Has the international climate regime promoted climate justice? Evidence from Clean Development Mechanism projects in China

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jingyuan Xu ◽  
Yue Zhang
1969 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 129-161 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Dehm

This article provides a TWAIL critique of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change [UNFCCC] in the aftermath of the 21st Conference of the Parties in Paris in December 2015. It engages with criticisms from the social and climate justice movement that the UNFCCC is promoting forms of “carbon colonialism” or “CO2lonialism” through its support for and establishment of international carbon trading and offsetting strategies. It proposes that using a jurisdictional approach to examine how the authority of the UNFCCC is authorized can provide key analytical tools to understand the regime. The article examines the way in which the regime is authorized by an invocation of “common concern” even as it promotes policies that marginalize the interests of those already most vulnerable to climate change. It concludes by suggesting that climate justice movements already are building different forms of commonality and that these alternative commonalties represent important new ways of thinking about global action on climate change. 


2004 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eduardo Viola

The climate regime is the more comprehensive and ambitious of all environmental regimes, linking in a very direct way one the most crucial economic issue, the use of energy and energy efficiency with one of the stronger environmental threaten. For this reason the climate regime is one of the most important examples of the impasses of building up some limited global governance in a unipolar anarchic world. The paper discusses the evolution of the Brazilian standing in its relation with the world during the last decade: moving from a more nationalist toward a more liberal and globalist standing in many issues related to the governance of the world. Also, the paper analyses the evolution of the Brazilian stance in the negotiations of the Kyoto Protocol: strong defense of the principle of common/differentiated responsibility, proposal of Clean Development Fund, alliance with USA for transforming the Clean Development Fund in the Clean Development Mechanism, moving from opposition to supporting of flexibility mechanisms, making bridge between developed and developing countries in many negotiations, supporting the European Union in the opposition to the inclusion of carbon sinks, opposition to emergent countries voluntary commitments, opposition to the eligibility of primary forest protection for the Clean Development Mechanism, strong criticism of the withdraw of USA in March 2001, leading role among developing countries in supporting the reaching of a final agreement in Bonn (July 2001) and Marrakech (November 2001), and leading role in trying to achieve the ratification of the Protocol in 2002. Finally the paper shows how the reluctance of Russia to ratify the Protocol during 2003 was producing a combination of despair and disengagement in the Lula administration.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronja Ritthaler-Andree

What are the implications of different perceptions of justice for the emission reduction policies of the three major polluting countries, the United States, China and India? And how do they shape the development of the international climate regime? Based on an independently developed analytical framework, this theory-driven comparative study is one of the first to examine international and national negotiating positions according to different dimensions of climate justice. The study reveals that the polluting countries’ positions on climate justice began to converge in 2015, before diverging again in 2018.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document