Achieving consensus in multilateral international negotiations: The case study of the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change

Carmela Bernardo,Lingfei Wang,Francesco Vasca,Yiguang Hong,Guodong Shi,Claudio Altafini

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abg8068

IF: 13.6

2021-12-17

Science Advances

Abstract:A dynamical model describes the negotiation process that led to the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change.

multidisciplinary sciences

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

China, the United States and the European Union: Multiple Bilateralism and Prospects for a New Climate Change Diplomacy

david belis,paul joffe,bart kerremans,ye qi

2015-01-01

Abstract:This article argues that one of the most significant evolutions in global climate politics in recent years is the redefinition of power relations that has emerged since the 2009 Copenhagen summit. In the run-up to a potential new climate deal at the 2015 Paris summit, a new climate change diplomacy may be emerging among three actors that are in many respects the most powerful and influential: China, the United States and the European Union. The rise of China is affecting many areas of global governance, but nowhere is it more evident than in the case of climate change, where a very specific mix of power politics, economic interests and normative environments defines the direction of the debate. This article explores how the latter three elements are shaping and re-shaping “multiple bilateralisms”1 between the US, China and the EU and identifies tentative steps toward stronger collective action. The article concludes that a new, perhaps more decentralized but potentially more inclusive approach on climate change is being established.2
Dynamic Grouping for Climate Change Negotiation: Facilitating Cooperation and Balancing Interests through Effective Strategies

Duo Zhang,Yuren Pang,Yu Qin

2023-07-26

Abstract:The current framework for climate change negotiation models presents several limitations that warrant further research and development. In this track, we discuss mainly two key areas for improvement, focusing on the geographical impacts and utility framework. In the aspects of geographical impacts, We explore five critical aspects: (1) the shift from local to global impact, (2) variability in climate change effects across regions, (3) heterogeneity in geographical location and political structures, and (4) collaborations between adjacent nations, (5) the importance of including historical and cultural factors influencing climate negotiations. Furthermore, we emphasize the need to refine the utility and rewards framework to reduce the homogeneity and the level of overestimating the climate mitigation by integrating the positive effects of saving rates into the reward function and heterogeneity among all regions. By addressing these limitations, we hope to enhance the accuracy and effectiveness of climate change negotiation models, enabling policymakers and stakeholders to devise targeted and appropriate strategies to tackle climate change at both regional and global levels.

Computers and Society,Artificial Intelligence
Three Models of Global Climate Governance: From Kyoto to Paris and Beyond

David Held,Charles Roger

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12617

2018-11-01

Global Policy

Abstract:Abstract The Paris Agreement has emerged as one of the world's most important international treaties. Many believe that it offers a new approach to the problem of climate change, can contribute significantly to the goal of reducing emissions, and may hold lessons for how to govern other cross‐border issues. As a result, it has been the focus of considerable debate among scholars and policy makers. But how precisely does Paris seek to govern global warming and is it likely to work in practice? We address this question by contrasting the Paris ‘model’ of climate governance with earlier ones associated with the Kyoto Protocol and Copenhagen Accord. These models have taken different approaches to the problem of governing climate change, each with attendant advantages and limitations. The Paris model advances upon earlier efforts in certain respects, but also blends elements from earlier models. We then lay out the central axes of the debate that has emerged about the future of the Paris model, and discuss research illuminating how it may operate in practice. The agreement's success will depend on how the agreement is implemented, and on how the UNFCCC process interacts with the complementary approaches to climate governance appearing beyond it. In many countries across the world, political leaders are now promising that by putting their nation first and ending intrusive international agreements and regimes, they can establish a new era of national greatness. Such forces may, in the future, constitute one of the most significant threats to the success of the Paris model, as well as other areas of international cooperation.

political science,international relations
The Paris Agreement and the new logic of international climate politics

ROBERT FALKNER

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2346.12708

IF: 4.985

2016-08-31

International Affairs

Abstract:This article reviews and assesses the outcome of the 21st Conference of the Parties (COP‐21) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), held in Paris in December 2015. It argues that the Paris Agreement breaks new ground in international climate policy, by acknowledging the primacy of domestic politics in climate change and allowing countries to set their own level of ambition for climate change mitigation. It creates a framework for making voluntary pledges that can be compared and reviewed internationally, in the hope that global ambition can be increased through a process of ‘naming and shaming’. By sidestepping distributional conflicts, the Paris Agreement manages to remove one of the biggest barriers to international climate cooperation. It recognizes that none of the major powers can be forced into drastic emissions cuts. However, instead of leaving mitigation efforts to an entirely bottom‐up logic, it embeds country pledges in an international system of climate accountability and a ‘ratchet mechanism’, thus offering the chance of more durable international cooperation. At the same time, it is far from clear whether the treaty can actually deliver on the urgent need to de‐carbonize the global economy. The past record of climate policies suggests that governments have a tendency to express lofty aspirations but avoid tough decisions. For the Paris Agreement to make a difference, the new logic of ‘pledge and review’ will need to mobilize international and domestic pressure and generate political momentum behind more substantial climate policies worldwide. It matters, therefore, whether the Paris Agreement's new approach can be made to work.

