Introduction: exploring and explaining the Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate

  • Sylvia I. Karlsson-Vinkhuyzen
  • Harro van Asselt
Original Paper

Abstract

This introduction lays the groundwork for this Special Issue by providing an overview of the Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate (APP), and by introducing three main analytical themes. The first theme concerns the emergence and continuation of the APP. The contributions show that the emergence of the APP can be attributed to international factors, including the United States’ rejection of the Kyoto Protocol, and its search for an alternative arena for global climate governance, and other countries’ wish to maintain good relations with the US; as well as domestic factors, such as the presence of bureaucratic actors in favour of the Partnership, alignment with domestic priorities, and the potential for reaping economic benefits through participation. The second theme examines the nature of the Partnership, concluding that it falls on the very soft side of the hard–soft law continuum and that while being branded as a public–private partnership, governments remain in charge. Under the third theme, the influence which the APP exerts on the post-2012 United Nations (UN) climate change negotiations is scrutinised. The contributions show that at the very least, the APP is exerting some cognitive influence on the UN discussions through its promotion of a sectoral approach. The introduction concludes with outlining areas for future research.

Keywords

Asia-Pacific Partnership Kyoto Protocol Public–private governance Post-2012 climate policy Soft law United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Steinar Andresen, Frank Biermann, Harriet Bulkeley, Peter Lawrence, Jeff McGee and Antto Vihma for their comments on an earlier draft. The research was in part conducted under the project Adaptation and Mitigation Strategies: Supporting European Climate Policy (ADAM), financed by DG Research of the European Commission under the Sixth Framework Programme 2002–2006, Priority 1.1.6.3, Global Change and Ecosystems. Harro van Asselt would furthermore like to thank the Canon Foundation Europe for the financial support for the research stay at the Tokyo Institute of Technology.

References

  1. Abbott, K. W., Keohane, R. O., Moravcsik, A., Slaughter, A.-M., & Snidal, D. (2000). The concept of legalization. International Organization, 54(3), 401–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abbott, K. W., & Snidal, D. (2000). Hard and soft law in international governance. International Organization, 54(3), 421–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Andonova, L. B., Betsill, M. M., & Bulkeley, H. (2009). Transnational climate governance. Global Environmental Politics, 9(2), 52–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. APP Charter (2006). Charter for the Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate. Retrieved May 20, 2009 from http://www.asiapacificpartnership.org.
  5. APP Vision Statement (2006). Vision statement of Australia, China, India, Japan, the Republic of Korea, and the United States of America for a New Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate. Retrieved May 20, 2009, from http://www.asiapacificpartnership.org.
  6. Bäckstrand, K. (2008). Accountability of networked climate governance: The rise of transnational climate partnerships. Global Environmental Politics, 8(3), 74–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Biermann, F., Pattberg, P., van Asselt, H., & Zelli, F. (2009). The fragmentation of global governance architectures: A framework for analysis. Global Environmental Politics, 9(4) (in press).Google Scholar
  8. Biermann, F., Pattberg, P., & Zelli, F. (Eds.). (2010). Global climate governance beyond 2012: Architecture, agency and adaptation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Brütsch, C., & Lehmkuhl, D. (2007). Complex legalization and the many moves to law. In C. Brütsch & D. Lehmkuhl (Eds.), Law and legalization in transnational relations (pp. 9–32). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Bulkeley, H. (2001). Governing climate change: The politics of risk society? Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 26(4), 430–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Canada. (2008). Country statement—Canada. Retrieved May 17, 2009, from http://www.asiapacificpartnership.org/pdf/vancouver/CountryStatement_Canada.pdf.
  12. Chinkin, C. (2000). Normative development in the international legal system. In D. Shelton (Ed.), Commitment and compliance: The role of non-binding norms in the international legal system (pp. 21–42). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Christoff, P., & Eckersley, R. (2007). The Kyoto Protocol and the Asia Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate. In T. Bonyhady & P. Christoff (Eds.), Climate law in Australia (pp. 32–45). Sydney: Federation Press.Google Scholar
  14. de Coninck, H., Fischer, C., Newell, R. G., & Ueno, T. (2008). International technology-oriented agreements to address climate change. Energy Policy, 36(1), 335–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fisher, B. S., Ford, M., Jakeman, G., Gurney, A., Penm, J., Matysek, A., & Gunasekera, D. (2006). Technological development and economic growth. Inaugural Ministerial Meeting of the APP, Sydney, 11–13 January. ABARE Research Report 06.1. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics.Google Scholar
  16. Heggelund, G., & Buan, I. F. (2009). China in the Asia-Pacific Partnership—consequences for UN climate change mitigation efforts? International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 9(3).Google Scholar
  17. Hof, A. F., den Elzen, M. G. J., & van Vuuren, D. P. (2009). Environmental effectiveness and economic consequences of fragmented versus universal regimes: What can we learn from model studies? International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 9(1), 39–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Karlsson, S. I. (2009, February). G8 climate action from Gleneagles to Hokkaido—dying flare or lasting flame? Paper presented at the International Studies Association Conference, New York.Google Scholar
  19. Karlsson-Vinkhuyzen, S. I, & Vihma, A. (2009). Comparing the legitimacy and effectiveness of global hard and soft law: An analytical framework (manuscript on file with authors).Google Scholar
  20. Kellow, A. (2006). A new process for negotiating multilateral environmental agreements? The Asia-Pacific Climate Partnership beyond Kyoto. Australian Journal of International Affairs, 60(2), 287–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kirton, J. J., & Trebilcock, M. J. (2004). Introduction: Hard choices and soft law in sustainable global governance. In J. J. Kirton & M. J. Trebilcock (Eds.), Hard choices, soft law: Voluntary standards in global trade, environment, and social governance (pp. 3–29). Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  22. Korppoo, A., & Luta, A. (Eds.). (2009). Towards a new climate regime: Views of China, India, Japan, Russia and the United States on the road to Copenhagen. FIFA Report 2009: 19. Helsinki: The Finnish Institute of International Affairs.Google Scholar
  23. Lawrence, P. (2007). The Asia Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate (AP6): A distraction to the Kyoto process or a viable alternative? Asia Pacific Journal of Environmental Law, 10(3/4), 183–209.Google Scholar
  24. Lawrence, P. (2009). Australian climate policy and the Asia Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate (APP): From Howard to Rudd—Continuity or change? International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 9(3).Google Scholar
  25. McGee, J., & Taplin, R. (2006). The Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate: A complement or competitor to the Kyoto Protocol? Global Change Peace & Security, 18(3), 173–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. McGee, J., & Taplin, R. (2008). The Asia-Pacific Partnership and the United States’ international climate change policy. Colorado Journal of International Environmental Law and Policy, 19(2), 179–218.Google Scholar
  27. McGee, J., & Taplin, R. (2009). The role of the Asia Pacific Partnership in discursive contestation of the international climate regime. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 9(3).Google Scholar
  28. Oberthür, S., & Gehring, T. (Eds.). (2006). Institutional interaction in global environmental governance. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  29. Pattberg, P., & Stripple, J. (2008). Beyond the public and private divide: Remapping transnational climate governance in the 21st century. International Environmental Agreements: Politics Law and Economics, 8(4), 367–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Pezzey, J. C. V., Jotzo, F., & Quiggin, J. (2008). Fiddling while carbon burns: Why climate policy needs pervasive emission pricing as well as technology promotion. The Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 52(1), 97–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rajamani, L. (2005). Differential treatment in international environmental law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Reinicke, W. H., & Witte, J. M. (2000). Interdependence, globalization, and sovereignty: The role of non-binding international legal accords. In D. Shelton (Ed.), Commitment and compliance: The role of non-binding norms in the international legal system (pp. 75–100). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Scharpf, F. W. (1999). Governing in Europe: Effective and democratic? New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Shelton, D. (2000). Introduction: Law, non-law and the problem of ‘soft law’. In D. Shelton (Ed.), Commitment and compliance: The role of non-binding norms in the international legal system (pp. 1–18). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Sindico, F. (2007). Climate change: A security (council) issue. Carbon and Climate Law Review, 1(1), 29–34.Google Scholar
  36. Skodvin, T., & Andresen, S. (2009). An agenda for change in U.S. climate policies? Presidential ambitions and congressional powers. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 9(3).Google Scholar
  37. Sugiyama, T., & Sinton, J. (2005). Orchestra of treaties: A future climate regime scenario with multiple treaties among like-minded countries. International Environmental Agreements: Politics Law and Economics, 5(1), 65–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Trubek, D. M., Cottrell, P., & Nance, M. (2005). “Soft law”, “hard law” and European integration. In G. de Búrca & J. Scott (Eds.), Law and New Governance in the EU and the US (pp. 65–94). Oxford: Hart.Google Scholar
  39. van Asselt, H. (2007). From UN-ity to diversity? The UNFCCC, the Asia-Pacific Partnership, and the future of international law on climate change. Carbon and Climate Law Review, 1(1), 17–28.Google Scholar
  40. van Asselt, H., Gupta, J., & Biermann, F. (2005). Advancing the climate agenda: Exploiting material and institutional linkages to develop a menu of policy options. Review of European Community and International Environmental Law, 14(3), 255–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. van Asselt, H., Kanie, N., & Iguchi, M. (2009). Japan’s position in international climate policy: Navigating between Kyoto and the APP. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 9(3).Google Scholar
  42. Victor, D. G. (2007). Fragmented carbon markets and reluctant nations: Implications for the design of effective architectures. In J. E. Aldy & R. N. Stavins (Eds.), Architectures for agreement: Addressing global climate change in the post-Kyoto world (pp. 133–160). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Vihma, A. (2009). Friendly neighbor or Trojan horse? Assessing the interaction of soft law initiatives and the UN climate regime. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 9(3).Google Scholar
  44. World Bank (2008). Development and climate change: A strategic framework for the World Bank Group. Washington, DC: World Bank.Google Scholar
  45. WRI. (2009). Climate Analysis Indicators Tool (CAIT) Version 6.0. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sylvia I. Karlsson-Vinkhuyzen
    • 1
  • Harro van Asselt
    • 2
  1. 1.Finland Futures Research CentreTurku School of EconomicsTampereFinland
  2. 2.Department of Environmental Policy Analysis, Institute for Environmental StudiesVrije Universiteit AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations