Abstract
This essay critically examines why the United States Government (USG) has been reluctant to accept legally binding greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets (LBGERTs). The paper notes that four factors are essential in explaining this, namely the economy, scepticism about climate science, hegemonic drives and a quest for distributive justice. Notwithstanding, USG reluctance to accept LBGERTs is shaped by the convergence of interests of key actors in US political system who conceive government action to combat climate as a threat to their interests, although this can be reinforced or dissuaded by party ideology. While party ideology could strengthen or weaken US actions to fight climate change, the shielding of its sovereignty remains paramount regardless of ideological differences between the Democrats and Republicans. It indicates that while it could be argued that the Kyoto Protocol was a failed regime given the wide acceptance of the Paris Agreement, the planned withdrawal of US from Paris Agreement demonstrates that the Kyoto Protocol was not wholly a failure and buttressed the need to have a legally binding agreement (LBA). Also, it argues that the success of the Paris Agreement is a function of trust, reputation and reciprocity among countries that are parties to it.
References
Afionis, S., 2017. The European Union in International Climate Change Negotiations. Taylor & Francis.10.4324/9781315773469Search in Google Scholar
Anderson, J.W., 1997. Climate Change, Clinton and Kyoto. The Negotiations over Global Warming. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future (RFF).Search in Google Scholar
Antilla, L., 2005. Climate of scepticism: US newspaper coverage of the science of climate change. Global environmental change, 15(4), pp.338-352.10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2005.08.003Search in Google Scholar
Atkinson, M.M. and Coleman, W.D., 1992. Policy networks, policy communities and the problems of governance. Governance, 5(2), pp.154-180.10.1111/j.1468-0491.1992.tb00034.xSearch in Google Scholar
Babiker, M.H., Jacoby, H.D., Reilly, J.M. and Reiner, D.M., 2002. The evolution of a climate regime: Kyoto to Marrakech and beyond. Environmental Science & Policy, 5(3), pp.195-206.10.1016/S1462-9011(02)00035-7Search in Google Scholar
Bailey, C.J., 2015. US Climate Change Policy. Surrey: Ashgate Publishing Limited.10.4324/9781315548661Search in Google Scholar
Bell, D. 1973. The Coming of Post-Industrial Society. New York: Basic Books.Search in Google Scholar
Bennett, C.J., 1991. What is policy convergence and what causes it?. British journal of political science, 21(2), pp.215-233.10.1017/S0007123400006116Search in Google Scholar
Bergesen, H. O., and Sydnes, A. K., 1992. Protection of the Global Climate–Ecological Utopia or Just a Long Way to Go?, pp. 35-47, Green Globe Yearbook, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Bieler, A. and Morton, A.D., 2004. A critical theory route to hegemony, world order and historical change: neo-Gramscian perspectives in International Relations. Capital & Class, 28(1), pp.85-113.10.1177/030981680408200106Search in Google Scholar
Bodansky, D., 2010. The Copenhagen climate change conference: a postmortem. American Journal of International Law, 104(2), pp.230-240.10.5305/amerjintelaw.104.2.0230Search in Google Scholar
Boykoff, M.T. and Boykoff, J.M., 2007. Climate change and journalistic norms: A case-study of US mass-media coverage. Geoforum, 38(6), pp.1190-1204.10.1016/j.geoforum.2007.01.008Search in Google Scholar
Buchner, B., Carraro, C. and Cersosimo, I., 2002. Economic consequences of the US withdrawal from the Kyoto/Bonn Protocol. Climate Policy, 2(4), pp.273-292.10.3763/cpol.2002.0234Search in Google Scholar
Bulkeley, H. and Newell, P., 2015. Governing climate change. Routledge.10.4324/9781315758237Search in Google Scholar
Burnham, P., 2006. Neo-Gramscian hegemony and the international order. In Global Restructuring, State, Capital and Labour (pp. 28-44). Palgrave Macmillan UK.10.1057/9780230627307_3Search in Google Scholar
Busch, P.O. and Jörgens, H., 2005a. International patterns of environmental policy change and convergence. European Environment, 15(2), pp.80-101.10.1002/eet.374Search in Google Scholar
Busch, P.O. and Jörgens, H., 2005b. The international sources of policy convergence: explaining the spread of environmental policy innovations. Journal of European public policy, 12(5), pp.860-884.10.1080/13501760500161514Search in Google Scholar
Caney, S., 2010. Climate change and the duties of the advantaged. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 13, pp. 203-228.10.1080/13698230903326331Search in Google Scholar
Carafa, L., 2015. Is the US-China Climate Agreement a Game-changer?. The International Spectator, 50(1), pp.8-14.10.1080/03932729.2015.999419Search in Google Scholar
Carroll, W., Graham, N., Lang, M.K., Yunker, Z. and McCartney, K.D., 2018. The Corporate Elite and the Architecture of Climate Change Denial: A Network Analysis of Carbon Capital’s Reach into Civil Society. Canadian Review of Sociology/Revue canadienne de sociologie, 55(3), pp.425-450.10.1111/cars.12211Search in Google Scholar
Chasek, P.S., Downie, D.L. and Brown, J.W., 2013. Global environmental politics. 6th ed. Boulder: Westview Press.Search in Google Scholar
Christoff, P., 2010. Cold climate in Copenhagen: China and the United States at COP15. Environmental Politics, 19(4), pp.637-656.10.1080/09644016.2010.489718Search in Google Scholar
Christoff, P., 2016. The promissory note: COP 21 and the Paris Climate Agreement. Environmental Politics, 25(5), pp.765-787.10.1080/09644016.2016.1191818Search in Google Scholar
Coon, C.E., 2001. Why President Bush Is Right to Abandon the Kyoto Protocol [online]. Available at: <http://www.heritage.org/environment/report/why-president-bush-right-abandon-the-kyoto-protocol> [Accessed 25 November 2017].Search in Google Scholar
Cox, R.W., 1983. Gramsci, hegemony and international relations: an essay in method. Millennium, 12(2), pp.162-175.10.1177/03058298830120020701Search in Google Scholar
Cox, R.W. and Sinclair, T.J., 1996. Approaches to world order (No. 40). Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511607905Search in Google Scholar
Depledge, J., 2005. Against the grain: the United States and the global climate change regime. Global Change, Peace & Security, 17(1), pp.11-27.10.1080/0951274052000319337Search in Google Scholar
Dimitrov, R.S., 2016. The Paris agreement on climate change: Behind closed doors. Global Environmental Politics, 16(3), pp. 1-11.10.1162/GLEP_a_00361Search in Google Scholar
Donnelly, J., 2000. Realism and international relations. Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511612510Search in Google Scholar
Doyle, T., McEachern, D. and MacGregor, S., 2015. Environment and politics. Routledge.10.4324/9780203383704Search in Google Scholar
Dunlap, R.E., 2013. Climate change skepticism and denial: An introduction. American behavioral scientist, 57(6), pp.691-698.10.1177/0002764213477097Search in Google Scholar
Dunlap, R.E. and McCright, A.M., 2008. A widening gap: Republican and Democratic views on climate change. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 50(5), pp.26-35.10.3200/ENVT.50.5.26-35Search in Google Scholar
Evans, A.M. and Krueger, J.I., 2016. Bounded prospection in dilemmas of trust and reciprocity. Review of General Psychology, 20(1), p.17.10.1037/gpr0000063Search in Google Scholar
European Commission Joint Research Centre, 2016. Trends in Global CO2 emissions: 2016 report (pp. 42-43) [online] Available at: <http://edgar.jrc.ec.europa.eu/news_docs/jrc-2016-trends-in-global-co2-emissions-2016-report-103425.pdf> [Accessed 12 November 2017].Search in Google Scholar
Falk, A. and Fischbacher, U., 2006. A theory of reciprocity. Games and economic behavior, 54(2), pp.293-315.10.1016/j.geb.2005.03.001Search in Google Scholar
Fehr, E. and Gächter, S., 2000. Fairness and retaliation: The economics of reciprocity. The journal of economic perspectives, 14(3), pp.159-181.10.1257/jep.14.3.159Search in Google Scholar
Feiock, R.C., 2007. Rational choice and regional governance. Journal of Urban Affairs, 29(1), pp.47-63.10.1111/j.1467-9906.2007.00322.xSearch in Google Scholar
Feldman, E.J. and Milch, J., 1982. Technocracy versus democracy: The comparative politics of international airports. Auburn House.Search in Google Scholar
Franceschet, A., 2002. Moral principles and political institutions: perspectives on ethics and international affairs. Millennium J Int Studies, 31 pp.347–357.10.1177/03058298020310020901Search in Google Scholar
Gerrard, M.B., 2017. Global Climate Change. Environmental Law Practice Guide, 3.Search in Google Scholar
Gerson, M., 2012. Climate and the culture war. The Washington Post. 17 January.Search in Google Scholar
Getz, K. A. (2001). Public affairs and political strategy: Theoretical foundations. Journal of Public Affairs: An International Journal, 1(4), 305-329.10.1002/pa.77Search in Google Scholar
Giddens, A., 2009. The politics of climate change. Cambridge: Polity PressSearch in Google Scholar
Gillis, J., and Kaufman, L., 2012. Leak offers glimpse of campaign against climate science. New York Times. 15 February.Search in Google Scholar
Gilpin, R., 2011. Global political economy: Understanding the international economic order. Princeton University Press.10.2307/j.ctvcm4j53Search in Google Scholar
Gross, M., 2015. Twenty-five years of climate change failure. Current Biology, 25(8) pp. R307-R31010.1016/j.cub.2015.03.044Search in Google Scholar
Grubb, M., Vrolijk, C. and Brack, D., 1999. The Kyoto Protocol: a guide and assessment. Royal Institute of International Affairs Energy and Environmental Programme.Search in Google Scholar
Grubb, M., 2004. Kyoto and the future of international climate change responses: From here to where. International Review for Environmental Strategies, 5(1), pp.15-38.Search in Google Scholar
Grundmann, R., 2016. Climate change as a wicked social problem. Nature Geoscience, 9(8), pp.562-563.10.1038/ngeo2780Search in Google Scholar
Guzman, A.T., 2008. How international law works: a rational choice theory. Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195305562.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Haas, P.M., 1992. Introduction: epistemic communities and international policy coordination. International organization, 46(1), pp.1-35.10.1017/S0020818300001442Search in Google Scholar
Haites, E., Yamin, F. and Höhne, N., 2014. Possible Elements of a 2015 Agreement to Address Climate Change. Carbon & Climate Law Review, pp.3-12.Search in Google Scholar
Harrison, K. and Sundstrom, L.M., 2010. Global commons, domestic decisions: The comparative politics of climate change. MIT press.10.7551/mitpress/9780262014267.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Helm, D., 2012. Climate policy: The Kyoto approach has failed. Nature, 491(7426), pp.663-665.Search in Google Scholar
Holzinger, K. and Knill, C., 2005. Causes and conditions of cross-national policy convergence. Journal of European public policy, 12(5), pp.775-796.10.1080/13501760500161357Search in Google Scholar
Holzinger, K., Knill, C. and Sommerer, T., 2008. Environmental policy convergence: The impact of international harmonization, transnational communication, and regulatory competition. International Organization, 62(4), pp.553-587.10.1017/S002081830808020XSearch in Google Scholar
Hughes, S., Chu, E.K. and Mason, S.G., 2018. Introduction. In Climate Change in Cities (pp. 1-15). Springer, Cham.10.1007/978-3-319-65003-6_1Search in Google Scholar
Jasny, L., Dewey, A.M., Robertson, A.G., Yagatich, W., Dubin, A.H., Waggle, J.M. and Fisher, D.R., 2018. Shifting echo chambers in US climate policy networks. PloS one, 13(9), p.e0203463.10.1371/journal.pone.0203463Search in Google Scholar
Jones, J., 2014. In US, most do not see global warming as a serious threat. Gallup Poll, 13 March.Search in Google Scholar
Kinley, R., 2017. Climate change after Paris: From turning point to transformation. Climate Policy, 17(1), pp.9-15.10.1080/14693062.2016.1191009Search in Google Scholar
Keohane, R.O., 1986. Reciprocity in international relations. International organization, 40(1), pp.1-27.10.1017/S0020818300004458Search in Google Scholar
Keohane, R.O., 2005. After hegemony: Cooperation and discord in the world political economy. Princeton University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Knill, C., 2005. Introduction: Cross-national policy convergence: concepts, approaches and explanatory factors. Journal of European public policy, 12(5), pp.764-774.10.1080/13501760500161332Search in Google Scholar
Krasner, S., 1983. Structural causes and regime consequences; regimes as intervening variables. In: K. Stephen, ed. International Regimes. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.10.1017/S0020818300018920Search in Google Scholar
Kutney, G., 2014. Carbon politics and the failure of the Kyoto protocol. Routledge.10.4324/9781315851099Search in Google Scholar
Lewis, J.I., 2008. China’s strategic priorities in international climate change negotiations. Washington Quarterly, 31(1), pp.155-174.10.1162/wash.2007.31.1.155Search in Google Scholar
McCright, A.M. and Dunlap, R.E., 2003. Defeating Kyoto: The conservative movement’s impact on US climate change policy. Social Problems, 50(3), pp.348-373.10.1525/sp.2003.50.3.348Search in Google Scholar
Mendelsohn, R. O., 2005. An Economist’s View of the Kyoto Climate Treaty [online] Available at: <https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4504298> [Accessed 25 November 2017].Search in Google Scholar
Meyer, L.H. and Roser, D., 2010. Climate justice and historical emissions. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 13(1), pp.229-253.10.1080/13698230903326349Search in Google Scholar
Mouffe, C., 1979. Gramsci and Marxist theory. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Search in Google Scholar
Mueller, D.C., 1986. Rational egoism versus adaptive egoism as fundamental postulate for a descriptive theory of human behavior. Public Choice, 51(1), pp.3-23.10.1007/BF00141682Search in Google Scholar
Newport, F., 2014. Americans show low levels of concern on global warming. Gallup Poll, 4 April.Search in Google Scholar
Nisbet, M.C., 2011. Public opinion and participation In: J.S. Dryzek, R.B. Norgaard and D. Sclosberg eds., The Oxford handbook of climate change and society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Nwankwo, C.F., 2018a. Brexit as critical juncture: factors for UK’s environmental policy amendment. Climate Change, 4(16), pp.723-727.Search in Google Scholar
Nwankwo, C.F. 2018b. Global Climate Regime: the challenges from Kyoto Protocol to Paris Agreement. Energy Today, 6(1). Available at: https://www.energytoday.net/economics-policy/global-climate-regime-the-challenges-from-kyoto-protocol-to-paris-agreement/ [Accessed 23 May 2019].Search in Google Scholar
Nwankwo, C.F., 2018c. Brexit: Critical Juncture in the UK’s International Development Agenda?. Open Political Science, 1(1), pp.16-19.Nwankwo, C.F. and Okafor, U.P., 2018. Impediments and Desirability of Complete Ban on International Movement of Toxic Waste. Open Political Science, 1(1), pp.131-135.10.1515/openps-2018-0010Search in Google Scholar
O’connor, J.S., 1988. Convergence or divergence?: Change in welfare effort in OECD countries 1960–1980. European Journal of Political Research, 16(3), pp.277-299.10.1111/j.1475-6765.1988.tb00153.xSearch in Google Scholar
Okereke, C., 2010. Climate justice and the international regime. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 1(3), pp.462-474.10.1002/wcc.52Search in Google Scholar
Okereke, C. and Matt, E., 2014. A Neo-Gramscian Account of Carbon Markets: The Cases of the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme and the Clean Development Mechanism. The Politics of Carbon Markets. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
Ostrom, E., 1998. A behavioral approach to the rational choice theory of collective action: Presidential address, American Political Science Association, 1997. American political science review, 92(1), pp.1-22.10.2307/2585925Search in Google Scholar
Page, E.A., 2007. Fairness on the day after tomorrow: justice, reciprocity and global climate change. Polit. Stud. 55, 225–242.10.1111/j.1467-9248.2007.00649.xSearch in Google Scholar
Peters, G. and Woolley, J.T., 2001. George W. Bush: Letter to Members of the Senate on the Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change. The American Presidency Project [online] Available at: http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=45811> [Accessed 26 November 2017].Search in Google Scholar
Pflieger, G., 2014. Kyoto Protocol and Beyond. In Global Environmental Change (pp. 517-525). Springer Netherlands.10.1007/978-94-007-5784-4_87Search in Google Scholar
