Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The 2 °C target: a European norm enters the international stage—following the process to adoption in China

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

“The 2 °C target—a European norm enters the international stage” is an empirical, qualitative study, using the case of China to illustrate the role played by the EU as a leader and forerunner pushing for a 2 °C target using diffusion mechanisms of persuasion and socialization. In order to better understand and evaluate how international and European climate norms enter the global and domestic discourse, the article details the nascent theoretical debate and critically assesses the role of the scientific community as translating medium. In the field of climate change China has been an increasingly important member of the UNFCCC process and a key target of European engagement policies. Process tracing shows that British scientific and political personalities took central roles introducing the discourse about the 2 °C target in China. The article aims to set an example of possible trajectories a norm can follow and will require further testing in the future.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. EU climate policy making is one of the community’s priorities treaty where member states as well as their head of states do continue to play a strong role. The article will include actors at the EU level and the member states level, in particular, the United Kingdom, alike and identify them as such.

  2. “The Umbrella Group is a loose coalition of non-EU developed countries which formed following the adoption of the Kyoto Protocol. Although there is no formal list, the Group is usually made up of Australia, Canada, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, the Russian Federation, Ukraine and the US” (UNFCCC 2012).

  3. Interview with National Climate Center, August 2012.

  4. Ibid.

  5. Ibid.

  6. The USA had accepted the limit in line with the Copenhagen Accords in 2009, but raised questions about its validity in August 2012 (Black 2012).

  7. Interview with member of the UK delegation, November 2012.

  8. Observation by Sam Randalls, University College London.

Abbreviations

CASS:

Chinese Academy of Social Sciences

CMA:

China Meteorological Administration

COP:

Conference of the Parties

EEAS:

European External Action Service

EU:

European Union

G8:

Group of Eight

GHG:

Greenhouse Gas

IPCC:

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

KP:

Kyoto Protocol

LCA:

Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention (LCA)

NACCC:

National Advisory Committee on Climate Change

NAMA:

National Appropriate Mitigation Action

NCC:

National Climate Center

NDRC:

National Development and Reform Commission

NGO:

Non-Governmental Organisation

UK:

United Kingdom

UNFCCC:

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

US:

United States

References

  • Acharya, A. (2004). How ideas spread: Whose norms matter? Norm localization and institutional change in Asian regionalism. International Organization, 58(2), 239–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BBC News (2009). Where Countries Stand on Copenhagen. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8345343.stm. Accessed 20 Dec 2012.

  • Beckett, M., & Johnson, A. (2005). Chairs’ Conclusions from 1 November Ministerial meeting on the Dialogue on Climate Change, Clean Energy and Sustainable Development. Gleneagels: 31st G8 Summit.

  • Biedenkopf, K., & Dupont, C. (2013). A Toolbox Approach to the EU’s External Climate Governance. In A. Boening, J.-F. Kremer, & E. Aukje van Loon (Eds.), Global power Europe. Heidelberg: Springer.

  • Black, R. (2012). Climate: 2C or not 2C? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-19193146. Accessed 9 Aug 2013.

  • Börzel, T. A., & Risse, T. (2011). When Europeanisation meets diffusion: Exploring new territory. West European Politics, 35(1), 192–207. doi:10.1080/01402382.2012.634543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bretherton, C., & Vogler, J. (2006). The European Union as a global actor, 2nd ed. London: Routledge.

  • Carrapatoso, A. (2011). Climate policy diffusion: Interregional dialogue in China-EU relations. Global Change, Peace & Security, 23(2), 177–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Checkel, J. T. (2005). International institutions and socialization in Europe: Introduction and framework. International Orgnanization, 59(4), 801–826.

    Google Scholar 

  • Commission of the European Communities (2007). Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions—Limiting global climate change to 2 degrees Celsius—The way ahead for 2020 and beyond. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:52007DC0002:EN:NOT31 Jan 2014.

  • Commission of the European Communities (2009). Towards a comprehensive climate change agreement in Copenhagen. In C. o. t. E. Communities (Ed.), COM (2009)39. Brussels.

