Climate Regime Building in a Changing World and China's Role in Global Climate Governance

2014 ◽  
Vol 02 (01) ◽  
pp. 1450002
Author(s):  
Jiahua PAN ◽  
Mou WANG
Keyword(s):  
Developing Countries ◽  
Developing Country ◽  
Developing Economies ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Small Island ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Form ◽  
Climate Governance ◽  
International Climate ◽  
Governance Processes

In 2012, the 18th session of the Conference of the Parties (COP18) of the United Nation Framework Convention on Climate Change (hereinafter referred to as the Convention) in Doha concluded a package of results which included the second commitment period of the "Kyoto Protocol", ending the Bali Roadmap negotiating mandate (hereinafter referred to as the Bali mandate) after five years, and officially opening the intensive negotiations of Durban Platform. Compared to the "dual-track" negotiation under Bali mandate, Durban Platform mandate is on "one-track". But it does not mean that some parties' concerns and positions about "dual-track" have been adjusted. They are seeking a way to realize their needs in Durban Platform. Therefore, "one-track" negotiation on Durban Platform does not simplify problems, but presents problems intensively. At the beginning of Durban Platform mandate, whether to mandate the Durban Platform negotiations was controversial among developing countries, while after consultations, Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) and the emerging developing economies divided on main concerns, such as mitigation targets, legal forms, sources of finance mechanism, etc. In fact, AOSIS's position gradually converged with the European Union (EU). And EU and AOSIS became the most aggressive powers to promote the Durban Platform negotiations. The traditional North–South divergence is facing adjustment, and new powers are restructuring negotiations. The huge disparity of interest among parties hinders progress in the Durban Platform negotiations. Parties will continue to debate and seek consensus on the interpretation of the principle of "common but differentiated responsibilities", emission reduction models and targets, sources of finance mechanism, the legal form of the future agreement, etc. With the social and economic development, China is receiving growing attention in the international climate governance processes. China's status as a developing country is being questioned by some developed and developing countries. Rapid increase of China's foreign investment and aid attracts worldwide attention, which stimulates the voices and expectations for China to shift its role as a developing country to shoulder more international obligations. However, China should be clearly aware of the fact that China's power of discourse is still very limited and far from being a leader in the world in various fields, including the international climate governance processes. China's participation in global climate governance, no matter its role being passively changed by others or a voluntary shift, still needs to keep a low profile, strengthen its economy, balance rights and obligations, and commit according to capabilities.

International Governance on Carbon Tariff and Its Vacuum in International Regime

2013 ◽  
Vol 01 (01) ◽  
pp. 1350008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mou WANG
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Developing Countries ◽  
International Trade ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
International Governance ◽  
International Consensus ◽  
Climate Governance ◽  
Emission Quota ◽  
Carbon Tariff

Drawing on the idea that countries are eligible to implement differentiated emission reduction policies based on their respective capabilities, some parties of UNFCCC attempt to weaken the principle of “Common but differentiated responsibilities(CBDR)” and impose carbon tariff on international trade. This initiative is in fact another camouflage to burden developing countries with emission cut obligation, which has no doubt undermined the development rights of developing countries. This paper defines Carbon Tariff as border measures that target import goods with embodied carbon emission. It can be import tariffs or other domestic tax measures that adjust border tax, which includes plain import tariffs and export rebates, border tax adjustment, emission quota and permit etc. For some developed countries, carbon tariffs mean to sever trade protectionism and to build trade barriers. Its theoretical arguments like “loss of comparative advantage”, “carbon leakage decreases environmental effectiveness” and “theoretical model bases” are pseudo-propositions without international consensus. Carbon tariff has become an intensively debated issue due to its duality of climate change and trade, but neither UNFCCC nor WTO has clarified this issue or has indicated a clear statement in this regard. As a result, it allows some parties to take advantage of this loophole and escape its international climate change obligation. Carbon tariff is an issue arising from global climate governance. To promote the cooperation of global climate governance and safeguard the social and economic development of developing countries, a fair and justified climate change regime and international trade institution should be established, and the settlement of the carbon tariff issue should be addressed within these frameworks. This paper argues that the international governance of carbon tariff should in cooperation with other international agreements; however, principles and guidelines regarding this issue should be developed under the UNFCCC. Based on these principles and guidelines, WTO can develop related technical operation provisions.

Environmental Ministries as Climate Policy Drivers: Comparing Brazil and India

2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 355-381 ◽  
Author(s):  
Solveig Aamodt
Keyword(s):  
Developing Countries ◽  
Environmental Policy ◽  
Climate Policy ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Subsequent Development ◽  
Institutional Climate ◽  
Climate Negotiations ◽  
Historical View ◽  
International Climate ◽  
International Climate Negotiations

With the 2015 Paris Agreement, global climate governance increasingly depends on domestic climate policy ambitions, also in large developing countries such as Brazil and India, which are prominent representatives for developing countries in the international climate negotiations. Although the environmental policy literature expects ministries of environment to be important drivers of domestic climate policy, studies find that the climate policy ambitions of the Brazilian and Indian environmental ministries differ considerably. With a long-term analytical approach building on historical institutionalism, this article analyses and compares the climate policy roles of the Brazilian and Indian ministries of environment. The comparative analysis finds that three factors in particular influence the environmental ministries' climate policy ambitions: first, the historical view of environmental policy as a domestic or an international issue; second, the ministry's formal role in international climate negotiations; and third, the subsequent development of institutional climate logics.

