Emerging powers, North-South relations and global climate politics

Abstract

There is a widespread perception that power is shifting in global politics and that emerging powers are assuming a more prominent, active and important role. This article examines the role of emerging powers such as China, India, Brazil and South Africa (BASIC) in climate change politics and the extent to which their rise makes the already difficult problem of climate change still more intractable—due to their rapid economic development, growing power‐political ambitions, rising greenhouse gas emissions and apparent unwillingness to accept global environmental ‘responsibility’. By reviewing the developments in global climate politics between the 1992 Rio Earth Summit and Rio+20, this article unsettles the image of a clear shift in power, stressing instead the complexity of the changes that have taken place at the level of international bargaining as well as at the domestic and transnational levels. Within this picture, it is important not to overestimate the shifts in power that have taken place, or to underplay the continued relevance of understanding climate change within the North–South frame. Emerging powers will certainly remain at the top table of climate change negotiations, but their capacity actively to shape the agenda has been limited and has, in some respects, declined. Even though emerging powers have initiated and offered greater action on climate change, both internationally and domestically, they have been unable to compel the industrialized world to take more serious action on this issue, or to stop them from unpicking several of the key elements and understandings of the original Rio deal. At the same time, developing world coalitions on climate change have also fragmented, raising questions about the continued potency of the ‘global South’ in future climate politics.

O Que Gestão Estratégica Tem a Ver com Capitalismo(s)?

“…Esta literatura aponta que, ao invés de um futuro marcado pelo acirramento da dominação imperial dos EUA ou até mesmo por um colapso global de grandes proporções (como a ascensão de um fascismo global, por exemplo), o Ocidente deveria ajudar a construir condições para que economias emergentes assumam novas responsabilidades estratégicas (e.g., B. Santos, 2009;Hurrell & Sengupta, 2012;Shefner & Fernández-Kelly, 2011;Sklair, 2011).…”

“…Por meio de atribuição de atraso e ameaças ao resto do mundo, essa literatura reforça a invisibilização dos estrategistas de Estado que protagonizam a expansão do capitalismo histórico ocidentalista e a deslegitimação da autoridade de estrategistas do governo do resto do mundo. A literatura de estudos internacionais ressalta que a literatura euro-americana continua atribuindo problemas ao outro eternamente atrasado para legitimar a autoridade do ocidentalismo e de intervenções correspondentes (Arrighi, 2012;Hurrell & Sengupta, 2012). Autores de ciência política nos EUA ressaltam que as seguidas crises do capitalismo financeiro mostraram que as mais visíveis e conhecidas formas de corrupção -tais como subornos -não ocorrem somente em Washington "porque a indústria literalmente impregnou o núcleo do governo" (Jacobs & King, 2010, p. 797).…”

“…A difusão do temor ocidentalista de que economias emergentes e seus estrategistas criem e disseminem um tipo ameaçador de capitalismo -em especial o chamado capitalismo de Estado -ajuda a explicar o reconhecimento de diferenças e os processos correspondentes de gestão das diferenças pelo pós-Consenso de Washington (Gonçalves, 2005;Hurrell, 2009). Por meio de políticas de engajamento e resistência a tais mecanismos, economias emergentes mantiveram considerável poder de governança por meio de reestruturação de suas organizações e instituições de governo (Diniz, 2000;Eaton & Dickovick, 2004;Swyngedouw, 2005) e de crescente importância nos diferentes âmbitos de governança global (Hurrell & Sengupta, 2012) e também na promoção de alternativas responsáveis ao ocidentalismo extremado. Lançada em 2003, como um contramovimento ao avanço do novo imperialismo e à crise do capitalismo financeiro, a iniciativa IBAS, que reúne Índia, Brasil e África do Sul, ilustra, no âmbito das economias emergentes, não apenas "a renovada centralidade do desenvolvimentismo, mas também a ênfase renovada na cooperação Sul-Sul" (Lima & Hirst, 2009, p. 50 , a partir de então sob uma perspectiva desenvolvimentista transnacionalista em resposta ao avanço do novo imperialismo.…”

Doing Biopolitics Differently? Radical Potential in the Post-2015 MDG and SDG Debates

“…The difficulties of agreeing on international action have been evident in the climate change negotiations, where China and India in particular have opposed legal targets for developing countries, and the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities has been emphasised (Hurrell and Sengupta, 2012). In the early stages of discussions on the SDGs India made it clear that sustainable development targets should only apply to developed countries, with a senior negotiator stating publicly that '[w]e are against mandatory SDGs for all nations' (Chauhan, 2012).…”

“…However, there are at least a few reasons why broader structural features of global politics may encourage more flux in the contemporary politics of development. The so-called 'rise of the South' (UNDP, 2013) is increasingly complicating the image of a uni-polar world in which Western 'civilisation' is hegemonic (Green et al, 2012;Hurrell and Sengupta, 2012). The protracted financial and economic crises since 2007, and their continuing fall-out, have stimulated a revival of interest in discussions of the contradictions of capitalism, the green economy in all its forms, and alternative models of development (Green et al, 2012;Marglin and Banuri, 2013;Tienhaara, 2014).…”