IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-01239780.html

Equity, burden sharing and development pathways: reframing international climate negotiations

Author

Listed:
  • A. Mejean

    (CIRED - centre international de recherche sur l'environnement et le développement - Cirad - Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - AgroParisTech - ENPC - École nationale des ponts et chaussées - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • F. Lecocq

    (CIRED - centre international de recherche sur l'environnement et le développement - Cirad - Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - AgroParisTech - ENPC - École nationale des ponts et chaussées - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Y. Mulugetta

    (UCL - University College London [UCL])

Abstract

Distribution issues have been critical in international negotiations on climate change. These have been framed as a ‘burden sharing' problem since the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Three key difficulties are associated with this approach under a cap-and-trade system, namely the lack of consensus over what is equitable, uncertainty over estimates of policy costs, and lack of political realism and economic effectiveness of large-scale international transfers. These difficulties point to the risk of failure of post-2020 negotiations if these are based on the same premises of ‘sharing the emission reduction pie' within a cap-and-trade regime. History has shown that different development paths can lead to similar economic performances with contrasted emission intensities. This paper proposes some insights into what could constitute a way forward, by recasting the discussion about emission reductions from a development perspective. It concludes that climate negotiations should depart from the current framework and shift to a debate focused on choosing a development path that would address domestic issues, while aligning pure climate policies with development policies. © 2015, Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht.

Suggested Citation

  • A. Mejean & F. Lecocq & Y. Mulugetta, 2015. "Equity, burden sharing and development pathways: reframing international climate negotiations," Post-Print hal-01239780, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-01239780
    DOI: 10.1007/s10784-015-9302-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a
    for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Philipp Pattberg & Cille Kaiser & Oscar Widerberg & Johannes Stripple, 2022. "20 Years of global climate change governance research: taking stock and moving forward," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 295-315, June.
    2. Zou Ji & Fu Sha, 2015. "The challenges of the post-COP21 regime: interpreting CBDR in the INDC context," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 421-430, November.
    3. Valeria Costantini & Anil Markandya & Elena Paglialunga & Giorgia Sforna, 2018. "Impact and distribution of climatic damages: a methodological proposal with a dynamic CGE model applied to global climate negotiations," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 35(3), pages 809-843, December.
    4. Jean-Charles Hourcade & P.-R. Shukla, 2015. "Cancun’s paradigm shift and COP 21: to go beyond rhetoric," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 343-351, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-01239780. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.