The transnational climate change governance (TCCG) landscape, led by sub- and non-state actors including businesses, municipalities, and NGOs, holds legitimate potential for tackling persisting climate injustices, in part by virtue of its polycentric character. However, while in theory polycentric governance systems could serve to correct structural power imbalances, the geography of TCCG remains remarkably uneven. This article explores this puzzle in the context of polycentric governance theory and the allegedly paradoxical relationship between polycentricity and equity. Two interrelated empirical and analytical research questions are addressed: (1) How is TCCG organized geographically along the global North–South divide? And, based on the geography of TCCG, (2) Does its polycentric character contribute toward more equitable governance across the global North and South? Following a large-N analysis of a novel dataset containing 174 governance arrangements and 1196 stakeholders with decision-making powers, I argue that the geography of TCCG is remarkably resistant to change, gravitating unmistakably toward the global North and its existing diplomatic hotspots. I argue that the TCCG system currently in place resembles a system of concentrated polycentricity—a product of an overarching system of rules shared with the international regime that could, in turn, potentially explain the persisting North–South inequities in a still seemingly increasingly polycentric climate.

由包括企业、市政当局和非政府组织在内的次级和非国家行为者领导的跨国气候变化治理 (TCCG) 格局具有解决持续存在的气候不公正现象的合法潜力，部分原因在于其多中心特征。然而，虽然理论上多中心治理体系可以纠正结构性权力失衡，但 TCCG 的地理分布仍然非常不平衡。本文在多中心治理理论和多中心与公平之间所谓的矛盾关系的背景下探讨了这一难题。解决了两个相互关联的实证和分析研究问题：(1) TCCG 在地理上是如何沿着全球南北鸿沟组织的？并且，根据 TCCG 的地理位置，(2) 它的多中心特征是否有助于在全球北方和南方实现更公平的治理？继大对包含 174 个治理安排和 1196 个具有决策权的利益相关者的新数据集进行N分析后，我认为 TCCG 的地理环境对变化具有显着的抵抗力，明确无误地倾向于全球北方及其现有的外交热点。我认为，目前的 TCCG 系统类似于一个集中的多中心系统——一个与国际制度共享的总体规则系统的产物，反过来，这可能解释在看似日益多中心的气候中持续存在的南北不平等.