India’s Engagement in Global Climate Negotiations from Rio to Paris

Abstract

India’s positions in global climate negotiations have evolved over three distinct periods. The first period of international regime creation in the 1980s and 1990s saw India play an important role in building coalitions with developing countries to draw clear commitments from developed countries on emission reduction, finance, and technology transfers. In the second period from 2005 to 2010, marked by transition and contestation, India showed flexibility and put forth voluntary commitments, while opposing moves to dilute the concept of differentiated responsibility. The third period, from 2011 to 2015, was marked by Indian compromise with changing negotiation contours that pushed for symmetrical treatment of developing and developed countries in matters of differentiation. This chapter also explores the reasons for continuity and change in India’s positions over the decades.

India's Evolving Climate Diplomacy: Reassessing the Present, Envisioning the Future

“…During the second phase of transition and contestation, which lasted from 2005 to 2010, India demonstrated adaptability and made voluntary pledges while resisting attempts to weaken the notion of differentiated responsibility. Indian compromise with shifting negotiation parameters that pushed for symmetrical treatment of developing and developed countries in questions of distinction characterized the third term, which ran from 2011 to 2015 (Sengupta, 2019). India's participation in these negotiations has been motivated by a number of things, such as its goals for internal development, its wish to keep its strategic independence, and its desire to be acknowledged as an accountable player in the world arena.…”

India and Climate Change: Old Traditions, New Strategies

“…Dubash and Rajamani (2015) argue that India's negotiating position was largely defined within a foreign policy frame, with relatively little evolution in domestic politics around climate change. Climate policy was synonymous with foreign policy, and its main emphasis was on preparing diplomatically for negotiations to ensure that primary responsibility for mitigation rested with the developed country parties (Dasgupta, 2019;Sengupta, 2019). During this time, climate policy was handled collaboratively by the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) and the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MOEF), with a very small number of experienced officials (Dubash & Ghosh, 2019).…”

“…India was instrumental in constructing and propagating the principle of common but differentiated responsibility and respective capabilities, which lies at the core of India's strategy in the multilateral climate negotiations (Dasgupta, 2019;Sengupta, 2019). This principle creates a firewall between developed and developing country parties and serves as the basis of India's reluctance to avoid any legally binding climate mitigation commitments.…”

“…In addition, these emerging economies started having dialogues with the developed countries in other forums outside the UNFCCC process, such as the G8+5 Dialogue on Climate and Energy in 2008, the US-led Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate in 2009 and the G20 conferences (Mohan, 2017). Driven by global pressures for domestic climate action, India launched the National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC) in the lead up to the Copenhagen climate talks in December 2009 (Atteridge et al, 2012;Dubash, 2013b;Dubash & Joseph, 2016;Rastogi, 2011;Sengupta, 2019).…”

“…Negotiations were seen as a constraint and not as an opportunity, which in turn affected the approach of MEA officials (Nachiappan, 2019, p. 193). Sengupta (2019Sengupta ( , 2020 writes that the main reason for the long continuity in India's foreign policy on climate was a strong belief among these officials that their reasoning and positions were right and required no changing. This belief grew stronger in the face of the developed country parties' unwillingness to abide by their prior promises under the UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol.…”