  • Committee on Climate Change (2012). The 2050 target—achieving an 80% reduction including emissions from international aviation and shipping. London: Committee on Climate Change.

  • Conference of the Parties (COP 15) (2009). Copenhagen accord. Copenhagen, Denmark.

  • Conference of the Parties (COP 16) (2010). The Cancun Agreements: Outcome of the work of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the convention. In D. A. b. t. C. o. t. Parties (Ed.). Cancun, Mexico.

  • Cortell, A., & Davis, J. (2000). Understanding the domestic impact of international norms: A research agenda. International Studies Review, 2(1), 65–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Danylkiw, A. (2010). Conference of Parties ‘Takes Note Of’ Copenhagen Accord. http://insideclimatenews.org/print/3833. Accessed 2 Dec 2012.

  • De Cock, G. (2011). The European Union as a bilateral ‘Norm Leader’ on climate change vis-à-vis China. European Foreign Affairs Review, 16(1), 89–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Economist (2013, 19 January 2013). Beginning at home. Climate-change laws. The Economist, p. 54.

  • EEAS, & EU Commission (2011). Joint reflection paper ‘Towards a renewed and strengthened EU climate diplomacy’. Brussels.

  • EU Climate Change Expert Group (EG Science) (2008). The 2° target. Background on impacts, emission pathways, mitigation options and costs. In E. C. C. E. G. E. Science) (Ed.), Information Reference Document. Brussels.

  • Finnemore, M., & Sikkink, K. (1999). International norm dynamics and political change. In P. Katzenstein, R. Keohane, & S. Krasner (Eds.), Exploration and contestation in the study of world politics (pp. 247–277). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forsyth, T. (2012). Politicizing environmental science does not mean denying climate science nor endorsing it without question. Global Environmental Politics, 12(2), 18–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fox, J., & Godement, F. (2009). A power audit of EU-China relations. European Council of Foreign Relations.

  • Geden, O. (2012). Die Modifikation des 2-Grad-Ziels, Klimapolitische Zielmarken im Spannungsfeld von wissenschaftlicher Beratung, politischen Präferenzen und ansteigenden Emissionen. SWP Studie (June 2012).

  • GLOBE International (2013). Climate legislation study: A review of climate change legislation in 33 countries, 3rd ed. In T. Townshend, S. Fankhauser, R. Aybar, M. Collins, T. Landesman, M. Nachmany, et al. (Eds.). London.

  • Graham, E. R., Shipan, C. R., & Volden, C. (2013). The diffusion of policy diffusion research in political science. British Journal of Political Science, 43(03), 673–701. doi:10.1017/S0007123412000415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Groen, L., & Niemann, A. (2011). EU actorness and effectiveness under political pressure at the Copenhagen climate change negotiations. Paper presented at the Twelth European Union Studies Association Conference, Boston, Massachusetts, 3–5 March 2011.

  • Harrison, K., & Mcintosh Sundstrom, L. (2010). Global commons, domestic decisions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Heinze, T. (2011). Mechanism-based thinking on policy diffusion: A review of current approaches in political science. KFG working paper, Vol. 34, pp. 1–32.

  • Holslag, J. (2010). China’s scepticism of clean energy champion Europe. The International Spectator, 45(1), 115–130. doi:10.1080/03932720903562569.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hone, D. (2012). How important is the two degree target? In the energy collective (Ed.), David hone’s blog (Vol. 2012). London.

  • Hood, C. (2010). The blame game: Spin, bureaucracy, and self-preservation in government. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • IPCC SAR (1996). Climate change 1995: The second assessment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, UK.

  • IPCC TAR (2001). Climate change 2001: The scientific basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental 52 Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, UK.

  • IPCC AR4 (2007). Climate change 2007: Working Group I Report “The Physical Science Basis.” Cambridge, UK.

  • Jaeger, C. C., & Jaeger, J. (2010). Warum zwei Grad? Bundeszentrage für politische Bildung: Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte, Beilage zur Wochenzeitung ‚Das Parlament’, 32–33, 7–14.

