Abstract
Since the 1990s, the European Union is aspiring global leadership in the area of climate change, which is refl ected in its active participation in the negotiations on the international climate change regime. However, those ambitions have not always turned out to be appropriate or justifi ed. Despite the fact that the European Union was able to achieve certain results during the Kyoto Protocol negotiations and even more signifi cant results in the process of its ratifi cation, for the most part EU negotiation strategy based on normative considerations, had not been successful, it was especially evident during the 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen. Partly the disappointing results of EU performance during the Copenhagen negotiations are to be blamed on some of the key features of EU functioning logic, for example, the overall tendency to rely on scientifi c evidence in policy-making, which did not allow the EU to assess other parties’ interests adequately. As the results of the negotiations of parties to the UNFCCC in December 2015 in Paris have shown, the European Union did manage to work out its previous mistakes and build a broad informal international coalition. Contrary to the pessimistic expectations, the agreement was adopted and it took into account quite a few of the EU proposals. However, the Paris Treaty has a number of fl aws and inaccuracies, so the ability to eliminate them in a timely manner by the international community and the EU in particular, will determine the future of the new international climate change regime.
Highlights
Since the 1990s, the European Union is aspiring global leadership in the area of climate change, which is reflected in its active participation in the negotiations on the international climate change regime
Despite the fact that the European Union was able to achieve certain results during the Kyoto Protocol negotiations and even more significant results in the process of its ratification, for the most part EU negotiation strategy based on normative considerations, had not been successful, it was especially evident during the 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen
The Paris Treaty has a number of flaws and inaccuracies, so the ability to eliminate them in a timely manner by the international community and the EU in particular, will determine the future of the new international climate change regime
Summary
2014 Report / PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, 2014. Mode of access: http://edgar.jrc. ec.europa.eu/news_docs/jrc-2014-trends-inglobal-co2-emissions-2014-report-93171.pdf. This fact has not been ignored by the EU, and after 2005 it launched bilateral dialogue processes and signed bilateral agreements on cooperation in the climate field with Australia, Brazil, Canada, India, Mexico, Russia, the USA, South Africa and Japan in order to provide some support for internal European climate change policy development and, more importantly, to stand a chance to influence the negotiating position of these countries It seemed that in 2009 the American administration of the newly elected Barack Obama was ready to support the EU global climate change policy vision at the 15th Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC in Copenhagen. Mode of access: http://unfccc.int/key_steps/doha_climate_ gateway/items/7389.php countries are only responsible for 14% of global GHG emissions, the US, Canada, Russia and Japan did not sign the amendment.
Full Text
Topics from this Paper
International Climate Change Regime
United Nations Climate Change Conference
Copenhagen Negotiations
Paris Treaty
Normative Considerations
+ Show 5 more
Create a personalized feed of these topics
Get StartedTalk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Similar Papers
Jan 1, 2017
India Review
Jan 1, 2021
Environmental Health Perspectives
Apr 1, 2011
BRICS Law Journal
Jan 1, 2016
Academic Journal of Environment & Earth Science
Jan 1, 2022
Jan 1, 2015
Journal of Environmental Policy and Administration
Mar 31, 2016
M/C Journal
Aug 28, 2009
Papua Law Journal
Oct 25, 2018
New media and mass communication
Jan 1, 2015
Jurnal Ilmu Komunikasi
Mar 19, 2014
Geography Compass
Sep 1, 2008
IEEE Industry Applications Magazine
Mar 1, 2022
Comparative Politics (Russia)
Comparative Politics (Russia)
Aug 4, 2016
Comparative Politics (Russia)
Aug 4, 2016
Comparative Politics (Russia)
Aug 3, 2016
Comparative Politics (Russia)
Aug 2, 2016
Comparative Politics (Russia)
Aug 2, 2016
Comparative Politics (Russia)
Aug 2, 2016
Comparative Politics (Russia)
Aug 2, 2016
Comparative Politics (Russia)
Aug 2, 2016
Comparative Politics (Russia)
Aug 2, 2016
Comparative Politics (Russia)
Aug 2, 2016