What is the meaning of ‘consensus’ within and beyond the UNFCCC? What alternative interpretations of consensus are available based on consensus facilitation practice and related literature? This article assesses the mismatch between how the UNFCCC interprets consensus and its broader interpretation in the facilitation practice literature, and proposes a way forward using the concept of ‘standing aside’ more prominently. The restrictive consensus interpretation has far-reaching implications for the ability of the world’s central climate regime to be fit for purpose, i.e., facilitating multilateral climate action. The analysis of consensus in the UNFCCC points to the central problems of unpredictability and ambiguity in the determination that consensus exists. Many negotiators and chairs acknowledge the problem of predominantly interpreting consensus as unanimity and have subsequently sought ways to address the damage it does through ad hoc rulings that consensus exists sometimes by ignoring the expressions of objection; however, this comes at the expense of a good predictable process.

联合国气候变化框架公约内外的“共识”是什么意思？基于共识促进实践和相关文献，对共识有哪些可供选择的解释？本文评估了《联合国气候变化框架公约》如何解释共识与其在促进实践文献中的更广泛解释之间的不匹配，并提出了一种更突出地使用“站在一边”概念的前进方向。限制性共识解释对世界中央气候制度是否符合目的（即促进多边气候行动）的能力具有深远影响。UNFCCC 中对共识的分析指出了确定存在共识时的不可预测性和模糊性的核心问题。许多谈判者和主席承认主要将共识解释为全体一致的问题，并随后寻求通过临时裁决解决其造成的损害的方法，即有时通过忽略反对的表达而存在共识；然而，这是以牺牲良好的可预测过程为代价的。