International Climate Treaty Research Articles

Climate change, energy transition, and the Global South: learnings from the international framework on the ozone layer

The pursuit of climate action to meet net-zero targets has triggered the call for a global energy transition from fossil fuels to clean energy sources. However, this global energy transition does not entirely recognise all countries’ social, economic and technological capacities as well as emission contributions as envisaged under the Common but Differentiated Responsibilities (CBDR) principle, which underlies international climate policy. It is concerned more with the outcome of transitioning to clean energy than with justice in the transition process. Recognition justice, an element of energy justice, enables us to identify the inequalities that global energy paradigms (such as the energy transition) can create and how a justice framework can help us understand the implications of energy injustice and address the inequities across energy systems. Recognition justice acknowledges the divergent perspectives rooted in social, economic and racial differences and the varied strengths of developed and developing countries. The energy transition process ought to recognise these differences so that they are reasonably expected to benefit everyone. Implementing the energy transition in the Global South (GS) in the same way as it is being advanced in the Global North will have security, justice, economic, resource-stranding, and sustainable development implications. This issue (of injustice in the energy transition) is aggravated by two dichotomous realities: many countries in the South will be most impacted by climatic changes, yet there remains political and social opposition to climate action through the energy transition. As a solution, this paper relies on the notion of recognition justice with support from the Rawlsian justice concept to argue that a delayed transition represents justice and recognises the peculiar nature and different circumstances of the GS. It identifies that learnings from the Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer and the notion of CBDR under international climate treaties can be mainstreamed into energy transition research and policies to achieve justice for countries of the GS. The paper further finds that a delayed transition for the GS will (i) enable the region to address sustainability-related issues of hunger and multidimensional poverty, essential to realising other Sustainable Development Goals, whilst gradually implementing energy transition policies; (ii) present an attractive case against political and social opposition to energy transition in the GS; (iii) advance the goal of CBDR already recognised under international climate treaties and the bifurcated approaches established in such treaties; and, finally, (iv) ensure that developed countries contributing the most to greenhouse gas emissions take the lead now and act while the GS effectuates national contributions sustainably.

Formation of climate coalitions and preferential free trade: the case for participation linkage

We study the endogenous formation of climate coalitions linked to a preferential free trade arrangement. In a multi-stage, micro founded strategic trade and participation game, coalition and fringe countries dispose of a discriminatory tariff on dirty imports as well as emission permits imposed on domestic producers. Permits are traded on a common permit market inside the coalition and on local markets outside, respectively. We provide an analytical solution for the general equilibrium and the policy game, in the three country case, while the participation game is solved by Monte Carlo simulation. Moreover, conditional probabilities are computed for the transition to coalitions of various sizes induced by free trade. Under various regimes analyzed, we find that preferential free trade can create strong incentives for building effective climate coalitions in terms of depth and breadth. This result even holds if fringe countries are given the option of trade cooperation as a retaliation devise and is driven by a favorable shift in the coalition’s terms of trade. As a policy implication, negotiations on international climate treaties and free trade arrangements should be interlinked.

Saudi Arabia energy transition in a post-paris agreement era: An analysis with a multi-level perspective approach

This paper examines the factors that play a role in shaping modern energy transition in Saudi Arabia, a particularly hydrocarbon-rich country. We base our analysis on the three lenses of the multi-level perspective (MLP) approach: landscape, regime, and niche. The findings indicate that the interaction between external (enforcement of international climate treaties and concerns about the potential adverse impacts of accelerated global energy transition) and internal factors (growing domestic energy consumption and the rise of GHG emissions) play a significant role in shaping Saudi Arabia modern energy transition: one that evolved from a cautious approach to a progressive one. The findings indicate that niche and landscape factors play a minimal role in exerting any pressure on sociotechnical regimes, and the success of the clean energy transition in Saudi Arabia is conditional on direct government support. Aligning landscape, regime, and niche developments are recommended to ensure a holistic energy transition.