  • Karlsson, C., Parker, C., Hjerpe, M., & Linnér, B.-O. (2011). Looking for leaders: Perceptions of climate change leadership among climate change negotiation participants. Global Environmental Politics, 11(1), 89–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kesselman, M., Krieger, J., Allen, C. S., DeBardeleben, J., & Hellman, S. (2008). European politics in transition. Boston, US: Houghton Mifflin.

  • Kraft, M. E., & Furlong, S. R. (2013). Public policy: Politics, analysis, and alternatives. Thousand Oaks, CA: CQ Press/SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leal-Arcas, R. (2012). Unilateral trade-related climate change measures. The Journal of World Investment and Trade, 13(6), 875–927.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Legro, J. (1997). Which norms matter? Revisiting the ‘failure’ of internationalism. International Organization, 51(1), 31–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, J. I. (2007). China’s strategic priorities in international climate change negotiations. The Washington Quarterly, 31(1), 155–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Major Economies Forum (2009). Declaration of the leaders the major economies forum on energy and climate L’Aquila.

  • March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1989). Redisovering institutions. The organizational basis of politics. New York, London: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meilstrup, P. (2010). The runaway summit: The background story of the Danish presidency of the COP15, UN Climate Change Conference. In N. Hvidt & H. Mouritzen (Eds.), Danish foreign policy yearbook (pp. 113–136). Copenhagen: Danish Institute for Institutional Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, C. A. (2004). Climate science and the making of a global political order. In S. Jasanoff (Ed.), States of knowledge: The co-production of science and social order (pp. 46–66). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oberthür, S. (2011). The European Union’s performance in the international climate change regime. Journal of European Integration, 33(6), 667–682. doi:10.1080/07036337.2011.606690.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ottinger, R. L. (2010). Introduction: Copenhagen Climate Change Conference—success or failure? Pace Environmental Law Review, 27(2), 411–419.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pettenger, M. (Ed.). (2008). The social construction of climate change. Power, knowledge, norms, discourses. Hamphsire, UK: Ashgate Publishing Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • PRC (2006). China-EU partnership on climate change rolling work plan. In M. o. F. A. o. t. P. s. R. o. China (Ed.). Beijing.

  • Putnam, R. (1988). Diplomacy and domestic politics: The logic of two level games. International Organisation, 42(3), 427–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Randalls, S. (2010). Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Climate Change, 1(4), 598–605.

    Google Scholar 

  • Risse, T. (2000). “Let’s argue!’’. Communicative action in world politics. International Organization, 54(1), 1–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Risse-Kappen, T. (1994). Ideas do not flow freely: Transnational coalitions, domestic structures, and the end of the cold war. International Organization, 48(2), 185–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogelj, J., McCollum, D. L., Reisinger, A., Meinshausen, M., & Riahi, K. (2013). Probabilistic cost estimates for climate change mitigation. Nature, 493(7430), 79–83. doi:10.1038/nature11787.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Romano, G. C. (2010). The EU-China partnership on climate change: Bilateralism begetting multilateralism in promoting a climate change regime? http://www.mercury-fp7.net/fileadmin/user_upload/E-paper_no__8_2011.pdf. Accessed 31 Jan 2014.

  • RTCC (2012). US says two degree guarantee should be dropped by global climate change deal. http://www.rtcc.org/us-says-two-degree-guarantee-should-be-dropped-by-global-climate-change-deal/. Accessed 22 Dec 2012.

  • Schreurs, M., & Tiberghien, Y. (2007). Multi-level reinforcement: Explaining European Union leadership in climate change mitigation. Global Environmental Change, 7(4), 19–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sebenius, J. K. (2006). Negotiation analysis: Between decisions and games. In W. Edwards, R. Miles, & D. Von Winterfeldt (Eds.), Advances in decision analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Skodvin, T. (2000). Structure and agent in the scientific diplomacy of climate change: An empirical case study of science–policy interaction in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Stalley, P. (2013). Principled strategy: The role of equity norms in China’s climate change diplomacy. Global Environmental Politics, 13(1), 1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stern, N. (2007). The economics of climate change: The stern review. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Third World Network (2010). BASIC countries set out expectations for Cancun conference. Tianjin news update (Vol. 13). Tianjin: Third World Network.

