共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 31 毫秒
1.
The 26th Conference of the Parties (COP26) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was held in Glasgow a year later than scheduled, with expected outcomes achieved under a post-pandemic background. Based on the Issue-Actor-Mechanism Framework, this paper systematically evaluates the outcomes achieved at COP26 and analyzes the tendency of post-COP26 climate negotiations. Overall, with the concerted efforts of all parties, COP26 has achieved a balanced and inclusive package of outcomes and concluded six years of negotiations on the Paris Rulebook. It is fair to say that COP26 is another milestone in climate governance following the implementation of the Paris Agreement. Meanwhile, the Glasgow Climate Pact has cemented the consensus on a global commitment to accelerating climate action over the next decade and reached a breakthrough consensus on reducing coal, controlling methane, and halting deforestation. In the post-COP26 era, we still need to take concrete actions to implement the outcomes of the Paris Agreement and the Glasgow Climate Pact, innovate ways to speed up CO2 emissions reduction, and continue to strive for breakthroughs in important issues such as finance, technology, adaptation, and collaboration. In addition to avoiding the escalation of international conflicts, we need to collectively and properly handle the relationship between energy security, carbon reduction, and development and facilitate the efforts of countries to achieve their Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), including climate-related goals. China will continue to maintain the existing multilateral mechanisms and processes for climate governance, unremittingly take concrete actions to address climate change, promote a domestic comprehensive green transition and global cooperation on carbon neutrality, and contribute constructively to global climate governance. 相似文献
2.
United Nations climate change conferences have attracted an increasing number and range of observer participants, often outnumbering national delegates. The interactions between the formal and informal spaces of climate governance at the Conference of the Parties (COP) are explored by investigating why non-nation state actors (NNSAs) attend them and by measuring to what extent official UN Side Events provide relevant information for the formal negotiations. Based on primary empirical research at recent COPs, it is found that 60–75% of Side Events have related directly to items under negotiation in the post-2012 climate negotiations. In this regard, Side Events that facilitate informal exchange between stakeholders not only provide input into the negotiations but also allow issues beyond the realm of the negotiations to be discussed, reflecting the scope of climate change. Although Side Events are an effective forum to exchange ideas and network, their current format and purpose as being events ‘on the side’ does not offer a sufficient framework for coordination between the work of NNSAs and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) process. 相似文献
3.
With market-mechanisms likely to achieve emission reductions at lower cost than alternative approaches, there is a presumption that they will be embraced by those who are serious about achieving ambitious reductions. Two broad messages exist; there is already considerable activity and some ambition in many parts of the world – a fragmented but embryonic ‘global’ trading landscape is emerging – and there are efforts at UN level to provide a unifying framework for these bottom-up developments. The topography of interest and response varies considerably across groups of countries, and there have been delays in making progress on a unifying framework. This article analyses the current carbon market landscape in terms of market dynamics and market-mechanism developments whilst undertaking an examination of how climate change negotiations under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is shaping the future carbon market landscape. This work shows that the combination of existing, emerging, and potential carbon market-mechanisms can be regarded as an emerging pre-2020 fragmented ‘global’ carbon market landscape based on differing bottom-up market based approaches. One outcome of a 2015 Climate Agreement could be a post-2020 global carbon market which would include new domestic and international market initiatives such as the Framework for Various Approaches and New Market Mechanism, together with reformed Kyoto mechanisms.Policy relevanceWith the 2015 Agreement under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) expected to see Parties commit to ambitious mitigation commitments, post-2020 could see significant Party (& industry) investment in market-mechanisms and associated emissions units in an effort to achieve some of the abatement cost minimization offered by market approaches. This article is written for those who have an interest in understanding what is happening – and what is not happening – as regards the emergence of market-related approaches to GHG mitigation globally in the run up to the 21st Conference of the Parties (COP) of the UNFCCC which meets in Paris in December 2015, and what could be the shape of things to come post-2020. 相似文献
4.
