches differ and what constraints they face.
KEY TAKEAWAY: Global actors are not a monolithic bloc. States pursue national interests, institutions facilitate cooperation but lack enforcement power, and non-state actors fill gaps left by formal governance. Understanding these differences is essential for VCAA analysis.
| Actor Type | Examples | Primary Motivation | Tools Available |
|---|---|---|---|
| States | USA, China, Australia, small island states | National interest (security, economic prosperity, sovereignty) | Diplomacy, trade, military, foreign aid, domestic legislation |
| Institutions of global governance | United Nations (UNSC, UNGA, UNHCR), WTO, IMF, World Bank, WHO | Facilitating cooperation, maintaining international order | Treaties, sanctions (limited), funding, norm-setting, technical assistance |
| Non-state actors (NGOs) | Greenpeace, Médecins Sans Frontières, Amnesty International | Advocacy, humanitarian assistance, accountability | Lobbying, public campaigns, service delivery, litigation |
| Non-state actors (corporations) | ExxonMobil, BP, Apple, renewable energy firms | Profit, market share | Investment, lobbying, technology deployment |
| Non-state actors (IGOs) | ASEAN, African Union, NATO | Regional stability, collective security | Multilateral agreements, peacekeeping, economic integration |
United States:
- Under Biden: Rejoined Paris Agreement (2021), passed Inflation Reduction Act (2022) — \$369 billion in climate investments, the largest in US history
- Under Trump (2017–2021 and 2025–): Withdrew from Paris Agreement, rolled back EPA regulations, promoted fossil fuel expansion
- Demonstrates how domestic political change can reverse international commitments
China:
- World’s largest emitter (~27% of global CO₂)
- Pledged carbon neutrality by 2060, peak emissions before 2030
- Simultaneously the world’s largest installer of renewable energy AND approves new coal plants domestically
- Uses climate diplomacy strategically, negotiating bilateral statements with the US to manage the relationship
Small Island Developing States (SIDS):
- Led by groups like the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS)
- Advocate for 1.5°C targets and Loss and Damage financing
- Use moral authority and coalition-building rather than economic power to influence negotiations
- Tuvalu’s Prime Minister addressed COP26 standing in water to dramatise sea-level rise — an example of soft power diplomacy
Australia:
- Under Morrison government: Resisted 2050 net-zero targets until November 2021 under international pressure
- Under Albanese government (elected 2022): Legislated 43% emissions reduction by 2030, increased international climate finance commitments, rejoined the Pacific family more constructively
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC):
- Provides the overarching legal framework and annual COP summits
- Paris Agreement (2015): Established NDC framework, transparency mechanisms
- COP26 Glasgow (2021): Glasgow Climate Pact — accelerated fossil fuel phasedown language, new methane pledges
- COP28 Dubai (2023): First-ever call for “transitioning away” from fossil fuels; Loss and Damage Fund formally established
Limitations: Decisions require consensus; no binding enforcement mechanism; major emitters can frustrate ambition
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC):
- Synthesises scientific evidence; 2021–2022 Sixth Assessment Report provided most stark warnings to date
- Informs but does not negotiate; influence depends on political will to act on findings
World Bank / IMF:
- Green Climate Fund channelling financing to developing nations
- World Bank increased climate finance to \$38.6 billion in FY2023
Greenpeace:
- Legal action against Shell (Netherlands court ruled Shell must cut emissions 45% by 2030 — landmark 2021 verdict)
- Blockades of coal ports and fossil fuel infrastructure
- Public awareness campaigns shifting corporate and political behaviour
Fridays for Future / Youth Climate Movement:
- Founded by Greta Thunberg (2018); mobilised millions globally
- Placed pressure on governments prior to COP26; demonstrated that civil society can shift political timelines
- Illustrates the power of transnational social movements in global governance
Corporations:
- Tech giants (Apple, Google, Microsoft) committed to 100% renewable energy
- Fossil fuel companies (Exxon, Shell) engage in greenwashing while lobbying against binding regulation — accountability role of NGOs is critical
EXAM TIP: VCAA requires you to study at least one institution of global governance AND at least one non-state actor. Know their specific actions, not just their existence. Named organisations with specific, datable actions score far higher.
When evaluating responses, consider four criteria:
COMMON MISTAKE: Students often describe what actors “said” without evaluating what they did. Always distinguish between stated commitments and demonstrated action — this is where the strongest analytical arguments are made.
VCAA FOCUS: Your response must cover all three actor categories: states (plural), institutions of global governance (at least one), and non-state actors (at least one). Responses that omit one category will be significantly penalised.
