Advertisement

The more things change, the more they stay the same: Developing countries’ unity at the nexus of trade and environmental policy

  • Tana JohnsonEmail author
  • Johannes Urpelainen
Article
  • 18 Downloads

Abstract

The term “global South” refers to developing countries as a whole, but recently, numerous developing countries – Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Nigeria, Thailand, South Africa, and others – simultaneously grew wealthier while many other countries remain poor. This prompts a fundamental question: does the global South demonstrate unity in international politics, with developing countries at various wealth levels behaving like one another, and in ways unlike the industrialized “North”? Or is the global South fractured, too economically and politically diverse to operate in tandem? Theoretical expectations are mixed, and the empirical record is inconclusive. To adjudicate, we pinpoint a stringent set of observable implications that should hold if the developing world is to be considered at all unified vis-a-vis the industrialized world. Then we probe those implications with statistical analyses of over 3,600 paragraphs of text from governments’ negotiations concerning trade and environmental policy, a policy space that facilitates generalizability by representing fundamental sovereignty and wealth issues underlying traditional North-South frictions. Our finding – that overall, developing countries exhibit surprising unity – weighs in on central theoretical and policy debates in international relations, comparative politics, and political economy.

Keywords

North-south relations Global environmental politics International trade International political economy Developing countries 

JEL Classification

F0 F1 F5 

Notes

Acknowledgments

For research assistance, we thank Duke students Irina Danescu, Sanjeev Dasgupta, and Shanelle Van. For useful comments, we thank audiences at the annual conferences of the International Studies Association (ISA) and the International Political Economy Society (IPES), as well as audiences at seminars at Princeton and the University of Michigan. We are particularly grateful to Margaret Foster, Robert Franzese, Andrew Hurrell, Sikina Jinnah, Marc Jeuland, Miles Kahler, Eddy Malesky, Ronald Mitchell, Bora Park, and William Pizer for their feedback on previous drafts. A supplementary appendix is available at the Review of International Organization’s website.

Supplementary material

11558_2018_9336_MOESM1_ESM.zip (1.1 mb)
(ZIP 1.14 MB)

