 Climate Regime Building in a Changing World and China's Role in Global Climate GovernanceJiahua Pan () and
Mou Wang ()
Chinese Journal of Urban and Environmental Studies (CJUES), 2014, vol. 02, issue 01, 1-9 Abstract: 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. Keywords: Climate change; global governance; divergence on position; new circumstances; self-identity (search for similar items in EconPapers) Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:wsi:cjuesx:v:02:y:2014:i:01:n:s234574811450002x Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from DOI: 10.1142/S234574811450002X Access Statistics for this article Chinese Journal of Urban and Environmental Studies (CJUES) is currently edited by PAN Jiahua More articles in Chinese Journal of Urban and Environmental Studies (CJUES) from World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd. |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.