IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

China's Participation in Global Environmental Negotiations

  • Huifang Tian
  • John Whalley

In the paper we discuss China's participation in both the 2009 Copenhagen negotiations on a post-Kyoto global climate change regime currently under way and out beyond Copenhagen in further negotiations likely to follow. China is now both the largest and most rapidly growing carbon emitter, and has much higher emission intensity relative to GDP than OECD countries. In the Copenhagen negotiation, there will be strong pressure on China to take on emissions reduction commitments and China's concern will be to do so in ways that allow continuation of a high growth rate and fast development. Central to this will be maintaining access to OECD markets for manufactured exports in face of potential environmental protectionism. Thus the broad approach seems likely to be to take on environmental commitments in part in return for stronger guarantees of access to export markets abroad. This involves directly linked trade and environmental commitments although how linkage can be made explicit is a major issue. More narrowly, the issues that seem likely to dominate the climate change negotiating agenda from China's viewpoint are the interpretation of the common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR) principle adopted in Kyoto, the choice of negotiating instruments and form of emission commitments, and the size (and form) of accompanying financial funds for adaptation and innovation. We suggest that a possible interpretation of CBDR reflecting China's desire to leave room to grow when undertaking emission reduction commitments might be for China to take on emission intensity commitments while OECD countries take on emission level commitments. Larger funds and flexibility in their use will also raise China's willingness to make commitments.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL:
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc in its series NBER Working Papers with number 14460.

in new window

Date of creation: Oct 2008
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:14460
Contact details of provider: Postal: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138, U.S.A.
Phone: 617-868-3900
Web page:

More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Pizer, William, 2005. "The Case for Intensity Targets," Discussion Papers dp-05-02, Resources For the Future.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:14460. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ()

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.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.