A Granger Causality Analysis between the GDP and CO2 Emissions of Major Emitters and Implications for International Climate Governance

2018 ◽  
Vol 06 (01) ◽  
pp. 1850004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mou WANG
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
Developing Countries ◽  
Granger Causality ◽  
Carbon Emissions ◽  
Granger Causality Test ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
Causality Test ◽  
Climate Governance ◽  
International Climate ◽  
Integration Analysis

This paper empirically examines the relationship between carbon emissions and economic growth by applying the co-integration analysis and Granger causality test to the time series data of carbon emissions and gross domestic product (GDP) of the world’s top 20 emitters from 1990 to 2015. Co-integration analysis shows that there is a long-term equilibrium relationship between carbon emissions and economic growth in most countries; Granger causality test verifies a one-way causal link between carbon emissions and economic growth in most major emitters. In developed countries, economic growth is the Granger cause of carbon emissions, while the opposite is true in developing countries. The results reflect different characteristics regarding carbon emission reduction in developed and developing countries as they are at different developing stages. Carbon emission reduction exerts much greater adverse effects on the economic growth of developing countries than it does on that of developed countries. Based on the results of the Granger causal analysis, it is found that the requirements for developing countries to substantially reduce emissions are not in line with the characteristics in their current developing stage and therefore may pose obstructions. Developed countries should take the lead in carrying out emission reductions due to their accountability for historical emissions as well as their development stages and capabilities. In addition, they should aid developing countries in their efforts for transforming and upgrading development and reducing dependence of economic growth on carbon emissions. International climate governance should take into account the needs and characteristics of different countries for future development, and build a mechanism for international cooperation to achieve synergy between social economic development and global climate governance.

scholarly journals Market responses to global governance: International climate cooperation and Europe's carbon trading

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-33
Author(s):  
Federica Genovese
Keyword(s):  
Global Climate ◽  
Emission Trading ◽  
Policy Instruments ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Environmental Cooperation ◽  
Climate Agreements ◽  
Climate Negotiations ◽  
International Climate Agreements ◽  
International Climate ◽  
International Climate Negotiations

Abstract International environmental cooperation can impose significant costs on private firms. Yet, in recent years some companies have been supportive of international climate agreements. This suggests that under certain conditions environmental accords can be profitable. In this paper, I seek to explain this puzzle by focusing on the interaction between domestic regulation and decisions at international climate negotiations. I argue that global climate cooperation hurts the profits of polluting firms if domestic governments do not shield them from international compliance costs. Vice versa, if firms are subject to protective (i.e., insufficiently severe) policy instruments at home, firms can materially gain from international climate agreements that sustain expectations about their profitability. I test the argument with an event study of the effect of decisions at the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) on major European firms that received free carbon permits in the early stages of the European Union Emission Trading Scheme (EU ETS). The analysis suggests that financial markets carefully follow the international climate negotiations, and reward the regulated firms based on the outcome of UNFCCC decisions. The evidence also indicates the advantageous interplay between certain types of domestic regulations and international regimes for business. More generally, the results show the perils of privately supported policy for the effectiveness of international public good provision.

China’s Evolving Development Dilemma in the Context of the North-South Climate Governance Debate

2014 ◽  
Vol 13 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 699-727 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joyeeta Gupta ◽  
King Yip Wong
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Developing Countries ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Political Process ◽  
Green Economy ◽  
Industrialized Countries ◽  
Climate Governance ◽  
Climate Change Negotiations ◽  
The North ◽  
Zero Sum

This paper examines China’s policy and position in relation to the evolving climate change negotiations in order to explain how China is dealing with the dilemma of meeting its growing development needs while reducing ghg emissions. It argues that global climate governance requires steering and leadership to deal with the interlocked political process; that the developing countries (dcs) right to develop is challenged by the need for ecosystemic standards especially as climate change is seen as a zero-sum game as the more one country emits the less another one can. This is especially problematic as Industrialized countries (ics) appear to be both unwilling and unable to increase growth without increasing emissions. This explains China’s policy of insisting on its right to develop, of demanding that ics reduce their emissions and that they fulfil their obligations under the fccc, while expressing its willingness to take on a voluntary target. The paper argues that China’s state-led transition has eight unique characteristics that may allow it to lead as it moves beyond a no-regrets policy to a circular and green economy, cooperating with other dcs and mobilizing conscious green values in citizens. The question remains—will the initial success and scale of state-led transition lead the global green transition to a sustainable world?