References

  1. Alcock, F. (2008). Conflicts and coalitions within and across the ENGO community. Global Environmental Politics, 8(4), 66–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Armijo, L., & Burges, S. (2010). Brazil, the entrepreneurial and democratic BRIC. Polity, 42(1), 14–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ban, C., & Blyth, M. (2013). The BRICS and the washington consensus: an introduction. Review of International Political Economy, 20(2), 241–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bandeira, L.A.M. (2006). Brazil as a regional power and its relations with the united states. Latin American Perspectives, 33(3), 12–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barkin, J. (2003). Samuel trade, sustainable development, and the environment. Global Environmental Politics, 3(4), 92–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Barma, N., Ratner, E., Weber, S. (2007). A world without the west. The National Interest, 90(4), 23–30.Google Scholar
  7. Barma, N., Chiozza, G., Ratner, E., Weber, S. (2009). A world without the west? empirical patterns and theoretical implications. Chinese Journal of International Politics, 2(4), 525–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bechtel, M., & Tosun, J. (2009). Changing economic openness for environmental policy convergence: When can trade agreements induce convergence of environmental regulation? International Studies Quarterly, 53(4), 931–953.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Beeson, M. (2009). Trading places? china, the united states, and the evolution of the international political economy. Review of International Political Economy, 16 (4), 729–741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bergsten, C. (2008). Fred a partnership of equals: How Washington should respond to China’s economic challenge. Foreign Affairs, 87(4), 57–69.Google Scholar
  11. Bernauer, T., & Nguyen, Q. (2015). Free trade and/or environmental protection. Global Environmental Politics, 15(4), 105–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Biermann, F. (2001). The rising tide of green unilateralism in world trade law: Options for reconciling the emerging North-South conflict. Journal of World Trade, 35(3), 412–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chin, G.T. (2010). Remaking the architecture: The emerging powers, Self-Insuring and regional insulation. International Affairs, 86(3), 693–715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. David, S.R. (1991). Explaining third world alignment. World Politics, 43(2), 233–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Davis, C.L., & Pelc, K.J. (2017). Cooperation in hard times: Self-restraint of trade protection. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 61(2), 398–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Davis, C.L, & Bermeo, S.B. (2009). Who files? developing country participation in GATT/WTO adjudication. Journal of Politics, 71(3), 1033–1049.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. de Renzio, P., & Seifert, J. (2014). South-South Cooperation and the future of development assistance: Mapping actors and options. Third World Quarterly, 35(10), 1860–1875.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Donno, D., & Rudra, N. (2014). To fear or not to fear? BRICs and the developing world. International Studies Review, 16(3), 447–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Drahos, P. (2003). When the weak bargain with whe strong: Negotiations in the world trade organization. International Negotiation, 8(1), 79–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Drezner, Daniel W. (2014). The system worked: How the world stopped another great depression. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Dubash, Navroz K. (2017). Safeguarding development and limiting vulnerability: India’s stakes in the paris agreement. Climate Change: Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews.  https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.444.Google Scholar
  22. Esty, D.C. (2001). Bridging the Trade-Environment divide. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 15(3), 113–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gustavo, F.-M., & Kreps, S. (2013). The foreign policy consequences of trade: China’s commercial relations with Africa and Latin America, 1992-2006. Journal of Politics, 75(2), 357–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gray, K., & Murphy, C. (2013). Rising powers and the future of global governance. Third World Quarterly, 34(2), 183–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Haass, R.N. (2008). The age of nonpolarity: What will follow U.S. Dominance. Foreign Affairs, 87(3), 44–56.Google Scholar
  26. Halper, S. (2010). The beijing consensus: How china’s authoritarian model will dominate the Twenty-First century. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  27. Hampson, F.O., & Heinbecker, P. (2011). The ‘New’ multilateralism of the Twenty-First century. Global Governance, 17(3), 299–310.Google Scholar
  28. Bas, H., & Keukeleire, S. (2016). Rising powers and the future of global governance. Global Governance, 22(3), 389–407.Google Scholar
  29. Hopewell, K. (2015). Different paths to power: The rise of Brazil, India, and China at the world trade organization. Review of International Political Economy, 22(2), 311–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hopewell, K. (2017). The BRICS – merely a fable? emerging power alliances in global trade governance. International Affairs, 93(6), 1377–1396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hsu, A. (2016). The 2016 Environmental Performance Index. New Haven, CT: Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy.Google Scholar
  32. Hug, S., & Lukàs, R. (2014). Preferences or blocs? voting in the united nations human rights council. Review of International Organizations, 9(1), 83–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hung, H.-F. (Ed.). (2009). China and the transformation of global capitalism baltimore. MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Hurrell, A. (2006). Hegemony, liberalism and global order: What space for would-be great powers? International Affairs, 82(1), 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hurrell, A. (2013). Narratives of emergence: Rising powers and the end of the third world?. Revista de Economia Política, 33(2), 203–221.Google Scholar
