Can China save the world (original) (raw)
A balancing act : China’s role in climate change
2009
Climate change has reached the apex of the global agenda at a time when China faces significant development and energy security challenges. The political leadership and leading intellectuals are debating the direction of a new development pathway that provides both growth to meet development objectives, and dramatically reduces energy intensity and pollution. While the official position has not changed significantly, there are four key aspects that illustrate how climate change is conceived by the Chinese leadership. This signals that China may come to play a much more important role in global mitigation of climate change than was thought only a couple of years ago.
Is China the New Global Leader in the Fight Against Climate Change?
2019
Many commentators say that China’s approach to climate change has shifted over the last decade. Both within and outside ‘China watcher’ circles, China is no longer simply seen as a threat to ecology and climate. Now, a significant tranche of media reports and research papers suggest China is the new global leader in the fight against climate change, some going as far as suggesting it might ‘save the world’. This paper has analysed the concept of China’s leadership in the fight against climate change, with the aim of assessing whether China is, indeed, the new global leader. In doing so, this paper aimed to better inform all climate change stakeholders on the position they might take vis-a-vis China in future. This study was driven by the research question: is China the new global leader in the fight against climate change? This qualitative study first set out a definition of leadership within multilateral environmental governance, before drawing together key literature and findings from studies made over the last 10 years. It analysed this evidence against theoretical concepts of ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ power, and leadership, as illustrated by Joseph Nye. It tested the null hypothesis ‘China is purely a follower in the global fight against climate change, and shows no evidence of leadership of any form’ and found it to be falsifiable to a certain extent. There is significant evidence that China has changed the global ‘green economy’ - making ambitious emission reductions logistically feasible and affordably priced. Evidence of China achieving pre-eminent status in relevant multilateral organisations, however, is mixed at best. Furthermore, analysis of China’s massive Belt and Road Initiative suggests China may be following the development path of older developed economies before it; merely ‘exporting’ the highest emitting, highest polluting sections of its economy to other countries in the developing world.
China is a Key to Mitigate Global Climate Change
The Journal of international studies, 2015
This paper attempts to discuss China’s response on the global climate change. China, well known as the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases, the largest energy consumer and the second largest economy in the world, contributes for a third of the planet’s greenhouse gas output and has one of the world’s most polluted cities that surpassed United States and India. China’s economy growth has changed its perception on how they should cultivate their land, water, and natural resources. This economic expansion which is driven by fossil fuels, has led to dramatic increases in emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs). The world concerns on environmental problems in China because it influences the world whether pattern, it effects human life and it influences global community market. Keywords : Greenhouse Gases, Environmental Problems, Economy Growth
Open Letter to President Xi Jinping on the Climate Crisis (2022)
Asian Studies, 2023
Although climate models predict that global heating will prove more devastating for China than for many other countries, and economic models have shown that a transition to a low-carbon economy would strengthen China in the long run, the Chinese leadership has failed to reduce fossil fuel consumption enough to avoid extremes of weather that are devastating the country. Not long after becoming president, Xi Jinping announced a project to ground “socialism with Chinese characteristics” in selected ideas from ancient Chinese philosophy and culture, promoting it through quotations in his speeches from the Chinese classics, and especially Confucian and Daoist thought. These ideas turn out to be perfectly suited for the ‘reframing’ of worldviews that is required to think more productively about the climate crisis and political measures for dealing with it effectively. However, the Chinese leadership has failed to live up to its inspiring words, and has instead reverted to policies that are more in line with Chinese Legalism and Stalinism than with the Confucian, Daoist, and Marxist ideas that Xi Jinping has advocated. This has dealt a severe blow to China’s standing in the world and a huge loss of ‘soft power’ that previous regimes had accumulated. With the United States a shambles, the way is open for China to follow through on its promotion of traditional Chinese philosophy and take the lead, for the sake of the long-term well-being of its own people, in tackling the climate crisis—and thereby gain the greatest soft power triumph in history.
From Paris to Beijing: China, Next Champion on Climate Change
Despite ups and downs in climate diplomacy, China has been consistent in reforming energy related sectors and implementing climate-related policies at home in the past two decades. This explains why China shows no hesitation in moving along with the Paris Agreement regardless of US participation.
In an increasingly globalized world climate change is becoming an ever-pressing matter. A 2007 report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change states that climate changes threatens to destabilize ecosystems, weaken food security and precipitate severe water shortages (IPCC, 2007). Because of this and the effects of globalization, environmental issues have become increasingly prominent on the international agenda over the last fifty years. As environmental problems transcend national boundaries, they come to be a feature of international politics. This situation is rendered all the more unsustainable by the rise of new pollutants, like China and India (Vogler, 2011, p. 348). China has experienced a remarkable period of economic high growth over the last decades. Even though this is generally seen as a good thing, the rapid economic development also has its downside. In recent years a serious degradation of the environment took place in China (Wang, 2007). China is the biggest emitter of carbon emissions in the world. Emissions transcend national boundaries, which makes this a global problem. However, China has been very reluctant to sign treaties or make any form of concessions. Therefore I will analyze the position of China in international climate politics through various theoretical frameworks. In order to explain the position of China two theories are used: classical realism and neoliberal institutionalism. The way I would like to conduct my research has led to the following research question: To what extent can China’s position in climate negotiations be explained through classical realism and neoliberal institutionalism? I will use the variable treaties to give my research more focus. I will first map the climate treaties and earlier compliances by China. I will focus on the Kyoto protocol and the Copenhagen summit. Afterwards I will analyze them through a realist and neoliberal institutionalist perspective. However, before I can answer my research question it must first be identified what the effects are of the Chinese position to international climate negotiations. Therefore a sub-question needs to be answered first: What are the effects of the Chinese position on climate negotiations? In this sub-question there is an independent and a dependent variable. The independent variable is the Chinese position in climate negotiations, the dependent variable are the effects. After answering this sub-question and examining the variables I can proceed to answer my general research question. The hypothesis to my research question is: the current position of China in international climate negotiations is more of a puzzle for neoliberal institutionalism than for classical realism. In order to answer this question I have divided this article in various sections. Firstly I will provide a description of China’s position in the area of climate politics. I will also look at the effects of china’s position on international climate negotiations. Afterwards I’ll examine the effects, and thirdly I will give a brief description of the theoretical framework of classical realism and neoliberal institutionalism. I will apply these theories to climate treaties, in particular to the Kyoto protocol and the Copenhagen protocol and the effect of these treaties. In this article I argue that the current position of China in international climate negotiations is more of a puzzle for neoliberal institutionalism than for classical realism. This is because climate negotiations take the form of a zero-sum game. Most countries will pursue relative gains. The most important effect of China’s position on international climate negotiations is that they are hindering a solid agreement, but they do however have the capacity to contribute in knowledge and innovative factors.
China's Climate- and Energy-security Dilemma: Shaping a New Path of Economic Growth
Journal of Current Chinese Affairs, 2009
China is undergoing modernization at a scale and speed the world has never witnessed. As climate change increasingly dominates the global agenda, China faces the challenge of shaping a new growth path in a climate-constrained world. The paper argues that China's current climate and energy policy is, at best, a “repackaging” of existing energy and environmental strategies with co-benefits for the mitigation of climate change. Nevertheless, even though policies are not climate-change driven, the quick (rhetorical) endorsement of low-carbon development and the strong momentum of green technologies indicate that political ambitions are in favour of finding a more sustainable development pathway. A new growth path would, however, require a fundamental shift, with development and energy strategies being set within climate security constraints. The eventual success of this new path remains uncertain.
China and climate justice: moving beyond statism
… Environmental Agreements: Politics, …, 2013
China is the largest national source of greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution causing climate change. However, despite some rhetorical progress at the 2011 Durban climate conference, it has consistently rejected calls to take on binding targets to reduce its GHG emissions. The Chinese Government has understandably argued that developed states are responsible for the predominant share of historical GHG emissions, have greater capacity to pay for the cost of mitigation, and indeed have an obligation to do so before China is required to take action. However, due to the explosive growth in its GHG emissions, China is now in a position to single-handedly dash any hope of climate stability if its position does not change. On the diplomatic level, other big polluters, particularly the United States, will not enter into new binding agreements to reduce substantially their own GHG emissions without a credible commitment from China. Challenging the “statist” framing of the climate justice, this article explores the possibility for China to take on a leadership role in climate change diplomacy in a way that allows it to maintain its long-standing principled resistance to binding national emissions targets while making meaningful progress toward combating the problem. Action by China’s rapidly growing affluent classes may hold the key to long-term climate stability.
The Interpreter, 2022
It is difficult to imagine Xi Jinping brokering peace in Ukraine, but if China wants to be respected, this is a chance.