Tom Jacob 《Climate Policy》2013,13(1):91-97
What is the significance of the 2007 United Nations Climate Change Conference in Bali? The formal outcomes, especially the ‘Bali Action Plan’, are described and commented on, along with the challenges for negotiating a post-2012 agreement in Copenhagen during 2008 and 2009. The article concludes that the outcome of the Bali meeting is insufficient when compared to the nature of the challenge posed by climate change. However, it can nevertheless be considered a success in terms of ‘Realpolitik’ in paving the way for the negotiations ahead, because some real changes have been discerned in the political landscape. The challenges for the road towards Copenhagen are manifold: the sheer volume and complexity of the issues and the far-reaching nature of decisions such as differentiation between non- Annex I countries pose significant challenges in themselves, while the dependency on the electoral process in the USA introduces a high element of risk into the whole process. The emergence of social justice as an issue turns climate policy into an endeavour to improve the world at large—thereby adding to the complexity. And, finally, the biggest challenge is the recognition that the climate problem requires a global solution, that Annex I and non-Annex I countries are mutually dependent on each other and that only cooperation regarding technology in combination with significant financial support will provide the chance to successfully tackle climate change. 相似文献
5.
自特朗普就任美国总统,美国退出《巴黎协定》已在意料中,但当特朗普正式宣布退出仍引发了国际社会的广泛关注。究其宣布退出的考虑不难看出,尽管美国政治信誉、国际合作和长远经济均受影响,但借此特朗普既可以提高其政治影响力、同时又可向国际社会重新要价。从国际应对气候变化的大形势看,美国的退出不会根本逆转全球气候治理的大方向。但美国削减国内气候变化研究、多边环境基金的资金支持和援助等政策将影响气候变化的基础研究和国际应对气候变化多边机制,以及未来应对气候变化的国际合作和长期目标的实现。《联合国气候变化框架公约》的"共同但有区别"的责任原则将受到冲击。就未来而言,全球应对气候变化的正向发展仍旧是主旋律,气候治理正进入多元主体发挥作用的时代,地方和民间组织层面将开展更多的技术创新务实合作,提高气候变化科学及认知的能力建设仍将是长期的任务。 相似文献
6.
Brandon B. Derman 《Climate Policy》2014,14(1):23-41
Justice dilemmas associated with climate change and the regulatory responses to it pose challenges for global governance, arguably hampering progress and raising concerns over efficacy and relevance. Scholarly literature suggests that transnational civil society groups can help address problems of governance and injustice that cross borders and pit states against each other. Findings of a comparative, qualitative study of climate justice advocacy suggest, however, that civil society groups' work in the US and EU is significantly shaped by institutional factors specific to those regimes, limiting advocates' broader impact. Moreover, political opportunities for the pursuit of climate action, and justice particularly, have diminished in those settings. By contrast, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) provides greater opportunities for discussions of justice, although civil society actors are significantly constrained within it. It is argued that greater roles for civil society in the UNFCCC could prove constructive in the face of current challenges connected with justice issues. Three themes in civil society advocacy linking principles of global justice with current climate policy debates are summarized. Finally, it is suggested that the first iteration of the UNFCCC Periodic Review provides timely opportunities to more fully draw upon civil society's potential contributions toward a fair and effective global climate regime.Policy relevanceThe roles of civil society organizations in climate governance were examined in three policy contexts: the UNFCCC, the US, and the EU, with special attention to advocacy addressing issues of equity and justice, identified as key challenges for a post-2012 global agreement. Findings suggest that (1) civil society roles are significantly constrained in each context, and (2) political opportunities for climate advocacy have diminished since 2009 in the US and EU, underlining (3) the continued salience of the UNFCCC as a forum for engagement and the construction of effective and equitable climate policy. Potential exists for increased civil society involvement at the UNFCCC to help resolve obstacles based in divergent national priorities. Three areas of justice-focused civil society activity are reviewed for current negotiation topics and the governance structure of the institution. The current UNFCCC Periodic Review is identified as an opportunity to increase civil society involvement. 相似文献
7.
The stakes for alleviating poverty and avoiding unbridled climate change are inextricably linked. Climate change impacts will slow down and may even reverse trends in poverty reduction. The pathways consistent with global warming of no more than 2?°C require strategies for poverty alleviation to make allowance for the constraint of low-carbon development. Existing climate funds have failed to target poverty alleviation as a high-priority strategy for adaptation or as a component of low-carbon development. This article proposes a funding window as part of the Green Climate Fund in order to foster synergies targeting greater satisfaction of basic needs, while making allowance for adaptation and mitigation. This financial mechanism is based on indicators of the satisfaction of basic needs and could respond to the claims of the developing countries, which see alleviating poverty as the first priority in climate negotiations. It defines a country continuum, given that there are poor people everywhere; all developing countries are therefore eligible with a mechanism of this sort.Policy relevanceThe Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) calls for substantial emissions reductions and adaptation strategies over the next decades to reduce the high risks of severe impacts of climate change over the 21st century. Industrialized countries and developing countries alike recognize the need to mitigate climate change and to adapt to it. But they face many challenges that lead to an ‘emissions gap’ between an emissions level consistent with the 2?°C increase limit and the voluntary pledges that they have made thus far in the climate negotiations (United Nations Environment Programme. (2014). The Emissions Gap Report 2014. A UNEP synthesis report). In this arena, many developing countries underline that their first domestic priority is the satisfaction of basic needs. In the run-up to the next climate negotiations at the 21st Conference of the Parties (COP 21) in Paris, the proposed poverty-adaptation-mitigation funding window could contribute to alleviate the conflict between development and climate goals in developing countries. In this sense, it could spur developing countries to integrate more ambitious emissions limitations pledges into their Intended Nationally Determined Contributions. This could in turn entice industrialized countries to act similarly. In the end, it could pave the way to an ambitious climate agreement in Paris at COP 21. 相似文献
8.
《Climate Policy》2013,13(3):221-231
Abstract Five years down the road from Kyoto, the Protocol that bears that city's name still awaits enough qualifying ratifications to come into force. While attention has been understandably focussed on the ratification process, it is time to begin thinking about the next steps for the global climate regime, particularly in terms of a deeper inclusion of developing countries' concerns and interests. This paper begins doing so from the perspective of the developing countries. The principal argument is that we need to return to the basic principles outlined in the Framework Convention on Climate Change in searching for a north—south bargain on climate change. Such a bargain may be achievable if we can realign the policy architecture of the climate regime to its original stated goals of sustainable development. 相似文献
9.
The key outcomes of the 2006 Nairobi Conference on Climate Change are described, with a particular emphasis on adaptation, the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and the future of the United Nations climate change regime beyond 2012. Based on an analysis of the key issues being negotiated, the Nairobi Conference can be understood as an important step in the larger process towards a future climate change regime. Its significance is in establishing the confidence and trust between the key players that will be necessary for the successful completion of the current phase of negotiations and agreement on the post-2012 climate change regime. 相似文献
10.
增强发展中国家能力建设是全球应对气候变化的重要前提条件,而在联合国气候变化框架公约(UNFCCC)的谈判进程中,能力建设部分一直进展缓慢。自缔约方第7次会(COP7)上确定了发展中国家能力建设框架后,能力建设的机制建设一直没有取得实质性进展。在巴黎气候变化大会(COP21)上,缔约方一致通过了《巴黎协定》。《巴黎协定》首次授权通过执行附属机构(SBI)建立巴黎能力建设委员会(PCCB)。该委员会将全面协调对发展中国家能力建设的支持,同时监管2016-2020年的能力建设工作计划,全面系统地促进和增强发展中国家应对气候变化的能力建设活动。另外,《巴黎协定》还同意建立透明度能力建设倡议(CBIT)用以增强2020年前后的机制和技术能力。随后,全球环境基金(GEF)为该倡议成立了CBIT信托基金。至此,公约下能力建设议题已经建立了相对完整的国际机制。未来议题的谈判将走向务实与细节。随着全球应对气候变化迈向一个新阶段,中国在能力建设议题的谈判上也应做相应的调整。 相似文献
11.
适应是《联合国气候变化框架公约》及其《巴黎协定》下的重要谈判内容。2018年12月举行的第24次缔约方大会（COP24）就适应议题后续实施方案达成了共识,为全球气候治理带来新的机遇和挑战。中国在未来全球气候治理中,如何借助新成果推动国内适应工作稳步发展,积极发挥中国作用,是新形势下亟需考虑的重要问题。基于此,本文梳理了适应议题的焦点问题、各集团和缔约方的立场观点,展望了2019—2025年适应相关议题主要工作安排,并对此提出了中国未来适应领域完成相关工作需要考虑的应对措施建议,包括：(1)深入分析国际信息报告体系与国内信息的联系,梳理国内适应工作亮点,为构建高质量报告奠定基础;(2)构建跨部门跨地区协作机制,加强信息搜集与完善,有效提高数据和信息统计功能;(3)强化气候变化适应技术、规范、标准等科学研究的作用,为制定政策规定时纳入相应技术要求、提高政策规定等需求提供科学性和可操作性的服务。 相似文献
12.
ABSTRACTThe continuous submission and scaling-up of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) constitutes a key feature of the Paris Agreement. In their NDCs, states propose governance mechanisms for implementation of climate action, in turn distinguishing appropriate roles for the state in climate governance. Clarity on Parties’ suggested roles for the state makes explicit assumptions on the premise of climate policy, in turn contributing to enhanced transparency in negotiations on the scaling-up of NDCs. This also speaks to ongoing debates on roles for the state in climate governance literature. This article identifies the governance mechanisms proposed by states in their NDCs and the roles for the state envisioned by those governance mechanisms, and also examines how cross-national patterns of roles for the state break or converge with conventional patterns of international politics. The analysis shows that states propose a plurality of roles, which to different extents may be complementary or conflictual. We conclude that income, region, and the Annexes under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) are important for understanding suggested roles for the state, but that there are nuances to be further explored. We argue that this paper has three key findings: i) a majority of states rely on market mechanisms to implement their NDCs while rules on implementation and assessment of market mechanisms are still an outstanding issue in the negotiations, meaning that resolving this issue will be essential; ii) the process for evaluating and assessing qualitative governance mechanisms needs to be specified; and iii) increased awareness of differing views on the state’s roles makes explicit different perspectives on what constitutes an ambitious and legitimate contribution to combating climate change.Key policy insights
A majority of states (> 75%) envision the state as regulator (creating and strengthening legislation), market facilitator (creating and maintaining market structures), or facilitator (creating more favourable material conditions for climate-friendly behaviour).
Greater awareness of differing views on roles for the state can increase understanding of different perspectives on ambition and legitimacy of contributions, in turn facilitating trust in negotiations.
A distinction between substantive and procedural qualitative governance mechanisms and their function and interaction would facilitate the stocktaking dialogues.
13.
Global climate negotiations have been characterized by a divide between developed and developing nations – a split which has served as a persistent barrier to international agreement within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change process. Notable progress in bridging this division was achieved at the 21st Conference of the Parties meeting in Paris through the introduction of Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs). However, the collective ambition of submitted INDCs falls short of a global 2°C target, requiring an effective ratchet mechanism to review and increase national commitments. Inequitable distribution of additional responsibilities risks re-opening historic divisions between parties. This article presents a flexible ratchet framework which shares mitigation commitments on the basis of per capita equity in line with emerging requirements for a 2°C target. The framework has been designed through convergence between developed and developing nations; developed nation targets are based on an agreed standardized percentage reduction wherever emissions are above per capita equity; developing nations are required to peak emissions at or below per capita equity levels by an agreed convergence date. The proposed framework has the flexibility to be integrated with current INDCs and to evolve in line with shifting estimates of climate sensitivity.Policy relevanceThe outcome of the 21st Conference of the Parties (COP21) negotiations in Paris offered mixed results in terms of level of ambition and submitted national commitments. A global agreement to keep average global temperature rise below two degrees was maintained; however, current pledged Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) are projected to result in an average warming of close to three degrees. The implementation of a global ratchet mechanism to scale-up national commitments will remain key to closing this ambition gap to reach this two degree target. How this upscaling of responsibility is shared between parties will be a defining discussion point within future negotiations. This study presents a standardized, equity-based framework for how this ratchet mechanism can be implemented – a framework designed to be flexible for evolution in line with better understanding of climate sensitivity, and adaptable for integrations with current INDC proposals. 相似文献
14.
For over 20 years, Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change have struggled with the normative significance of history for the differentiation of responsibilities. Negotiations on ‘historical responsibility’ have been marked by considerable conflict between developed and developing countries. However, in 2010, the Parties acknowledged the concept in a consensus decision. This article analyses UN Climate Change Conference delegates' agreement with the decision, whether it reconciled conflict between interpretations of historical responsibility, and the significance that delegates ascribe to the decision for future agreements. The decision has not eliminated conflict between different interpretations. Delegates who understand historical responsibility as linking countries' historical contributions to climate change to their responsibilities to act agree more with the decision and foresee it having a stronger influence on future agreements than do those viewing the concept in more conceptual terms. The decision marks the start of negotiations concerning how rather than whether historical responsibility should guide operative text. This article demonstrates that (1) the divergent interpretations pose clear challenges for a necessary but demanding agreement on operationalization, and (2) focusing on an ambiguous version of proportionality between contribution to change and responsibility can become a first step for convergence between divergent positions. 相似文献
15.
Equity has been at the core of the global climate debate since its inception over two decades ago, yet the current negotiations toward an international climate agreement in 2015 provide a new and critical opportunity to make forward progress on the difficult web of equity issues. These negotiations and the discussions about equity are taking place in a context that has shifted: all countries will be covered under a new agreement; growing climate impacts are being felt, especially by the most vulnerable; and there is an emergence of new institutions and increasing complexity in the international climate regime. Innovative thinking on equity, including which countries should take action and how, is therefore essential to finalizing an agreement by 2015. A broader, deeper, and more holistic view of equity is necessary, one that sees equity as a multi-dimensional challenge to be solved across all the facets of the international climate process.Policy relevanceThis article is relevant to policy makers following the development of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform as it prepares the way for a new agreement in 2015. The article focuses specifically on the issues most relevant to the debate around equity in the negotiations and how that debate is evolving with the expansion of the UNFCCC. It explains the current state of the negotiations and what issues are on the negotiating table, including the fact that negotiations on equity are now much broader than the mitigation commitments, to include the possible ‘equity reference framework’, concerns relating to adaptation and loss and damage, and the need for ambition in terms of mitigation and finance support. 相似文献
16.
This study focusing on the climate equity debate in the context of GHG mitigation explores design of a framework that is based on the ‘common but differentiated responsibilities’ principle of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Besides incorporating the widely recognized differences among countries such as current and historic GHG emissions and capabilities, the framework also accounts for their relative vulnerabilities to climate change. The study argues that since climate change impacts are akin to global public bad, compensation, especially for the poorer nations who are also the worst victims of the climate change impacts, could be conceived in the form of greater share in the GHG emission rights. This, it is argued, would provide the much needed space to grow for the poorer countries and facilitate enhancement of their adaptive capacity to face climate and other threats. It is also argued that the framework results accord with one of the welfare principles, the Weak Equity Axiom (WEA) (Sen, A. K. (1973). On economic inequality. Delhi: Oxford University Press), and yield an equitable distribution of burden.Policy relevanceThe present study attempts to inform the equity debate in the international climate negotiations. The multi-criteria framework of the study suggests a means to incorporate various national attributes which could result in an equitable sharing of the GHG mitigation burden among countries. The study results highlight that impacts due to climate change could provide an important and equitable basis for burden sharing in the present and in future. The study also highlights the significance of scientific literature on climate change impact assessments in informing the future policy dialogue in the climate negotiations. 相似文献
17.