  36. Hurrell, A., & Narlikar, A. (2006). A new politics of confrontation: Brazil and India in multilateral trade negotiations. Global Society, 20(4), 415–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hurrell, A., & Sengupta, S. (2012). Emerging powers, North-South relations and global climate politics. International Affairs, 88(3), 463–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ikenberry, G. (2011). John the future of the liberal world order: Internationalism after America. Foreign Affairs, 90(3), 56–68.Google Scholar
  39. Jeuland, M., & Pattanayak, S. (2012). Benefits and costs of improved cookstoves: Assessing the implications of variability in health, forest and climate impacts. PLOS One, 7(2), e30338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Johnson, T. (2015). Information revelation and structural supremacy: The world trade organization’s incorporation of environmental policy. Review of International Organizations, 10(2), 207–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Johnson, T., & Urpelainen, J. (2012). A strategic theory of regime integration and separation. International Organization, 66(4), 645–677.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kahler, M. (2013). Rising powers and global governance: Negotiating change in a resilient status quo. International Affairs, 89(3), 711–729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kasa, S., Gullberg, A.T., Heggelund, G. (2008). The group of 77 in the international climate negotiations: Recent developments and future directions. International Environmental Agreements, 8(2), 113–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kastner, S.L. (2016). Buying influence? assessing the political effects of China’s international trade. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 60(6), 980–1007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Kelley, J.G. (2004). International actors on the domestic scene: Membership conditionality and socialization by international institutions. International Organization, 58(3), 425–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Keukeleire, S., & Bas, H. (2013). The BRICS and other emerging power alliances and multilateral organizations in the Asia? Pacific and the global south: Challenges for the european union and its view on multilateralism. Journal of Common Market Studies, 52(3), 582–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Keukeleire, S., & Bas, H. (2016). Developing countries and international organization. Review of International Organizations, 11(2), 155–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Krasner, S.D. (1985). Structural conflict: The third world against global liberalism. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  49. Lai, B., & Lefler, V. (2017). Examining the role of region and elections on representation in the UN security council. Review of International Organizations, 12 (4), 585–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Laidi, Z. (2012). BRICS: Sovereignty Power and weakness. International Politics, 49(5), 614–632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Mahrenbach, L. (2016). Emerging powers, domestic politics, and WTO dispute settlement reform. International Negotiation, 21(2), 233–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Mansfield, E.D. (2014). Rising powers in the global economy: Issues and questions. International Studies Review, 16(3), 437–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Hau, M.V., Scott, J., Hulme, D. (2012). Beyond the BRICS: Alternative strategies of influence in the global politics of development. European Journal of Development Research, 24(1), 187–204.Google Scholar
  54. Mearsheimer, J. (2001). The tragedy of great power politics. New York: W. W. Norton and Company.Google Scholar
  55. Milhorance, C., & Soule-Kohndou, F. (2017). South-South Cooperation and change in international organizations. Global Governance, 23(3), 461–481.Google Scholar
  56. Miller, M.C. (2016). The role of beliefs in identifying rising powers. Chinese Journal of International Politics, 9(2), 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Miller, M.A. (1995). The third world in global environmental politics. Lynne Rienner: Boulder.Google Scholar
  58. Mitchell, R., & Bernauer, T. (1998). Empirical research on international environmental policy: Designing qualitative case studies. Journal of Environment and Development, 7(1), 4–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Mittelman, J. (2013). Global bricolage: Emerging market powers and polycentric governance. Third World Quarterly, 34(1), 23–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Muhr, T. (2016). Beyond ‘BRICS’: Ten theses on South-South cooperation in the Twenty-First century. Third World Quarterly, 37(4), 630–648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Najam, A. (2005). Developing countries and global environmental governance: From contestation to participation to engagement. International Environmental Agreements, 5(3), 303–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Narlikar, A. (2003). International trade and developing countries: Bargaining coalitions in the GATT and WTO. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  63. Narlikar, A. (2010). New powers: How to become one and how to manage them New York. NY: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  64. Narlikar, A. (2013). Negotiating the rise of new powers. International Affairs, 89(3), 561–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Narlikar, A., & Tussie, D. (2004). The g20 at the cancun ministerial: Developing countries and their evolving coalitions in the WTO. World Economy, 27(7), 947–966.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Nayyar, D. (2016). BRICS, Developing Countries and Global Governance. Third World Quarterly, 37(4), 575–591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Panke, D. (2017). Speech is silver, silence is golden? examining state activity in international negotiations. Review of International Organizations, 12(1), 121–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Pfaff, A., Robalino, J., Sanchez-Azofeifa, G.A., Rodriguez, C.M. (2017). Changing the deforestation impacts of eco-/REDD payments: Evolution (2000-2005) in Costa Rica’s PSA program. IOP Conference Series, 6(25), 252022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Pizer, W., & Zhang, X. (2018). China’s new national carbon market. AEA Papers and Proceedings, 108, 463–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Radelet, S. (2015). The great surge: The ascent of the developing world. Simon and Schuster: New York.Google Scholar
  71. Rowland, W. (1973). The plot to save the world: the life and times of the Stockholm conference on the human environment toronto. Irwin and Co: Clarke.Google Scholar
  72. Schimmelfennig, F. (2001). The community trap: Liberal norms, rhetorical action, and the eastern enlargement of the european union. International Organization, 55 (1), 47–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Schirm, S. (2013). Global politics are domestic politics: a societal approach to divergence in the g20. Review of International Studies, 39(3), 685–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Schirm, S.A. (2010). Leaders in need of followers: Emerging powers in global governance. European Journal of International Relations, 16(2), 197–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Schneider, C.J., & Urpelainen, J. (2012). Accession Rules for International Institutions: A Legitimacy-Efficacy Trade-Off? Journal of Conflict Resolution, 56(2), 290–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Schultz, J. (1995). The GATT/WTO committee on trade and the environment: Toward environmental reform. American Journal of International Law, 89(2), 423–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Schweller, R. (2011). Emerging powers in an age of disorder. Global Governance, 17(3), 285–297.Google Scholar
  78. Scott, J. (2016). The international politics of South-South trade. Global Governance, 22(3), 427–445.Google Scholar
  79. Scott, J., & Wilkinson, R. (2013). China threat? evidence from the WTO. Journal of World Trade, 47(4), 761–782.Google Scholar
  80. Selden, T.M., & Song, D. (1994). Environmental Quality and Development: Is There a Kuznets Curve for Air Pollution Emissions? Journal of Environmental Economics and management, 27(2), 147–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Sinha, M. (2013). An evaluation of the WTO committee on trade and environment. Journal of World Trade, 47(6), 1285–1322.Google Scholar
  82. Srinivasan, R.N. (1998). Developing countries and the multilateral trading system boulder. CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  83. Stephen, M. (2012). Rising regional powers and international institutions: The foreign policy orientations of India, Brazil, and South Africa. Global Society, 26(3), 289–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Tarasofsky, R. (1999). The WTO committee on trade and environment: Is it making a difference?. In Jochen, A., & Frowein, R.W. (Eds.) Max planck yearbook of united nations law, (Vol. 3 pp. 471–488). The Hague: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar
  85. Thomas, C. (1987). In search of security: The third world in international relations. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
  86. Tierney, M.J. (2014). Rising powers and the regime for development finance. International Studies Review, 16(3), 452–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Torras, M., & Boyce, J.K. (1998). Income, inequality, and pollution: a reassessment of the environmental kuznets curve. Ecological Economics, 25(2), 147–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Urpelainen, J. (2010). Regulation under economic globalization. International Studies Quarterly, 54(4), 1099–1121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Vihma, A., Mulugetta, Y., Karlsson-Vinkhuyzen, S. (2011). Negotiating solidarity? the g77 through the prism of climate change negotiations. Global Change Peace and Security, 23(3), 315–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Voeten, E. (2000). Clashes in the assembly. International Organization, 54(2), 185–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Wade, R. (2011). Emerging world order? from multipolarity to multilateralism in the g20, the world bank, and the IMF. Politics and Society, 39(3), 347–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Walt, S.M. (1987). The origins of alliances. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  93. Williams, M. (1993). Re-Articulating The third world coalition: The role of the environmental agenda. Third World Quarterly, 14(1), 7–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Woods, N. (2006). The globalizers: The IMF, the world bank, and their borrowers. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  95. Woods, N. (2008). Whose aid? whose influence? China, emerging donors and the silent revolution in development assistance. International Affairs, 84(6), 1205–1221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. World Bank. (2010). The end of the third world? modernizing multilateralism for a multipolar world. Speech by world bank President Robert Zoellick, April 14, Washington DC.Google Scholar
  97. Young, A.R. (2010). Perspectives on the changing global distribution of power: Concepts and context. Politics, 30(S1), 2–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Zangl, B., Heußner, F., Kruck, A., Lanzendörfer, X. (2016). Imperfect adaptation: How the WTO and the IMF adjust to shifting power distributions among their members. Review of International Organizations, 11(2), 171–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Sanford School of Public Policy and Department of Political ScienceDuke UniversityDurhamUSA
  2. 2.School for Advanced International StudiesJohns Hopkins UniversityWashingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations