{"title":"Global justice and EU climate policy in a contested liberal international order","authors":"Thomas Diez, Franziskus von Lucke","doi":"10.1093/ia/iiad231","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Following the failure of the Conference of the Parties (COP15) in 2009 in Copenhagen, the European Union has significantly altered its negotiation strategy in the global climate regime. It moved from an emphasis on ‘leadership by example’ and an insistence on top-down, binding targets within a framework of strong global governance institutions (impartiality in global justice terms) towards a strategy of shared leadership, increased dialogue (mutual recognition) and acceptance of more voluntary instruments (non-domination). This article traces this shift through an examination of EU policy documents and makes sense of it by reference to learning effects of an EU with solidarist ambitions in a pluralist international society, and the changing power distribution and contestations of the post-Cold War liberal order on the global level. Furthermore, it assesses the consequences of the shift for international society (especially concerning different ‘solidarisms’) and global climate justice. We argue that while a changed EU approach has been vital to maintaining the EU's status as a relevant actor and to secure the Paris Agreement, too much emphasis on the pluralist dimension and non-domination may also hinder effective global solutions to climate change. It is therefore vital that the EU continues its solidarist ambitions by pushing for rigorous measures of accountability, but also by alleviating structural domination in the climate regime and particularly by better recognizing and including civil society actors from the global South.","PeriodicalId":48162,"journal":{"name":"International Affairs","volume":"188 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Affairs","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iiad231","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Abstract Following the failure of the Conference of the Parties (COP15) in 2009 in Copenhagen, the European Union has significantly altered its negotiation strategy in the global climate regime. It moved from an emphasis on ‘leadership by example’ and an insistence on top-down, binding targets within a framework of strong global governance institutions (impartiality in global justice terms) towards a strategy of shared leadership, increased dialogue (mutual recognition) and acceptance of more voluntary instruments (non-domination). This article traces this shift through an examination of EU policy documents and makes sense of it by reference to learning effects of an EU with solidarist ambitions in a pluralist international society, and the changing power distribution and contestations of the post-Cold War liberal order on the global level. Furthermore, it assesses the consequences of the shift for international society (especially concerning different ‘solidarisms’) and global climate justice. We argue that while a changed EU approach has been vital to maintaining the EU's status as a relevant actor and to secure the Paris Agreement, too much emphasis on the pluralist dimension and non-domination may also hinder effective global solutions to climate change. It is therefore vital that the EU continues its solidarist ambitions by pushing for rigorous measures of accountability, but also by alleviating structural domination in the climate regime and particularly by better recognizing and including civil society actors from the global South.
期刊介绍:
International Affairs is Britain"s leading journal of international relations. Founded by and edited at Chatham House, the Royal Institute of International Affairs in London, it has not only developed a much valued insight into European policy debates but has also become renowned for its coverage of global policy issues. Mixing commissioned and unsolicited articles from the biggest names in international relations this lively, provocative journal will keep you up-to-date with critical thinking on the key issues shaping world economic and political change.