Research Articles: China and the European Union: Emerging Partners in Global Climate Governance?

Abstract

This article analyzes the historical dynamics of the relationship between China and the European Union (EU) in global climate governance. The evolution of this relationship is traced through three time periods: the early days of the United Nations (UN) climate regime (1992–2001), the road to the Copenhagen summit (2001–2009) and the post-Copenhagen phase with the launch of the Durban Platform (2009-present). The contribution aims to expose two of the major structural changes that define current global climate governance dynamics, i.e., globalization and the rise of China, and identify key challenges for an increased collaboration between China and the EU. It is concluded that the EU and China are gradually emerging as strategic partners in global climate governance, but that severe uncertainties regarding the future of the climate regime persist. In order to translate practical bilateral cooperation into more tangible outcomes in the multilateral sphere, a fine balance will have to be struck between traditional Chinese sensitivities regarding sovereignty and economic development, and the EU's desire for an international agreement with ambitious mitigation targets.

Notes

Notes

1. Conrad states that “[t]he contradiction between the astonishing dynamic of China's domestic climate policy agenda and its seemingly tenacious position in international climate negotiations … reveals much about a nation at the crossroads, undecided which way to turn. The alterations in China's political interests … are clearly evident in the domestic policy changes China introduced during previous years. However, China's leadership thus far has remained hesitant to translate this new set of interests fully into a coherent position in the international arena” (2012:435, emphasis added).

2. Afionis, for example, argues that “Member States … are vehemently opposed to the Commission taking over the negotiations. Member States are fine as long as the Commission acts like a 28th Member State and tries not to further limit their sovereignty in international affairs” (2011:357, emphasis added).