Net-zero democracy

Abstract This Article examines two interrelated puzzles in contemporary climate governance. First, how can Net Zero commitments translate from law on the books to law in action—and remain resilient over time amid political volatility and policy backlash? Second, if climate policies must be entrenched to survive over time, how can they remain democratically legitimate? As governments adopt long-term decarbonization goals, they face the persistent risk of rollback through electoral shifts, populist resistance, or vested interests. To counteract this vulnerability, actors have developed entrenchment strategies —institutional designs aimed at shielding climate policy from reversal. I identify two ideal-type models: the public law model , which relies on legal and constitutional mechanisms, and the green industrial model , which aligns market actors with climate goals through state investment and regulatory incentives. While both offer tools for long-term stability, they raise distinct normative concerns. Entrenchment may secure future commitments, but it can also limit the ability of future publics to revisit or reshape them. Drawing on legal doctrine, political economy, and democratic theory, the Article argues that resilient and legitimate climate governance must balance durability with adaptability. Climate entrenchment should preserve the freedom of future citizens to contest, reinterpret, and revise the commitments made in their name. Climate policy must therefore be both forward-looking and democratically accountable—protecting the conditions for collective self-government even as it seeks to safeguard the planet for generations to come.