National climate litigation and the international rule of law

AbstractThis article assesses the implications of national climate litigation for what is termed ‘the international rule of law’. Starting from the finding that the current international climate treaty regime lacks several elements of an international rule of law, such as legal bindingness, clarity, and justiciability, the author explores what national courts contribute to filling these gaps. Deviating from a linear progression narrative, which is prevalent in existing literature, this article provides a more nuanced and complex picture. Whereas successful climate litigation is hardly imaginable without reliance on internationally agreed-upon facts – such as reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and global average temperature levels deemed ‘dangerous’ – doctrinally decisions do not represent a turn toward a stricter rule of international climate law. Instead of applying and progressively developing climate treaties, courts thus far have primarily used these provisions only to develop national constitutional law and regional human rights law. The created system of highly contextual national rule(s) of climate law is a fragmented one which is regionally limited to a few states predominantly located in Western Europe. Consequently, it is a far cry from a truly global rule of international climate law.

Climate shaming: explaining environmental NGOs targeting practices

ABSTRACT How do non-governmental organizations (NGOs) target governments for climate shaming? NGOs increasingly function as monitors of states climate performance and compliance with international climate treaties such as the Paris Agreement. Lacking formal sanctioning capacities, NGOs primarily rely on ‘naming and shaming’ to hold states accountable to their commitments in climate treaties and to ramp up their climate mitigation efforts. However, we know little about how and why NGOs engage in climate shaming. This article advances two arguments. First, we argue that NGO climate shaming is likely to be shaped by the international and national climate records of governments. Second, governments’ climate actions can create contradicting expectations by both inviting and repelling NGO climate shaming. To test our arguments, we complied an original global data set on climate shaming events carried out by environmental NGOs. Our empirical analysis suggests that while NGOs are generally more likely to shame climate laggards, climate frontrunners may also be shamed if they engage in non-binding climate commitments.

Effect of reciprocity on public opinion of international climate treaties: experimental evidence from the US and China

ABSTRACTThis study reports survey results of American and Chinese citizens administered to determine the effect of reciprocity and the absence of reciprocity on public support of international climate treaties. American and Chinese college students and adults were surveyed about their support for signing an international climate treaty including commitments to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, conditional on the other country signing the same treaty or not. This study finds knowledge of other-country non-support on average decreases cooperative behaviour among all age groups in both the US and China. Knowledge of China’s support for the treaty is found on average to increase support among American adults, while having no noticeable effect on average support among American college students. Chinese citizens are found to not respond positively to reciprocity. Although not statistically significant at conventional significance levels, knowledge of the US’s support is found on average to decrease support among Chinese college students and adults.Key policy insightsTo increase support for international climate treaties, knowledge that another major emitter will sign the treaty does not unanimously increase domestic support.Knowing the other country will not sign the treaty decreases domestic support for signing an international climate treaty for both Americans and Chinese, relative to not being told about the other country’s decision to sign the treaty.Knowing China will sign an international climate treaty on average increases American adult support for signing the same treaty, while American college student support is unaffected.Although not statistically significant at conventional significance levels, knowing the US will sign an international climate treaty on average decreases Chinese support for signing the same treaty.Policy-makers pursuing increased international support of climate treaties by first getting support from countries with substantial historical emissions might deter international support if little attention to fairness concerns is given.

Potentialities of Space-Based Systems for Monitoring Climate Policies and Mitigation of Climate Process Drivers

ABSTRACTThe services of space-based technology have advanced for monitoring strategies, especially for studying and predicting the physical events in ecosystems. This article investigates the viability of space technology use for monitoring implementations of climate policies and, potentialities for mitigation of climate process drivers. Qualitative data were sourced through Delphi experts’ method and quantitatively analyzed. The key findings show that experts allude to the high (3.33/4) anticipatory contributions of deploying space-based systems with dedicated sensors for monitoring implementation of international climate treaties. However, while there is a very strong yes (84.44 percent) rate on the potentiality of space-based solar power for direct climate change mitigation, the feasibility of deploying such systems in the near-future (2020 to 2025) is low (1.77/4). The statistics further show that the further away the possible start-time (2040 and a 50-year horizon of 2065) for deployment of space-based solar power, the more likely it will be deployed. The article concludes that deploying satellites for monitoring and mitigating global climate change contributes significantly to climate change management efforts. Specifically, the development of space-based solar power if fast-tracked. The article also provides a conceptual framework for climate change management using space technology, which facilitates constructive discussion informing policy direction on the subject.

Multi‐level Climate Governance: The global system and selected sub‐systems

Multi‐level Climate Governance: The global system and selected sub‐systems

More than ever, scientists need to engage with the public: the stakes are high and they may be for keeps.

Scientists of all stripes are failing miserably at one of the most important parts of our job—communication. On November 8, 2016, millions of Americans elected a man who denies human‐caused climate change, and, in doing so, they voted against facts and against science. Donald Trump has vowed to withdraw from the international climate treaty negotiated last year in Paris, and says that once he is in power, it will be open season for oil drilling and mining on federal lands and in the seas. He has selected the outspoken climate change denialist Scott Pruitt as the new head for the US Environmental Protection Agency—a man who for many years has fought US President Barack Obama's environmental initiatives, and has even sued the EPA on several occasions, most recently over Obama's Clean Power Plan. This does not bode well for the environment and for science. The situation is looking equally dire in other parts of the world, with nationalist, anti‐immigration, and big business interests taking precedence over the preservation of our planet, its natural resources, and its ecosystems and species. To be an environmentalist, an academic, or a scientist of any kind in this polarized and pernicious political landscape risks being labeled an elitist, a liar, an ultra‐leftist, and someone who is out of touch with the average person. Scientists cannot afford to shrug off these stereotypes and false labels and pretend that they are the opinions of a select few. In fact, we must acknowledge that in certain places these views are quickly becoming the consensus. We …

Rebound policy in the Paris Agreement: instrument comparison and climate-club revenue offsets

It is argued that without an international climate treaty, or with a soft treaty in the form of voluntary pledges, well-intended local and national climate strategies will seriously rebound in terms of energy use and CO2 emissions. I unravel the complexity of rebound in an international context, for which purpose the distinction between national and international rebound is introduced. The main climate–energy strategies and policies are assessed based on their capacity to control rebound, with carbon pricing – especially cap-and-trade – appearing to be the best approach. It is argued that motivations for further negotiations on amendments to the recent Paris climate agreement, namely on national policy coordination, can be strengthened by rebound concerns. As part of this, a new suggestion is to complement carbon equalization tariffs on carbon-intensive goods imported from countries with weak or non-existent climate policies with ‘revenue-recycling offsets’. These offsets would ease the political way to implementing carbon equalization tariffs, in turn creating pressure on countries to sign an effective climate treaty – a requirement to achieve consistent and serious carbon pricing worldwide. To support these arguments, the empirical patterns of rebound estimates are broadly outlined.Policy relevanceRebound is given scant attention in both IPCC documents and UNFCCC climate summits, where climate agreements are negotiated. This article argues that without an international climate treaty, or with a soft treaty in the form of voluntary pledges, as characterizes the recent Paris climate agreement, well-intended local and national climate strategies will seriously rebound in terms of CO2 emissions. This means that the motivations for climate negotiations can be strengthened by drawing attention to rebound concerns. The major current climate–energy strategies and policies are assessed on the basis of their capacity to control rebound, with carbon pricing – notably cap-and-trade – revealed to be the best approach. Further analysis and discussion of this is welcome, especially as rebound is neglected in the comparisons of carbon tax and emissions trading solutions to global warming. In particular, rebound should be added to the set of core criteria for judging and comparing instruments of climate policy. In addition, a new suggestion offered is to complement a climate club with carbon equalization tariffs on carbon-intensive goods imported from countries lacking strong climate policy with ‘revenue-recycling offsets’. This would make the implementation of such tariffs more politically feasible as well as creating pressure on countries to sign an effective climate treaty.

2 °C and SDGs: united they stand, divided they fall?

The adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the new international climate treaty could put 2015 into the history books as a defining year for setting human development on a more sustainable pathway. The global climate policy and SDG agendas are highly interconnected: the way that the climate problem is addressed strongly affects the prospects of meeting numerous other SDGs and vice versa. Drawing on existing scenario results from a recent energy-economy-climate model inter-comparison project, this letter analyses these synergies and (risk) trade-offs of alternative 2 °C pathways across indicators relevant for energy-related SDGs and sustainable energy objectives. We find that limiting the availability of key mitigation technologies yields some co-benefits and decreases risks specific to these technologies but greatly increases many others. Fewer synergies and substantial trade-offs across SDGs are locked into the system for weak short-term climate policies that are broadly in line with current Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs), particularly when combined with constraints on technologies. Lowering energy demand growth is key to managing these trade-offs and creating synergies across multiple energy-related SD dimensions. We argue that SD considerations are central for choosing socially acceptable 2 °C pathways: the prospects of meeting other SDGs need not dwindle and can even be enhanced for some goals if appropriate climate policy choices are made. Progress on the climate policy and SDG agendas should therefore be tracked within a unified framework.

China's sectoral strategies in energy conservation and carbon mitigation

This article reviews China's energy and climate strategies in the electric power, industrial, building, and transport sectors. These four sectors account for about three-quarters of China's total energy consumption and energy-related carbon emissions. We identify major gaps in China's energy and climate polices based on the status quo: first, command-and-control policies not only are costly, but also cannot accommodate the transition of energy consumption from production sectors to consumption sectors; second, unsmooth deployment of renewable energy poses challenges for decarbonizing China's electricity system. To close these gaps, we suggest two policy priorities: a carbon market to achieve cost-effective emission reduction, and a Renewable Quota System to promote the utilization of renewable energy. Challenges associated with these policies are discussed. Furthermore, we suggest that a sectoral approach can serve as a first step for China to make meaningful commitments under a prospective international climate treaty. In particular, the cement, steel, and aluminium sectors can be among the first groups to join this sectoral approach.Policy relevanceWe argue that China's sectoral climate policies should prioritize both the development of a carbon market to achieve cost-effective carbon mitigation and the improvement of renewable supporting polices to foster long-term renewable technology investment. However, to fully explore the advantages of a carbon market, we suggest that more stringent emission caps should be set at the national level. In addition, the carbon market and existing energy and climate policies should be carefully harmonized. In particular, the overlaps between existing command-and-control mitigation polices and the carbon market should be reduced to improve cost-effectiveness. In parallel with a carbon market, we suggest a second-best policy, the Renewable Quota System, as a supplement to the carbon market to foster green technology development and to create preconditions for a more stringent cap. At the international level, a sectoral approach can serve as a first step for China to make meaningful commitments under a prospective international climate treaty. In particular, the cement, steel, and aluminium sectors can be among the first group to join this sectoral approach.

Energy security matters in the EU Energy Roadmap

Energy security has gained increasing prominence on the EU political agenda, but is often framed narrowly, in terms of import dependency or security of supply. In this paper we screen and scope out a more comprehensive suite of energy security aspects to be considered when assessing low-carbon energy scenarios and apply it using the EU Energy Roadmap as an example. Availability and affordability issues as well as security of demand matters and geopolitical security aspects are identified and discussed. External factors, e.g., future international climate treaties and international relations, are important for some energy security outcomes. A broader framing of energy security together with structured assessments on the security implications of energy transitions would benefit future EU energy policy.

An Application of Automated Mediation to International Climate Treaty Negotiation

A generic framework for automated mediation of multi-attribute negotiation has recently been reported (Lai and Sycara in Group Decis Negot 18:169–187, 2009). This framework seeks to shorten time to agreement, achieve agreements that are closer to Pareto optimality, and remain tractable in situations involving multiple issues, incomplete information, and dynamic reservation utility. These objectives are all relevant to international climate treaty negotiation. Therefore, in this paper, we describe how this mediation framework can be applied to the climate policy setting and articulate a necessary extension to allow for more than two negotiating parties. We then demonstrate application of the framework, employing some simple economic and procedural assumptions. This example shows that automated mediation can add value to the negotiation process without placing an undue mental or computational burden on negotiators. Part of this value comes simply from encouraging negotiators to be explicit about their assumptions and preferences, even if most of this information is not shared with their opponents.

A post-Kyoto partner: Considering the stratospheric ozone regime as a tool to manage nitrous oxide

Nitrous oxide (N2O) is the largest known remaining anthropogenic threat to the stratospheric ozone layer. However, it is currently only regulated under the 1997 Kyoto Protocol because of its simultaneous ability to warm the climate. The threat N2O poses to the stratospheric ozone layer, coupled with the uncertain future of the international climate regime, motivates our exploration of issues that could be relevant to the Parties to the ozone regime (the 1985 Vienna Convention and its 1987 Montreal Protocol) should they decide to take measures to manage N2O in the future. There are clear legal avenues to regulate N2O under the ozone regime as well as several ways to share authority with the existing and future international climate treaties. N2O mitigation strategies exist to address the most significant anthropogenic sources, including agriculture, where behavioral practices and new technologies could contribute significantly to reducing emissions. Existing policies managing N2O and other forms of reactive nitrogen could be harnessed and built on by the ozone regime to implement N2O controls. There are several challenges and potential cobenefits to N2O control which we discuss here: food security, equity, and implications of the nitrogen cascade. The possible inclusion of N2O in the ozone regime need not be viewed as a sign of failure of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change to adequately deal with climate change. Rather, it could represent an additional valuable tool in sustainable development diplomacy.

The Fate of an Engineered Planet

The article presents fictitious accounts of possible technological innovations that might be designed to address rising global temperatures in the 100 years following 2013. According to the accounts, solar geoengineering could be used to spray particles into the atmosphere and deflect solar radiation. The possibility of an international climate treaty to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is mentioned. Other topics include international relations, a fictitious U.S. drought, and genetic manipulation technologies.

Expectations on corporate climate action under regulatory uncertainty

PurposeIn absence of extensive regulation, expectations can be a noteworthy institutional pressure driving corporate climate change action. The purpose of this study is to explore expectations on businesses to act on climate change when the anticipations for a new global climate agreement are relatively low. Expectations on corporate climate action are compared in two ways: to the previous year, when anticipations for a new international climate treaty were high, and to other categories of societal actors.Design/methodology/approachThis paper builds on a questionnaire handed out to an élite sample of 205 participants at the UN climate conference COP16/CMP6 in Cancún 2010, when anticipations were low for regulatory breakthrough in the international climate negotiations.FindingsThe responses suggest that expectations on businesses in 2010 did not decrease compared to 2009, when anticipations were high for regulatory breakthrough. A total of 40 percent of the respondents indicated that their expectations had increased since the previous year. Expectations on businesses were relatively high compared to other societal actors; and the highest expectations were expressed by businesses themselves.Originality/valueThe results provide an empirical foundation which stimulates thinking around expectations that make up an important component in the business environment. It is the first systematic ranking of expectations on business to act on climate change among participants at the UN climate change conference, one of the most prominent arenas in the field. The timing for the data collection provides a unique opportunity to analyse how expectations are related to different levels of regulatory anticipation.

Left Clouds Over Climate Change Policy

Will there be an international climate treaty to follow Kyoto when it expires in 2012, and if so what will it look like? Many climate justice and anti-capitalist spokespersons denounce the Kyoto Protocol as a “pretend solution” and reject international carbon trading altogether. This article argues that, on the contrary, an international cap and trade treaty is the only way to avert climate change fairly before it is too late, and that the Kyoto Protocol is a framework that progressives should defend and fix rather than condemn and nix. After explaining why many climate justice and anti-capitalist criticisms of carbon trading are without merit and fail to appreciate how international carbon trading can favor lesser developed countries (LDCs), five changes to make a post-Kyoto cap and trade treaty more effective and fair are proposed, and common arguments against carbon trading are rebutted. JEL codes: Q54, Q56, Q58

Expectation-Driven Climate Treaties with Breakthrough Technologies

Technology-oriented treaties are beginning to receive a wide attention as a potentially useful approach to the conundrum of international climate policy. While the potential scale effect of breakthrough mitigation technologies could promote cooperation on technology-oriented treaties, the scale effect could also make the dynamics susceptible to countries’ expectations on future technology diffusion and might lead to a self-fulfilling outcome. In this paper, we discuss the possibilities of such expectation-driven dynamics in the context of international climate treaties.