Five years down the road from Kyoto, the Protocol that bears that city’s name still awaits enough qualifying ratifications to come into force. While attention has been understandably focussed on the ratification process, it is time to begin thinking about the next steps for the global climate regime, particularly in terms of a deeper inclusion of developing countries’ concerns and interests. This paper begins doing so from the perspective of the developing countries. The principal argument is that we need to return to the basic principles outlined in the Framework Convention on Climate Change in searching for a north-south bargain on climate change. Such a bargain may be achievable if we can realign the policy architecture of the climate regime to its original stated goals of sustainable development. 相似文献
18.
《联合国气候变化框架公约》（简称《公约》）第25次缔约方会议取得了一定进展,但未能就各方最为关注的《巴黎协定》第六条市场机制实施细则达成一致。会议成果平淡主要有4个原因:第一,过度强调提高各方减排目标力度而未能聚焦《巴黎协定》第六条相关谈判;第二,主席国和部分缔约方急切将各方尚未形成政治共识的提高承诺力度问题引入谈判进程,破坏了谈判氛围;第三,各个议题推进不平衡;第四,发达国家企图逃避责任,促使发展中国家更加团结并形成对立。展望2020年的全球气候多边进程形势,《巴黎协定》第六条相关谈判将继续作为重点,提高力度也将成为讨论主题,但片面强调1.5℃目标可能引发重谈《巴黎协定》风险,同时发达国家背弃《公约》、转嫁责任意图明显。全球气候治理应聚焦落实承诺的力度,并平行推进《公约》及其《巴黎协定》的实施。 相似文献
19.
On the occasion of the thirtieth anniversary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, this principal supra-national institution remains paramount to the project of planetary climate planning and governance. Reflections on this anniversary should serve to recall the contestations through which this foundational institution was formed, and the delegate dynamics that continue to be reproduced in its wake. The contentious debates and political dynamics that afflicted the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee tasked with crafting the Framework Convention on Climate Change, as well as dissension in the periphery, remain as relevant today as they were three decades ago. Reprising these dynamics through detailed historical and archival analysis, this article excavates the negotiations of the 1992 Framework Convention on Climate Change by the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee, which met in 5 sessions during 1991–1992. The aim is to identify key fault-lines and conflicts in the lead-up to the finalization of the 1992 Convention, in order to demonstrate whose epistemic and normative commitments came to be reflected in the final outcome and to show how the legacy of this process endures to date. I seek to render visible actors and proposals peripheralized in the formation of planetary climate governance to extrapolate normative boundaries and proffer heterodox lessons from the margins. 相似文献
20.
Luis Gomez-Echeverri 《Climate Policy》2013,13(5):632-648
Funding for climate change efforts in developing countries is firmly established in the Articles of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Since the early days of the climate change negotiations, finance has been a key focus of attention and, often, a principal source of tension between developed and developing countries. Understandably, these tensions have led to numerous efforts to reform the financial mechanism of the UNFCCC. The history of reforms of the Global Environment Facility – for some time the only operating entity of the financial mechanism – and the recent establishment of the Green Climate Fund are good examples of such efforts. It is asked here whether these efforts have been sufficient to keep pace with a rapidly changing, more complex and radically different world from that of 1992 when the UNFCCC was signed by most countries in Rio de Janeiro. On the 21st anniversary of the signing of the UNFCCC, the effects that global transformations have had on climate change finance are here explored, and some of the new challenges, as well as emerging opportunities, resulting from the new landscape of climate finance that has emerged as a result are described. Policy relevance The climate change negotiations are entering a critical period. The issue of finance is one of the key pillars on which the success of a new deal on a binding agreement depends. A better understanding of the increasing complexity of the climate finance landscape is essential. The world of climate finance and the geopolitics in which it operates have been significantly transformed since the signing of the UNFCCC. A better understanding of this transformation would help policy makers and negotiators find more effective and realistic ways to help unleash the immense amount of financial resources that could potentially be made available for the great challenge that many countries face to address climate change. The need for up-front and significantly scaled-up investments requires effective mechanisms that can leverage and encourage investments into areas where they are most needed to face the challenge of climate change. The role of the Green Climate Fund will be critical in this regard. 相似文献