渐行渐远:中国和印度在《蒙特利尔议定书》基加利修正案上

IF 3.9 2区 社会学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Global Environmental Politics Pub Date : 2022-11-30 DOI:10.1162/glep_a_00698
Shiming Yang
{"title":"渐行渐远:中国和印度在《蒙特利尔议定书》基加利修正案上","authors":"Shiming Yang","doi":"10.1162/glep_a_00698","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Developing countries are growing apart on environmental issues. International environmental negotiations are no longer characterized merely by the North–South conflict. Rising powers have come to divide the Global South and redefine the Common-But-Differentiated Responsibilities principle. This article explains the divergence of China and India at the Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol, one of the first global environmental agreements to differentiate obligations between developing countries. China and India, the world’s two largest hydrofluorocarbon producers, ended decades of collaboration and split the rest of the developing world behind them. I argue that developmental strategy and political institutions shape the preferences and influences of industrial, governmental, and social stakeholders, thereby explaining their negotiation behavior and outcome. This article explains why China moved faster and further than India on negotiations for hydrofluorocarbon regulation. It has important implications for the two rising powers’ implementation of the Kigali Amendment and for their position formulations on other environmental issues.","PeriodicalId":47774,"journal":{"name":"Global Environmental Politics","volume":"23 1","pages":"74-101"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Growing Apart: China and India at the Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol\",\"authors\":\"Shiming Yang\",\"doi\":\"10.1162/glep_a_00698\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Developing countries are growing apart on environmental issues. International environmental negotiations are no longer characterized merely by the North–South conflict. Rising powers have come to divide the Global South and redefine the Common-But-Differentiated Responsibilities principle. This article explains the divergence of China and India at the Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol, one of the first global environmental agreements to differentiate obligations between developing countries. China and India, the world’s two largest hydrofluorocarbon producers, ended decades of collaboration and split the rest of the developing world behind them. I argue that developmental strategy and political institutions shape the preferences and influences of industrial, governmental, and social stakeholders, thereby explaining their negotiation behavior and outcome. This article explains why China moved faster and further than India on negotiations for hydrofluorocarbon regulation. It has important implications for the two rising powers’ implementation of the Kigali Amendment and for their position formulations on other environmental issues.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47774,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Environmental Politics\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"74-101\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Environmental Politics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1162/glep_a_00698\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Environmental Politics","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1162/glep_a_00698","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

发展中国家在环境问题上的分歧越来越大。国际环境谈判不再仅仅以南北冲突为特征。新兴大国已经开始分化全球南方,重新定义“共同但有区别的责任”原则。本文解释了中国和印度在《蒙特利尔议定书》基加利修正案上的分歧。《蒙特利尔议定书》是第一批区分发展中国家义务的全球环境协定之一。中国和印度是世界上最大的两个氢氟碳化合物生产国,两国结束了数十年的合作,将其他发展中国家甩在身后。我认为,发展战略和政治制度塑造了产业、政府和社会利益相关者的偏好和影响,从而解释了他们的谈判行为和结果。这篇文章解释了为什么中国在氢氟碳化物监管谈判上比印度走得更快更远。这对两个新兴大国实施基加利修正案以及在其他环境问题上的立场制定具有重要意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Growing Apart: China and India at the Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol
Abstract Developing countries are growing apart on environmental issues. International environmental negotiations are no longer characterized merely by the North–South conflict. Rising powers have come to divide the Global South and redefine the Common-But-Differentiated Responsibilities principle. This article explains the divergence of China and India at the Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol, one of the first global environmental agreements to differentiate obligations between developing countries. China and India, the world’s two largest hydrofluorocarbon producers, ended decades of collaboration and split the rest of the developing world behind them. I argue that developmental strategy and political institutions shape the preferences and influences of industrial, governmental, and social stakeholders, thereby explaining their negotiation behavior and outcome. This article explains why China moved faster and further than India on negotiations for hydrofluorocarbon regulation. It has important implications for the two rising powers’ implementation of the Kigali Amendment and for their position formulations on other environmental issues.
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
7.40
自引率
8.30%
发文量
43
期刊介绍: Global Environmental Politics examines the relationship between global political forces and environmental change, with particular attention given to the implications of local-global interactions for environmental management as well as the implications of environmental change for world politics. Each issue is divided into research articles and a shorter forum articles focusing on issues such as the role of states, multilateral institutions and agreements, trade, international finance, corporations, science and technology, and grassroots movements.
期刊最新文献
The Ecocentrists: A History of Radical Environmentalism by Keith Makoto Woodhouse The Role of Translation in Enacting Multiscalar Climate Action: Insights from European Christian Faith-Based Actors All Hands on Deck: Solutions-Based Pedagogies for Global Environmental Politics African Ecomedia: Network Forms, Planetary Politics by Cajetan Iheka Realpolitik in the Anthropocene: Resilience, Neoclassical Realism, and the Paris Agreement
×
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