IPIR lecture 11 - Global
environmental governance
Part 1 – State action. Gijsbert van Iterson Scholten
Climate governance
The bad news
The role of states & their national interests
Especially powerful ones: China, US, Europe
Conclusion
The bad news…
Source: https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/advance-article/doi/10.1093/biosci/biae087/7808595
2024 state of the climate report
25 out of 35 indicators on record-breaking highs (incl.
global temperatures, heat-related deaths, use of fossil
fuels and greenhouse gas emissions)
28 potential tipping points (/feedback mechanisms) that
could cause an irreversible speedup (e.g. melting ice,
permafrost, tree cover, ocean temperatures,
desertification and forest dieback)
Increasing number of researchers warning for societal
collapse
More bad news
Eradicating poverty leads to more demand for meat,
which causes additional methane emissions
AI has caused a 66% increase in Google’s emission of
greenhouse gasses (29% for Microsoft) compared to
2020 levels.
World peace might be a really good idea, as wars cause
immense environmental destruction. Unfortunately, we
now have more wars than ever before…
Who can save the planet?
Me and you?
International organizations?
States!
Beardsworth 2020
“Among an increasing complexity of social actors, the state still holds the
levers of power that are decisive in effecting social transformation.
Consequently, to one side of the empirical fact that countries constitute
the beef of the UNFCCC climate regime, I am arguing that the state
remains the primary vehicle of a politics of climate change.” (p. 380)
“my argument here is simple: (1) climate action must be of a political kind
if this action is to be coherent and effective, and the horizon of this
understanding of the political (comprehensive and effective action) is in a
vital sense defined by the state; (2) this political action redounds above
all to the agency and responsibility of the state both in relation to its own
citizenry and in relation to other states and their citizenry.” (p.380)
Beardsworth 2020 (continued)
“As the emerging literature on the Green New Deal implies,
the state can do the following”:
National level policies to steer the behaviour of
businesses and consumers towards a carbon-neutral
society. Regulated market economy
Set a best practice and offer leadership in climate action.
“major progress on the international climate agenda can
come, and perhaps can only come, through progressive
state action” (p. 381)
Nationally Determined Contributions
Back to realism!
States as the only relevant actors
Acting under conditions of anarchy
Looking after their own national interest
Power as a core variable
National interests
Pacific island nations have a real interest in
combating climate change: survival
Maldives, Tuvalu, Kiribati all had plans to buy
land elsewhere to remove their populations…
But at most have ‘soft’ power: moral appeals at
UNFCC summits and such
Most other (more powerful) countries define
their national interest in different ways
China
Declared goal: peak of emissions in 2030,
carbon neutrality by 2060
Massively investing in solar (and nuclear)
energy, electric cars, batteries etc.
Huge state subsidies (“Moonshot economics”!)
China’s national interest
Overriding concern: (economic) development
Also still building more coal plants than any
other country…
Domestic economic problems: new markets
needed
Want dominance in new global economic
sectors (solar, electric cars, batteries)
International responses: the US and
Europe
Tariffs!
Rather than following China’s lead, the US and
EU see China as an (unfair!) competitor.
Some action in US (Inflation Reduction Act),
some in Europe, but nowhere near enough and
not cooperative but conflictual. And fluctuating.
National interests of the Global West
Continued hegemony
Protecting existing industries for fear of mass
layoffs and social unrest
Can afford to invest in adaptation (‘curative
action’) rather than mitigation (‘prevention’)
Conclusion
Classic realist conundrum: states with a real
interest in combating climate change have no
power, states that have power have other
interests to look after
Hence: no successful action
Questions? Comments?
Questions? Comments?
What about middle powers?
What about the EU’s Green Deal? Still stands!
Innovation? (also in Europe and US!)
Citizen action in democracies?
