Climate governance in an international system under conservative hegemony: the role of major powers

Abstract

In the last five years, climate change has been established as a central civilizational driver of our time. As a result of this development, the most diversified social processes -as well as the fields of science which study them -have had their dynamics altered. In International Relations, this

The influence of mitigation policies of the International Climate Change Regime in the reduction of greenhouse gases in the area of transport

“…China, being one of the countries most vulnerable to climate changes, is very tempted to grow quickly in an attempt to alleviate the impact on the country and its people when the situation becomes more critical. According to Viola et al [20], the Chinese reformist elite is located in high development centers, especially in the city of Shanghai and in the nuclear, solar and wind energy sectors; also the awareness of the threats of climate change is greater in coastal regions than in mainland China. According to these authors, several factors combined can explain the growth of these reformist forces in the country, the first being the strong drivers for using sources of non-fossil fuels.…”

“…It is important to note the evolution of this framework and its GHG emission reductions in the future; j) with respect to the distribution of countries within the categories listed in the Kyoto Protocol -Annex I and Non-annex I, it may be important and relevant that the Conference of Parties (COPs) discuss the current validity of the initial division that was made, in view of the results that are submitted by countries related to their GHG reduction emissions. According to the classification of Viola et al [20], the countries that stand out in the leadership of climate global governance have behaved towards their commitments as follows: conservative (India, Russia, Argentina, United Arab Emirates, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Egypt, Nigeria, Pakistan, Thailand, Ukraine, Venezuela and Vietnam); moderately conservative (United States, China, Brazil, Canada, Colombia, South Africa, Malaysia, Mexico, Turkey, Israel, Australia, Bangladesh and the Philippines); and reformist (Norway, Taiwan, Switzerland, Singapore, European Union, South Korea and Japan). As Putnam [21], in its findings of significant evidence on the links between diplomacy and domestic policies, when he points to the possibility of synergy on connected matters, in which the strategic moves in the negotiating tables facilitate unexpected coalitions in the second stage of the negotiation, it could be foreseen, in the next rounds of the Convention negotiations in the COPs, the joint action of countries like Brazil, China, Mexico, Argentina, India and others, with interest and potential in this sense, for the definition of emission growth targets of GHG per unit of Gross Domestic Product (GDP).…”

The Challenges of the Anthropocene: From International Environmental Politics to Global Governance

“…As detailed in another paper (VIOLA; FRANCHINI; RIBEIRO, 2012), among the system's great and middlepowers, only the European Union, Japan and South Korea operate as relatively reformist forces, while India and Russia are conservative and the United States, China, Brazil and Indonesia behave as moderate conservative agents. An update of the role of these actors in 2017 shows that Japan and South Korea became moderate conservatives while the United States retreated to conservative positions.…”

Megacities in climate governance: the case of Rio de Janeiro

“…Topics such as new technologies, migration, environmental refugees, human rights violations, depletion of natural resources, climate change and energy security, take place on the agenda of the major problems of geopolitics and political ecology. (Viola et al, 2012), and allowing inevitable turbulence and global concerns. The current globalization is marked by the "simultaneity of scientific outbursts and technological outbreaks, ongoing and interactive, in all fields of knowledge, activity and human existence" (Dreifuss, 1996: 17).…”