Porinchu, D.F., 2017. Global Climate Change. The International Encyclopedia of Geography10.1002/9781118786352.wbieg0922Search in Google Scholar
Rajamani, L., 2009a. Addressing the post-Kyoto stress disorder: reflections on the emerging legal architecture of the climate regime. International and Comparative Law Quarterly 58(4), pp. 803–834.10.1017/S0020589309001584Search in Google Scholar
Rajamani, L., 2009b. The Copenhagen agreed outcome: form, shape and influence, Economic and Political Weekly XLIV (48), pp. 30–35.Search in Google Scholar
Ravenhill, J. ed., 2017. Global political economy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/hepl/9780198737469.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Revkin, A. and Broder, J., 2009. A grudging Accord in climate talks. New York Times, 19 December.Search in Google Scholar
Roberts, J.T., 2011. Multipolarity and the new world (dis) order: US hegemonic decline and the fragmentation of the global climate regime. Global Environmental Change, 21(3), pp.776-784.10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.03.017Search in Google Scholar
Rodney, W., 1972. How Europe underdeveloped Africa. Beyond borders: Thinking critically about global issues, pp.107-125.Search in Google Scholar
Rosen, A.M., 2015. The wrong solution at the right time: The failure of the Kyoto Protocol on climate change. Politics & Policy, 43(1), pp.30-58.10.1111/polp.12105Search in Google Scholar
Rourke, J.T., 2009. International politics on the world stage. 12th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.Search in Google Scholar
Saad, L., 2014. A steady 57% in US blame humans for global warming. Gallup Organisation, 18 March.Search in Google Scholar
Schlosberg, D., 2012. Climate justice and capabilities: a framework for adaptation policy. Ethics & International Affairs, 26(4), pp.445-461.10.1017/S0892679412000615Search in Google Scholar
Schlosberg, D. and Collins, L.B., 2014. From environmental to climate justice: climate change and the discourse of environmental justice. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 5(3), pp.359-374.10.1002/wcc.275Search in Google Scholar
Schüssler, R., 2011. Climate justice: a question of historic responsibility?. Journal of Global Ethics, 7(3), pp.261-278.10.1080/17449626.2011.635682Search in Google Scholar
Scott, S.V., 2004. Is there room for international law in realpolitik?: accounting for the US ‘attitude’ towards international law. Review of International Studies, 30(1), pp.71-88.10.1017/S0260210504005832Search in Google Scholar
Sharp, P., 2004. Virtue unrestrained: Herbert Butterfield and the problem of American power. International Studies Perspectives, 5(3), pp.300-315.10.1111/j.1528-3577.2004.00175.xSearch in Google Scholar
Sullivan, K., and Warrick, J., 1997. Gore Speech on Climate Criticized [online] Available at: <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/longterm/climate/stories/clim120997.htm> [Accessed 26 November 2017].Search in Google Scholar
Sussman, B., 2015. The U.S. finds its voice on climate change after two decades of failed diplomacy. [online] Available at: <https://www.brookings.edu/blog/planetpolicy/2015/11/24/the-u-s-finds-its-voice-on-climate-change-after-two-decades-of-failed-diplomacy/> [Accessed 26 November 2017].Search in Google Scholar
Urry, J., 2015. Climate change and society. In Why the social sciences matter (pp. 45-59). Palgrave Macmillan, London.10.1057/9781137269928_4Search in Google Scholar
Vrolijk, C., 2001. COP-6 collapse or ‘to be continued…?’. International Affairs, 77(1), pp.163-169.10.1111/1468-2346.00184Search in Google Scholar
Werksman, J., 2010. Legal symmetry and legal differentiation under a future deal on climate. Climate Policy, 10(6), pp.672-677.10.3763/cpol.2010.0150Search in Google Scholar
Wallerstein, I.M., 2004. World-systems analysis: An introduction. Duke University Press.10.1215/9780822399018Search in Google Scholar
World Bank, 2016. Gross domestic product 2016. [online] Available at: <http://databank.worldbank.org/data/download/GDP.pdf > [Accessed 17 November 2017].Search in Google Scholar
© 2019 Cletus Famous Nwankwo, published by De Gruyter
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Public License.