Environmental Challenges of Climate-Nuclear Fusion: A Case Study of India

I. INTRODUCTION II. NUCLEAR ENERGY USE WAS A CONTENTIOUS PUBLIC ISSUE BEFORE CLIMATE CHANGE EMERGED AS A PROBLEM III. INCLUSION OF NUCLEAR ENERGY IN INTERNATIONAL CLIMATE AGREEMENTS REMAINS CONTENTIOUS IV. CLIMATE CHANGE HAS NEVERTHELESS REVIVED THE CIVILIAN NUCLEAR ENERGY OPTION V. THE FOUNDATION FOR NUCLEAR ENERGY HAS BEEN LAID: INDIA AS AN EXAMPLE VI. ENGAGING INDIA IN NUCLEAR ENERGY SHOWS LOCAL AND GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS A. Increasing Nuclear Energy Will Not Solve India's Short Term Emissions Problem Because of Domestic and International Regulatory and Administrative Uncertainties B. Transferring Nuclear Technology to India Sets the Stage for Future Environmental Issues VII. CONCLUSION: ACKNOWLEDGING AND ADDRESSING THE CLIMATE-NUCLEAR LINK I. INTRODUCTION Climate change is launching a nuclear energy future because nuclear power generation produces low greenhouse gas emissions. (1) Nations are therefore reviewing their nuclear energy portfolio and expanding international cooperation on civilian nuclear energy. (2) India is a notable example. Recognizing India's energy demands and the climate mitigation problems associated with fossil fuel use, the Nuclear Supplier's Group, at the behest of the United States, removed nuclear trade sanctions imposed on India. (3) India has subsequently been negotiating and signing numerous bilateral agreements aimed at expanding its domestic nuclear power generation facility. (4) The apparent advantages of nuclear energy in mitigating climate change are however significantly marred by international and domestic regulatory and governance gaps in assessing and managing the environmental impacts of nuclear energy. (5) Although partially promoted to mitigate climate change, nuclear technology is not featured as an energy alternative in international climate treaties because of persisting environmental, safety, and cost concerns. (6) The Indian government's assessment of the legal framework to manage environmental and safety impacts of nuclear expansion, including waste management, does not match its alacrity in concluding nuclear agreements. (7) In this article it is argued that India's nuclear policy represents an upcoming challenge to environmental law for two reasons. First, it shows that the international community's support for India's civilian nuclear program, despite the exclusion of nuclear energy for safety, security, and cost reasons, will not yield timely emissions reduction benefits because of sketchy international and domestic energy policy and poorly aligned emissions reduction and energy diversification goals. Second, the expansion of India's civilian nuclear program demonstrates that nations have given scant attention to developing an adequate legal framework for managing serious associated environmental problems such as waste management, siting, and liability. Without a comprehensive and cohesive international regime on nuclear energy, these issues present serious environmental concerns both locally and globally. This case study demonstrates that a meaningful strategy to mitigate climate change must, without exacerbating other environmental problems, align national and international law and policy on three indivisible aspects of the problem: emissions, energy, and economics. The current approach to climate mitigation focuses primarily on emissions reduction goals, which may actually drive nations to pursue environmentally detrimental energy alternatives such as nuclear energy. This reality cannot be wished away by excluding a particular type of energy from the climate treaties. Instead, nations may have to take a more stringent approach and establish a climate assessment system under which certain types of energy will be phased out. A mechanism to simultaneously assess the environmental impacts of energy alternatives such as nuclear power must also be considered to ensure that alternatives achieve the requisite steep emissions cuts. …