international relations
Exploring Global Climate Policy Futures and Their Representation in Integrated Assessment Models

Thomas Hickmann,Christoph Bertram,Frank Biermann,Elina Brutschin,Elmar Kriegler,Jasmine E. Livingston,Silvia Pianta,Keywan Riahi,Bas Van Ruijven,Detlef Van Vuuren

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v10i3.5328

2022-09-21

Politics and Governance

Abstract:The Paris Agreement, adopted in 2015, paved the way for a new hybrid global climate governance architecture with both bottom-up and top-down elements. While governments can choose individual climate goals and actions, a global stocktake and a ratcheting-up mechanism have been put in place with the overall aim to ensure that collective efforts will prevent increasing adverse impacts of climate change. Integrated assessment models show that current combined climate commitments and policies of national governments fall short of keeping global warming to 1.5 °C or 2 °C above preindustrial levels. Although major greenhouse gas emitters, such as China, the European Union, India, the United States under the Biden administration, and several other countries, have made new pledges to take more ambitious climate action, it is highly uncertain where global climate policy is heading. Scenarios in line with long-term temperature targets typically assume a simplistic and hardly realistic level of harmonization of climate policies across countries. Against this backdrop, this article develops four archetypes for the further evolution of the global climate governance architecture and matches them with existing sets of scenarios developed by integrated assessment models. By these means, the article identifies knowledge gaps in the current scenario literature and discusses possible research avenues to explore the pre-conditions for successful coordination of national policies towards achieving the long-term target stipulated in the Paris Agreement.

political science
China as a Transformative Power in the Shaping of a New Global Climate Regime

Jiahua Pan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-0221-5_19

2022-01-01

Climate Change Economics

Abstract:The Paris Agreement is a power contest among the major forces and a demonstration of the changing landscape in international climate negotiation in the future.
The Process and Impact of Global Climate Governance: A Case Study of the Paris Climate Agreement

Xuming Qian,Jiaxin li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/546/3/032035

2020-07-01

IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science

Abstract:Abstract Global climate governance is a global public good, which has received more and more attention in recent years. Climate governance has three characteristics: multi-level, political and lagging. The paper examines the development process of global climate governance and its existing defects, and analyses the impact of the Paris Agreement on global climate governance. Since the entry into force of the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, several legal documents have been issued in phases, of which the Paris Agreement is the first major achievement of international climate governance. Although the Paris Agreement adopts the obvious weakness of the model in which the member nations determine their own contribution, it is also a very useful attempt. The effectiveness of the Paris Agreement still depends on the independent contributions of various countries. Therefore, in climate governance, it is necessary to lead countries to actively fulfil their obligations.
Paris Agreement: a Roadmap to Tackle Climate and Environment Challenges

Lixin Wu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/nsr/nww030

IF: 20.6

2016-01-01

National Science Review

Abstract:Adopted by the 196 Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change（UNFCCC）last December,and signed by 175 countries on 22 April 2016,the Paris Agreement provides guidelines for global efforts in addressing climate change,and establishes a five-year review cycle for detailed work programs of cutting emissions,differentiation between countries as to their responsibilities for action,and financing for poor countries to deal with rising temperatures.
From Kyoto to Paris and Beyond: The Emerging Politics of Climate Change

Saurabh Thakur

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/09749284211027252

2021-07-16

Abstract:Anthropogenic climate change has emerged as the most disruptive socio-political issue in the last few decades. The Kyoto Protocol’s failure to curb the rising greenhouse gases emissions pushed the UNFCCC-led negotiations towards a more flexible, non-binding agreement at the Paris COP21 meeting in 2015. The Paris Agreement’s hybrid approach to climate change governance, where flexible measures like the nationally determined commitments are balanced against the ambition of limiting the global temperature within the two-degree range, ensured the emergence of an increasingly complex and multi-stakeholder climate change regime. The article outlines the roadmap of the transition from the top-down approach of Kyoto Protocol to the legally non-binding, bottom-up approaches adopted for the post-Paris phase. The article outlines the post-Paris developments in international climate politics, which hold long-term geopolitical and geoeconomic implications. The article focuses on the fundamental shifts and balances within the UNFCCC architecture and examines the four fundamental features of this transition—the interpretation of differentiation and common but differentiated responsibilities, the evolving role of emerging economies in the negotiations, the rising profile of non-party stakeholders in shaping the climate action strategies and the emergence of climate justice movements as an alternate site of climate action.
Exploring Fair and Ambitious Mitigation Contributions under the Paris Agreement Goals

