困境中的桥梁:气候俱乐部、联盟和伙伴关系是有效国际合作的保障?

Heiner von Luepke, Karsten Neuhoff, Catherine Marchewitz
{"title":"困境中的桥梁:气候俱乐部、联盟和伙伴关系是有效国际合作的保障?","authors":"Heiner von Luepke, Karsten Neuhoff, Catherine Marchewitz","doi":"10.1007/s10784-024-09639-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Driven by the motivation to raise the ambition level of climate action and to foster the transformation of economies, current climate policy discourse revolves around ways to improve cooperation between industrialized countries and emerging economies. We identify three broad types of initiatives—multilateral-cross sectoral, multilateral, sector specific, and climate and development partnerships—and assess them for potentials to deliver on such objectives with a specific focus on industry transformation. This paper provides new reflections on the institutionalization of international climate cooperation. Specifically, we demonstrate the urgent need to understand what values, norms, and underlying principles drive a cooperation in order to draw conclusions on how to best institutionalize climate cooperation rules.in-use. We conclude that an overemphasis on a CO<sub>2</sub> price and on carbon border adjustment mechanisms, such as in the context of the initial proposals for a cross-sectoral climate club envisaged by G7 countries, would have contributed to a further polarization of the international landscape. We find, however, that multilateral, sectoral alliances play an important role for international goal setting and the convergence on standards, metrics, and benchmarks. Based on our analysis, we recommend strengthening multilateral, sector-specific partnerships. These can be focused on sectoral topics as a connector between countries, allowing for a strategically-aligned, increasingly deep collaboration. However, for any initiative to succeed, processes of international institutionalization will be needed in order to agree on rules for implementation based on aligned interests and equity. Building such institutions may well serve as a steppingstone toward more durable cooperation structures between developed economies and emerging economies. In sum, no existing cooperation approach is perfect, but three actions may be taken to move the agenda forward: First, reform of the carbon border adjustment mechanism and removing it from the center of climate club discussions, second, coupling sectoral alliances with climate and development partnerships, and three, designing them in a way to address fears of political influence seeking and superimposition of global north agendas on the global south.</p>","PeriodicalId":47272,"journal":{"name":"International Environmental Agreements-Politics Law and Economics","volume":"22 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bridges over troubled waters: Climate clubs, alliances, and partnerships as safeguards for effective international cooperation?\",\"authors\":\"Heiner von Luepke, Karsten Neuhoff, Catherine Marchewitz\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10784-024-09639-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Driven by the motivation to raise the ambition level of climate action and to foster the transformation of economies, current climate policy discourse revolves around ways to improve cooperation between industrialized countries and emerging economies. We identify three broad types of initiatives—multilateral-cross sectoral, multilateral, sector specific, and climate and development partnerships—and assess them for potentials to deliver on such objectives with a specific focus on industry transformation. This paper provides new reflections on the institutionalization of international climate cooperation. Specifically, we demonstrate the urgent need to understand what values, norms, and underlying principles drive a cooperation in order to draw conclusions on how to best institutionalize climate cooperation rules.in-use. We conclude that an overemphasis on a CO<sub>2</sub> price and on carbon border adjustment mechanisms, such as in the context of the initial proposals for a cross-sectoral climate club envisaged by G7 countries, would have contributed to a further polarization of the international landscape. We find, however, that multilateral, sectoral alliances play an important role for international goal setting and the convergence on standards, metrics, and benchmarks. Based on our analysis, we recommend strengthening multilateral, sector-specific partnerships. These can be focused on sectoral topics as a connector between countries, allowing for a strategically-aligned, increasingly deep collaboration. However, for any initiative to succeed, processes of international institutionalization will be needed in order to agree on rules for implementation based on aligned interests and equity. Building such institutions may well serve as a steppingstone toward more durable cooperation structures between developed economies and emerging economies. In sum, no existing cooperation approach is perfect, but three actions may be taken to move the agenda forward: First, reform of the carbon border adjustment mechanism and removing it from the center of climate club discussions, second, coupling sectoral alliances with climate and development partnerships, and three, designing them in a way to address fears of political influence seeking and superimposition of global north agendas on the global south.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47272,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Environmental Agreements-Politics Law and Economics\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Environmental Agreements-Politics Law and Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-024-09639-9\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Environmental Agreements-Politics Law and Economics","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-024-09639-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在提高气候行动目标水平和促进经济转型的推动下,当前的气候政策讨论围绕着如何改善工业化国家与新兴经济体之间的合作展开。我们确定了三大类倡议--多边-跨部门倡议、多边-特定部门倡议以及气候与发展伙伴关系--并评估了它们实现这些目标的潜力,特别关注产业转型。本文对国际气候合作的制度化进行了新的思考。具体而言,我们表明迫切需要了解是哪些价值观、规范和基本原则推动了合作,从而就如何最好地将气候合作规则制度化得出结论。我们的结论是,过分强调二氧化碳价格和碳边界调整机制,如七国集团(G7)国家设想的跨部门气候俱乐部的最初提案,将导致国际格局的进一步两极分化。然而,我们发现,多边部门联盟在国际目标设定以及标准、衡量标准和基准趋同方面发挥着重要作用。根据我们的分析,我们建议加强多边的、针对具体部门的伙伴关系。这些伙伴关系可以集中在部门主题上,作为国家间的连接纽带,实现战略上的一致和日益深入的合作。然而,任何倡议要取得成功,都需要国际制度化进程,以便在利益一致和公平的基础上商定实施规则。建立这样的机构很可能成为发达经济体与新兴经济体之间建立更持久合作结构的垫脚石。总之,现有的合作方式都不完美,但可以采取三项行动来推进议程:首先,改革碳边界调整机制,将其从气候俱乐部讨论的中心移除;其次,将部门联盟与气候和发展伙伴关系结合起来;第三,在设计这些联盟时,要消除人们对寻求政治影响和将全球北方议程强加于全球南方的担忧。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Bridges over troubled waters: Climate clubs, alliances, and partnerships as safeguards for effective international cooperation?

Driven by the motivation to raise the ambition level of climate action and to foster the transformation of economies, current climate policy discourse revolves around ways to improve cooperation between industrialized countries and emerging economies. We identify three broad types of initiatives—multilateral-cross sectoral, multilateral, sector specific, and climate and development partnerships—and assess them for potentials to deliver on such objectives with a specific focus on industry transformation. This paper provides new reflections on the institutionalization of international climate cooperation. Specifically, we demonstrate the urgent need to understand what values, norms, and underlying principles drive a cooperation in order to draw conclusions on how to best institutionalize climate cooperation rules.in-use. We conclude that an overemphasis on a CO2 price and on carbon border adjustment mechanisms, such as in the context of the initial proposals for a cross-sectoral climate club envisaged by G7 countries, would have contributed to a further polarization of the international landscape. We find, however, that multilateral, sectoral alliances play an important role for international goal setting and the convergence on standards, metrics, and benchmarks. Based on our analysis, we recommend strengthening multilateral, sector-specific partnerships. These can be focused on sectoral topics as a connector between countries, allowing for a strategically-aligned, increasingly deep collaboration. However, for any initiative to succeed, processes of international institutionalization will be needed in order to agree on rules for implementation based on aligned interests and equity. Building such institutions may well serve as a steppingstone toward more durable cooperation structures between developed economies and emerging economies. In sum, no existing cooperation approach is perfect, but three actions may be taken to move the agenda forward: First, reform of the carbon border adjustment mechanism and removing it from the center of climate club discussions, second, coupling sectoral alliances with climate and development partnerships, and three, designing them in a way to address fears of political influence seeking and superimposition of global north agendas on the global south.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
26.50%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics is a peer-reviewed, multi-disciplinary journal that focuses on the theoretical, methodological and practical dimensions of achieving cooperative solutions to international environmental problems. The journal, which is published four times each year, emphasizes both formal legal agreements (such as multilateral treaties) and less formal cooperative mechanisms (such as ministerial declarations and producer-consumer agreements). The journal''s scope encompasses the full range of environmental and natural resource issues, including (but not limited to) biosafety, biodiversity loss, climate change, desertification, forest conservation, ozone depletion, transboundary pollutant flows, and the management of marine and fresh-water resources. The editors welcome contributions that consider stakeholder initiatives and the role of civil society in the definition and resolution of environmental conflicts. The journal provides a forum on the role of political, economic, and legal considerations in the negotiation and implementation of effective governance strategies. Special emphasis is attached to the following substantive domains: The normative aspects and political economy of treaty negotiations and multilateral agreements, including equity considerations; Methodologies for evaluating the effectiveness of alternative governance mechanisms; The role of stakeholder initiatives and civil society in the definition and resolution of environmental conflicts; The harmonization of environmental strategies with prevailing social, political, and economic institutions.
期刊最新文献
The environmental rule of law and the protection of human rights defenders: law, society, technology, and markets Should we regulate forests through free trade agreements? Arctic wetlands, an evaluation of progress towards implementation of the Ramsar convention on wetlands: 1978–2022 The split ladder of policy problems, participation, and politicization: constitutional water change in Ecuador and Chile Pathways of scientific input into intergovernmental negotiations: a new agreement on marine biodiversity
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1