The Paris Climate Agreement and China’s Role in Global Climate Governance

2016 ◽  
Vol 02 (02) ◽  
pp. 185-200
Author(s):  
Hongyuan Yu
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Developing Countries ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
International Community ◽  
Climate Governance ◽  
Nationally Determined Contributions ◽  
Paris Climate Agreement ◽  
Combat Climate Change ◽  
Growth Approach

Since the first global summit on climate change was held in 1992, the international community has managed to adopt a series of agreements and action plans to coordinate efforts of all countries to tackle the existing and potential challenges caused by climate change. Yet due to a lack of legally binding mechanisms and the huge discrepancy between developed and developing countries in their respective responsibilities, little progress has been made in international climate negotiation over the past decade. With the joint endeavor of major greenhouse gas emitters, especially emerging economies like China, the first-ever universal, legally binding global climate deal, the Paris Climate Agreement, was adopted in December 2015, setting up the legal framework of Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) and relevant international institutions to combat climate change on a reinterpreted principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR).” Conducive as it is to the institutions and working model of global climate governance, the agreement will attach more responsibilities to developing countries including China. Having developed a strong resolution and given many open international commitments to assume more responsibilities in combating climate change, China should develop a green-growth approach while providing more public goods for the international community, so as to make its best contributions to future global climate governance.

Integration through Intermediate Goods: A Comparison of G-7 Openness to Developing Country Exports

2010 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 113-134
Author(s):  
John Berdell ◽  
Animesh Ghoshal
Keyword(s):  
Developing Countries ◽  
North America ◽  
Developing Country ◽  
Regional Integration ◽  
Developing Economies ◽  
Intermediate Goods ◽  
Production Networks ◽  
Diffusion Of Technology ◽  
Intermediate Goods Trade ◽  
Expenditure Elasticity

The fragmentation of manufacturing in G7 economies has substantially altered the way in which developing countries participate in world trade and production. Commodity chains and intertwined production networks have become increasingly important as vectors for the diffusion of technology and integration of developing countries into the world economy. We establish a set of simple and transparent benchmarks to compare and contrast the speed and extent to which production networks have integrated each of the G7 with developing economies through the importation of intermediate goods and examine these comparative indicators of G7 integration at both regional and global levels. We examine both total and intermediate goods trade flows and calculate the income-expenditure elasticity of developing-country sourced imports with respect to G7 incomes and also the elasticity of imported intermediate goods with respect to manufactured output. Within the G7, we find three tiers of openness to intermediate goods produced by developing countries, led by Germany and the US. Regional integration exhibits a clear pattern in which Central Europe appears to be integrating with developed Europe, Mexico with North America, and only East Asia is simultaneously integrating with North America, Europe and Japan.

Globalization Backlash in Developing Countries: Broadening the Research Agenda

2021 ◽  
pp. 001041402110375
Author(s):  
Nita Rudra ◽  
Irfan Nooruddin ◽  
Niccolò W. Bonifai
Keyword(s):  
Developing Countries ◽  
Developing Country ◽  
Research Agenda ◽  
Developing Economies ◽  
Industrialized Countries ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
Skilled Workers ◽  
Rich Countries ◽  
Early Phases ◽  
Over Time

This special issue explores why the globalization backlash is roiling rich industrialized countries. But why is the backlash less salient in developing ones? In this piece, we challenge scholars to consider why the backlash has not diffused widely to the developing world. We argue support for globalization depends on citizens’ expectations of future economic mobility. This is high in the early phases of globalization which encapsulates many developing economies. Since information about globalization’s effects is limited, observed mobility of some sustains optimism that the new economic order will allow everyone to prosper. Over time, unrealized expectations of mobility for less-skilled workers puncture this optimism. Such workers in rich countries are long past the honeymoon phase of globalization and confronting realities of stagnant incomes and job precarity. Barring visionary policies unlikely to emerge from today’s polarized politics, their discontent will soon be shared by their developing country counterparts, dooming future globalization.

Circular Economy Measurement and a Case of the Developing Country Context

2020 ◽  
pp. 241-257
Author(s):  
Kerem Toker ◽  
Fadime Çinar ◽  
Ali Görener
Keyword(s):  
Developing Countries ◽  
Social Change ◽  
Economic System ◽  
Developing Country ◽  
Circular Economy ◽  
Development Process ◽  
Developing Economies ◽  
Social Indicators ◽  
General View ◽  
Circular Economics

Circular economics (CE) is increasingly discussed among researchers, practitioners, and politicians. The discussions between the parties and the confusion about the concept cause the issue to remain on the agenda. According to the general view, CE is the slowing, shrinking, and closing of the welding flow to increase the welding efficiency. However, little attention has been devoted to measuring the CE level of a given economic system. The aim of this chapter is to demonstrate the emergence and development process of CE, and also to show how the CE level of any economic system can be measured. In this context, it is important for developing countries to interest with the issue but not in practice. To put this into perspective, the study examined Turkey's economic system. Turkey's economic, environmental, and social indicators examined were found to have a remote structure of the CE principle. It is expected that the results of the study will lead to a positive social change and become a framework for increasing the contribution of developing economies to the sustainable world.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document