Xunzhang Pan,Michel den Elzen,Niklas Hoehne,Fei Teng,Lining Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2017.04.020

IF: 6.424

2017-01-01

Environmental Science & Policy

Abstract:In order to achieve the Paris Agreement goals of keeping the temperature rise well below 2 degrees C or even 1.5 degrees C, all countries would need to make fair and ambitious contributions to reducing emissions. A vast majority of countries have adopted reduction targets by 2030 in their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). There are many alternative ways to analyze the fairness of national mitigation contributions. This article uses a model framework based on six equity principles of effort-sharing, to allocate countries' reduction targets under global emissions scenarios consistent with meeting the Paris climate goals. It further compares these allocations with the NDCs. The analysis shows that most countries need to adopt more ambitious reduction targets by 2030 to meet 2 degrees C, and even more for 1.5 degrees C. In the context of 2 degrees C, the NDCs of the United States of America and the European Union lack ambition with respect to the approaches that emphasize responsibility; China's NDC projection falls short of satisfying any approach in 2030. In the context of 1.5 degrees C, only India, by implementing its most ambitious efforts by 2030, could be in line with most equity principles. For most countries, the NDCs would use most of their allowed emissions space for the entire 21 st century by 2030, posing a major challenge to transform to a pathway consistent with their fair contributions in the long-term.
Research on the Synergy Mechanism of Multiple Subjects in Global Climate Governance: Based on the Perspective of the Evolutionary Game of Carbon Neutral Strategy Between China, the US, and the EU

Di Wang,Wei Dou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.138306

IF: 11.1

2023-01-01

Journal of Cleaner Production

Abstract:It is difficult to achieve ideal results only based on a single subject for governing global climate issues, and the synergy co-governance of multiple subjects may address this difficulty. Based on the different resource advantages and interests of China, the US, and the EU, the roles they assume and play in the governance of global climate issues are different. In this study, we explore the competition and interaction between the carbon neutral strategies of China, the US, and the EU under different scenarios through the dynamic evolution game model and use simulation analysis to simulate the impact of changes in the initial values of the main parameters on the evolution trend of the three-party game strategy under a variety of scenarios, in order to explore the dynamic evolution path of the behavior of the three parties in the game and the stabilization strategy. The result of this study suggests that: (1) The strategic choices of different participants in global climate governance interact with each other. (2) The ideal strategy combination may be achieved when the carbon neutral strategy game is carried out between China, the US, and the EU under certain conditions. (3) If the initial willingness to cooperate changes, with the Evolutionary Stable Strategy (ESS) unchanged, only the convergence rate of the evolutionary game subject's strategy choices will be affected. (4) The result of the sensitivity analysis suggests that certain policy conflicts exist in the evolution process of carbon neutrality strategies in China, the US, and the EU. Besides, the evolution path will deviate from the ideal state with the change in the benefits of different entities. The conclusion of this study can provide a valuable reference for China, the US, and the EU to divide responsibilities and form a consensus in the synergy governance mechanism, such that the effectiveness of global climate governance can be increased.
Dilemma and Prospect of International Climate Negotiation

WANG Su-chun,WANG Yong

DOI: https://doi.org/10.13878/j.cnki.yjxk.2013.04.004

2013-01-01

Abstract:Climate change is a typically global environmental problem that requires all the countries and organizations to jointly cope with, and the international climate negotiation system emerges as the time require. The climate negotiations are full of contradiction, challenge and gaming. Although the consensus of reducing greenhouse gas emissions has come into being, the free-rider phenomenon still exists and, at one time, the ne-gotiation was trapped in the prisoner?s dilemma because of the conflicts between partial interests and general in-terests. The international climate negotiation is influenced by many factors such as climate, politics, economy and technology. In the future, countries should seek international cooperation, strive for international sources, consult and negotiate democratically, respect state sovereignty and persist in sustainable development in the in-ternational climate negotiations.
Simulation of Climate Negotiation Strategies Between China and the U.S. Based on Game Theory

Jin Zhu-Gang,Cai Wen-Jia,Wang Can

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3724/sp.j.1248.2014.034

IF: 4.746

2014-01-01

Advances in Climate Change Research

Abstract:Consensus and disagreements between China and the U.S. are the key factors influencing the direction that global climate negotiation is heading for. By taking into account the uncertainties of temperature increment and its impact on GDP growth, together with the positive, negative and spillover effects of climate change investment on utility, a strategic simulation model including China and the U.S. is developed. Based on utility and game theory, a sensitivity analysis is conducted. The results show that the first-mover disadvantage exists in the game, and the scale of each country's climate change investment under non-cooperative scenario is too small to ensure the 2 degrees C target. To guarantee the stability and win-win basis for global cooperation, the simulation results also indicate that it makes sense to assist and compensate technology transfer and funding to China.
The Copenhagen Climate Change Conference from the Technoscience Perspective

XIAO Lei-bo,CAI Zhong

DOI: https://doi.org/10.13878/j.cnki.yjxk.2011.02.001

2011-01-01

Abstract:Technoscience-science under influence of society,politics and economy-is a kind of constructive practical activity in a seamless network of dynamic forces coming from human factors and non-human factors.The factors such as politics,science,technology,society and nature,etc are intertwined inseparably.The goal of Copenhagen Climate Change Conference is to reach a new agreement or establish a network or coalition of working countries based on the game playing of the so called "scientific evidences".However,scientific "evidences" from each party differed greatly,a coalition could not be established and the conference almost failed.Though there are principles of fairness between the developed and developing academics,the gap of climate research leads to extremely unfair political and economic consequences.In order to enhance the asymmetric bargaining position,China has to strengthen independent scientific research on climatology to strive for more discourse power.
Opinion: in the Wake of Paris Agreement, Scientists Must Embrace New Directions for Climate Change Research.

Olivier Boucher,Valentin Bellassen,Hélène Benveniste,Philippe Ciais,Patrick Criqui,Céline Guivarch,Hervé Le Treut,Sandrine Mathy,Roland Séférian

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1607739113

2016-01-01

Abstract:In this paper we analyze research gaps and identify new directions of research in relation to a number of facets of the Paris Agreement, including the new 1.5 °C objective, the articulation between near-term and long-term mitigation pathways, negative emissions, verification, climate finance, non-Parties stakeholders, and adaptation.
Evolution of Cooperation among BRICS Countries in Global Climate Governance: From UNFCCC to the Paris Agreement

Qi Shen,Xiaolong Zou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.24833/2071-8160-2024-1-94-65-85

2024-03-12

MGIMO Review of International Relations

Abstract:In the complex world of international negotiations, nation-states often navigate a spectrum of political relationships, from alliances and partnerships to competition and rivalry. Despite their diverse backgrounds and interests, the BRICS countries collectively constitute a significant proportion of global greenhouse gas emissions. Drawing upon the principles of neoliberal institutionalism, this study delves into the origins of the BRICS cooperation mechanism and its impact on climate cooperation among its member states. Our analysis traces the climate policies of BRICS nations since the inception of the UNFCCC in 1992, taking into consideration factors such as their level of economic development, environmental vulnerability, and the broader international political context. We argue that these three factors primarily shape the dynamics of alliance and partnership within BRICS regarding climate governance, although underlying competition may also influence collaborative efforts. This study aims to stimulate further theoretical discourse on the formation of political alliances within the context of global climate governance.
The Dynamics of Consensus Building in Intracultural and Intercultural Negotiations

Leigh Anne Liu,Ray Friedman,Bruce Barry,Michele J. Gelfand,Zhi-Xue Zhang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839212453456

IF: 12.529

2012-01-01

Administrative Science Quarterly

Abstract:This research examines the dynamics of consensus building in intracultural and intercultural negotiations achieved through the convergence of mental models between negotiators. Working from a dynamic constructivist view, according to which the effects of culture are socially and contextually contingent, we theorize and show in two studies of U.S. and Chinese negotiators that while consensus might be generally easier to achieve in intracultural negotiation settings than intercultural settings, the effects of culture depend on the epistemic and social motives of the parties. As hypothesized, we find that movement toward consensus (in the form of mental model convergence) is more likely among intracultural than intercultural negotiating dyads and that negotiators’ epistemic and social motives moderated these effects: need for closure inhibited consensus more for intercultural than intracultural dyads, while concern for face fostered consensus more for intercultural than intracultural dyads. Our theory and findings suggest that consensus building is not necessarily more challenging in cross-cultural negotiations but depends on the epistemic and social motivations of the individuals negotiating.
Global Digital Analysis for Science Diplomacy on Climate Change and Sustainable Development

Miguel Fuentes,Juan Pablo Cárdenas,Gastón Olivares,Eric Rasmussen,Soledad Salazar,Carolina Urbina,Gerardo Vidal,Diego Lawler

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su152215747

IF: 3.9

2023-11-09

Sustainability

Abstract:Addressing climate change requires innovative, collective action and robust international collaboration. Through joint efforts, nations can significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions, pioneer sustainable technologies, and implement effective adaptation measures. Science diplomacy and knowledge sharing hold the potential to bolster global stability and peace by directly confronting climate change challenges. Therefore, it becomes imperative to evaluate a country's alignment of its scientific knowledge system (SKS) with international guidelines. This study delineates the global scientific discourse on climate change and juxtaposes the alignment between an individual nation's research endeavors and United Nations resolutions concerning climate change and sustainable development. Our methodology integrates data extraction from scientific research databases with advanced textual analysis tools, highlighting this study's unique focus on the intersection of climate change and UN resolutions. To deliver an empirical analysis, we leveraged complex network theory and advanced text-processing techniques. Our findings demonstrate the trajectory of global scientific output related to these themes, segmented by countries and coupled with CO2 emissions data, key disciplines, and collaboration networks. These insights are instrumental for leaders, policymakers, and stakeholders, highlighting areas of convergence and divergence in national research initiatives essential for achieving global climate goals. Such knowledge is strategically useful for crafting purpose-driven public policies and honoring enduring multilateral pledges to address the climate crisis proactively.

environmental sciences,environmental studies,green & sustainable science & technology
Decentralized voluntary agreements do not reduce emissions in a climate change experiment

Alessandro Del Ponte,Aidas Masiliūnas,Noah Lim

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2024.108438

IF: 6.536

2024-11-01

Ecological Economics

Abstract:Can climate accords based on decentralized and voluntary agreements successfully reduce carbon emissions? We designed an economic experiment to study the effectiveness of the best-known mechanisms to foster international cooperation on climate change mitigation: climate pledges, financial penalties, and peer evaluation. We test each mechanism both separately and together. In the climate pledge treatments, participants could pledge their desired emissions target, approved by majority vote. In the treatments with financial penalties, failure to meet pledges triggered monetary sanctions. In the peer evaluation treatments, participants could evaluate each other, which determined who would receive an additional nonmonetary environmental prize. We find that most participants joined climate agreements and met their pledges, but pledges were insufficiently ambitious. As a result, neither pledges, financial penalties, nor peer evaluation reduced emissions. These results question the effectiveness of decentralized and voluntary climate agreements, such as the Paris Agreement.

economics,environmental studies,environmental sciences,ecology

Achieving consensus in multilateral international negotiations: The case study of the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change

China, the United States and the European Union: Multiple Bilateralism and Prospects for a New Climate Change Diplomacy

Dynamic Grouping for Climate Change Negotiation: Facilitating Cooperation and Balancing Interests through Effective Strategies

Three Models of Global Climate Governance: From Kyoto to Paris and Beyond

The Paris Agreement and the new logic of international climate politics

Exploring Global Climate Policy Futures and Their Representation in Integrated Assessment Models

China as a Transformative Power in the Shaping of a New Global Climate Regime

The Process and Impact of Global Climate Governance: A Case Study of the Paris Climate Agreement

Paris Agreement: a Roadmap to Tackle Climate and Environment Challenges

From Kyoto to Paris and Beyond: The Emerging Politics of Climate Change

Exploring Fair and Ambitious Mitigation Contributions under the Paris Agreement Goals

Research on the Synergy Mechanism of Multiple Subjects in Global Climate Governance: Based on the Perspective of the Evolutionary Game of Carbon Neutral Strategy Between China, the US, and the EU

Dilemma and Prospect of International Climate Negotiation

Simulation of Climate Negotiation Strategies Between China and the U.S. Based on Game Theory

The Copenhagen Climate Change Conference from the Technoscience Perspective

Opinion: in the Wake of Paris Agreement, Scientists Must Embrace New Directions for Climate Change Research.

Evolution of Cooperation among BRICS Countries in Global Climate Governance: From UNFCCC to the Paris Agreement

The Dynamics of Consensus Building in Intracultural and Intercultural Negotiations

Global Digital Analysis for Science Diplomacy on Climate Change and Sustainable Development

Decentralized voluntary agreements do not reduce emissions in a climate change experiment