  • Torney, D. (2012). Assessing EU leadership on climate change: The limits of diffusion in EU relations with China and India. [Kolleg-Forschergruppe (KFG) “The Transformative Power of Europe“ Freie Universität Berlin]. KFG working paper series, 46 (September 2012).

  • Underdal, A. (2000). Science and politics: The anatomy of an uneasy partnership. In S. Andresen, T. Skodvin, A. Underdal, & J. Wettestad (Eds.), Science and politics in international environmental regimes (pp. 1–21). Manchester: Manchester University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNEP (2010). The emissions gap report. Are the Copenhagen Pledges sufficient to limit global warming to 2°C or 1.5°C? A preliminary assessment. In Shutterstock (Ed.): UNEP.

  • UNFCCC (2012). Party Groupings. http://unfccc.int/parties_and_observers/parties/negotiating_groups/items/2714.php. Accessed 12 Dec 2012.

  • Van Schaik, L. (2013). The EU and the climate change regime. In K. E. Jørgensen, & K. V. Laatikainen (Eds.), Routledge handbook on the European Union and International Institutions. Performance, policy and power. New York: Routledge.

  • Van Schaik, L., & Schunz, S. (2012). Explaining EU activism and impact in global climate politics: Is the Union a norm- or interest-driven actor? JCMS. Journal of Common Market Studies, 50(1), 169–186. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5965.2011.02214.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Vliet, J., Berg, M., Schaeffer, M., Vuuren, D., Elzen, M., Hof, A., et al. (2012). Copenhagen accord pledges imply higher costs for staying below 2°C warming. Climatic Change, 113(2), 551–561. doi:10.1007/s10584-012-0458-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vogler, J. (2009). Climate change and EU foreign policy: The negotiation of burden sharing. International Politics, 46(4), 469–490.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, W., & Zheng, G. (Eds.). (2012). China’s climate change policies. China: Social Sciences Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wübbeke, J. (2010). The power of advice. Experts in Chinese climate change politics. FNI report: Fridtjof Nansens Institute.

  • Wübbeke, J. (2013). China’s climate change expert community—principles, mechanisms and influence. Journal of Contemporary China, 22(82), 712–731.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zartmann, I. W. (2008). Negotiation and conflict management: Essays on theory and practice. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, H. (2013). China and international climate change negotiations. http://welttrends.de/res/uploads/Zhang_China-and-International-climate-change-negotiations.pdf. Accessed 1 Dec 2013.

  • Zhong, Z. C. (2010). The European arms embargo on China: 20 (and a half) Years Later. http://www.theeuros.eu/The-European-Arms-Embargo-on-China,3545.html?lang=fr. Accessed 5 Jan 2012.

  • Zhuang, G. (2008). Understanding China's climate policy. https://www.chinadialogue.net/article/2239-Understanding-China-s-climate-policy. Accessed 11 Feb 2014.

Download references

Acknowledgments

I am grateful to Robert Falkner, Jonas Tallberg, Diarmuid Torney, Jost Wübbeke and Soyesh Lakhey for their valuable comments on previous drafts of the article. The article has benefited from interviews with many policymakers and representatives of business, non-government organizations (NGOs), and academia in the EU and China in 2012. The author is grateful to all those who helped with the preparation of this research, but since anonymity was promised in most cases, their help cannot be acknowledged individually

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. NFG “Asian Perceptions of the EU”, Freie Universität Berlin, Ihnestr. 26, 14195, Berlin, Germany

    Olivia Gippner

Authors
  1. Olivia Gippner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Olivia Gippner.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gippner, O. The 2 °C target: a European norm enters the international stage—following the process to adoption in China. Int Environ Agreements 16, 49–65 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-014-9246-5

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-014-9246-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation