Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The socialization potential of the CDM in EU–China climate relations

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

Abstract

This article hypothesizes that the material incentives associated with the clean development mechanism (CDM) have contributed to the internalization of climate protection norms in China. In current academic research, the CDM has both been extolled as a cost-effective and vilified as an environmentally and ethically inadequate climate mitigation instrument. Few studies so far, however, have looked into the CDM’s potential contribution to socialization-related phenomena such as raising climate change awareness in emerging economies. The relationship with the EU is highly relevant in this context, as the emission reduction credits (CERs) resulting from CDM projects would not have had any meaningful prices without the European Union’s Emissions Trading System (EU ETS). This article aims to fill the current research gap by studying the socialization potential of the CDM in EU–China climate relations in four periods, namely initiation (2001–2005), improvement (2005–2007), consolidation (2008–2010) and habit formation (2010–2014). We argue that there is at least a discernible effect and that the underlying causal mechanism involves the emergence and activities of norm entrepreneurs and habit formation through a process of legal institutionalization.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concludes that "the flexibility mechanisms under the Kyoto Protocol have generally helped to improve its economic performance, but their environmental effectiveness is less clear. (medium evidence, medium agreement)" (IPCC 2014, Ch. 13: 7).

  2. This conjecture is not to be mistaken for a more rationalist, behavioral understanding of socialization (such as active participation or cooperation in governance activities under the UNFCCC).

  3. See Belis and Kerremans (in preparation) for an analysis of the socialization potential of the CDM in Vietnam.

  4. See particularly the studies by Checkel (2005), Kelley (2004), (2005) and Schimmelfennig (2005).

  5. The EU also banned the import of industrial gas credits into the EU ETS as of early 2013.

  6. Emission Reduction Units, resulting from Joint Implementation (JI) projects.

  7. Installations under the EU ETS are obliged to "surrender" or use one allowance per reported metric ton of CO2-eq emissions per year in order to comply.

  8. For a in-depth analysis, see Skjærseth and Wettestad (2009).

  9. Including, besides Delbeke, officials such as Jürgen Lefevere who designed parts of the EU ETS and was one of the negotiators of the 2005 EU-China Partnership on Climate Change (Meeting notes, 7).

  10. Specifically, the controversial destruction of industrial gases under the CDM; see (e.g., Wara 2008).

  11. Tsinghua University ranks among the top 20 most successful CDM consultancies in terms of registered projects (69, as of January 1, 2013; UNEP Risø Centre 2013).

  12. Two hallmarks of Chinese climate and renewable energy policies in this period; see, e.g., Authors.

  13. The US comes in second at 60 GW and Germany third with around 32 GW installed capacity (WWEA 2013).

  14. The actual contribution of these projects in terms of additionality and “net contributions” to global emission reductions remains a debated question; see, (e.g., Authors; Wara 2008).

References

  • Alderson, K. (2001). Making sense of state socialization. Review of International Studies, 27(3), 415–433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belis, D. (2013). The role and dynamics of the Clean Development Mechanism in EU-Vietnam climate relations. In H. Bruyninckx, Y. Qi, Q. T. Nguyen & D. Belis (Eds.), The governance of climate relations between Europe and Asia: Evidence from China and Vietnam as key emerging economies (pp. 157–188). Cheltenham and Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.

  • Belis, D., & Kerremans, B. (in preparation). The socialization potential of the CDM in EU-Vietnam climate relations.

  • Belis, D., & Schunz, S. (2013). China and the European Union: Emerging partners in global climate governance? Environmental Practice, 15(3), 190–200.

  • Belis, D., Bui, V. H., & Nguyen, B. T. (2013). The governance of the CDM in China: Achievements and deficiencies. In H. Bruyninckx, Y. Qi, Q. T. Nguyen & D. Belis (Eds.), The governance of climate relations between Europe and Asia: Evidence from China and Vietnam as key emerging economies (pp. 128–154). Cheltenham and Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.

  • Bernstein, S. (2001). The compromise of liberal environmentalism. New York, NY: Columbia University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J. L. (1998). Institutional analysis and the role of ideas in political economy. Theory and Society, 27(3), 377–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cass, L. R. (2007). Measuring the domestic salience of international environmental norms: Climate change norms in American, German and British climate policy debates. In M. E. Pettenger (Ed.), The social construction of climate change: Knowledge, power, norms, discourses (pp. 23–50). Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chevallier, J. (2010). Carbon prices during the EU ETS phase II: Dynamics and volume analysis. Paris: Université de Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • China Central Television (CCTV) (2011). Climate change portraits: Su Wei. Beijing, 24 November 2011. http://english.cntv.cn/special/climatejourney/20111124/111794.shtml. Accessed 7 August 2014.

  • Conrad, B. (2012). China in copenhagen: Reconciling the “Beijing climate revolution” and the “Copenhagen climate obstinacy”. The China Quarterly, 2012(210), 435–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Delbeke, J. (2008). Putting the emerging global carbon market on a solid footing. Brussels, 19 May 2008. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/climat/pdf/20080519_jd_opening.pdf. Accessed 13 August 2014.

  • Delbeke, J. (2013). Foreword. In H. Bruyninckx, Y. Qi, Q. T. Nguyen & D. Belis (Eds.), The governance of climate relations between Europe and Asia: Evidence from China and Vietnam as key emerging economies (pp. xiv–xvi). Cheltenham and Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.

  • Delbosc, A., Stephan, N., Bellassen, V., Cormier, A., & Leguet, B. (2011). Assessment of supply-demand balance for Kyoto offsets (CERs and ERUs) up to 2020. Paris: CDC Climate Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Directive 2004/101/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 October 2004 amending Directive 2003/87/EC establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community, in respect of the Kyoto Protocol’s project mechanisms.

  • Directive 2009/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 amending Directive 2003/87/EC so as to improve and extend the greenhouse gas emission allowance trading scheme of the Community.

  • EU-China CDM Facilitation Project. (2010). EU–China CDM facilitation project final report. Stockholm, Beijing: Swedish Environmental Research Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2013). Emissions trading: 2012 saw continuing decline in emissions but growing surplus of allowances. Press Release, 16 May. Brussels: EC.

  • Finnemore, M., & Sikkink, K. (1998). International norm dynamics and political change. International Organization, 52(4), 887–917.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grubb, M., Vrolijk, C., & Brack, D. (1999). The kyoto protocol. A guide and assessment. London: The Royal Institute of International Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Intergovernmentall Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2014). Climate change 2014: Mitigation of climate change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Final Draft Report, April 12, 2014. http://mitigation2014.org. Accessed 12 June 2014.

  • Jiang, K., Zhuang, X., Miao, R., & He, C. (2013). China’s role in attaining the global 2 °C target. Climate Policy, 13(1), 55–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, A. I. (2001). Treating international institutions as social environments. International Studies Quarterly, 45(4), 487–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelley, J. (2004). International actors on the domestic scene: Membership conditionality and socialization by international institutions. International Organization, 58(3), 425–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koh, H. H. (1997). Why do nations obey international law? The Yale Law Journal, 106(8), 2599–2659.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michaelowa, A. (2007). Unilateral CDM: Can developing countries finance generation of greenhouse gas emission credits on their own? International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 7(1), 17–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michaelowa, A. (Ed.). (2012). Carbon markets or climate finance? Low carbon and adaptation investment choices for the developing world. Abingdon and New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michaelowa, A., & Buen, J. (2012). The clean development mechanism gold rush. In A. Michaelowa (Ed.), Carbon markets or climate finance? Low carbon and adaptation investment choices for the developing world (pp. 1–38). Abingdon and New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mutz, D. C., Sniderman, P. M., & Brody, R. A. (1996). Political persuasion: The birth of a field of study. In D. C. Mutz, P. M. Sniderman & R. A. Brody (Eds.), Political persuasion and attitude change (pp. 1–14). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Coordination Committee on Climate Change (NCCCC). (2005). Measures for operation and management of clean development mechanism projects in China. Beijing: NCCC.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) (2010). Letter including autonomous domestic mitigation actions. 28 January 2010. http://unfccc.int. Accessed 13 August 2014.

  • NDRC (2014). Clean development mechanism in China. http://cdm-en.ccchina.gov.cn/. Accessed 8 August 2014.

  • Pettenger, M. E. (Ed.). (2007). The social construction of climate change: Power, knowledge, norms, discourses. Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Qi, Y. (Ed.). (2011). 中国低碳发展报告 (2011–2012) Zhongguo ditan fazhan baogao (2011–2012) [Annual review of low carbon development in China (2011–2012)]. Beijing: Social Sciences Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Qi, Y. (Ed.). (2014). 中国低碳发展报告 (2014) Zhongguo ditan fazhan baogao (2014) [Annual review of low carbon development in China (2014)]. Beijing: Social Sciences Academic Press.

  • Qi, Y., Ma, L., Zhang, H., & Li, H. (2008). Translating a global issue into local priority: China’s local government response to climate change. Journal of Environment and Development, 17(4), 379–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quemin, S., & Wang, W. (2014). Overview of climate change policies and development of emissions trading in China. Paris: Chaire Economie du Climat.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruthner, L., Johnson, M., Chatterjee, B., Lazarus, M., Fujiwara, N., Egenhofer, C., et al. (2011). Study on the integrity of the clean development mechanism (CDM). Report CLIMA.B.3/ETU/2010/0020r for the European Commission, Directorate General for Climate Action. London: AEA.

  • Santalco, A. (2012). How and when China will exceed its renewable energy deployment targets. Energy Policy, 51, 652–661.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schimmelfennig, F. (2005). Strategic calculation and international socialization: Membership incentives, party constellations, and sustained compliance in Central and Eastern Europe. International Organization, 59(4), 827–860.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, L. (2007). Is the CDM fulfilling its environmental and sustainable development objectives? An evaluation of the CDM and options for improvement. Berlin: Öko-Institut.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schröder, M. (2012). Local climate governance in China: Hybrid actors and market mechanisms. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Skjærseth, J. B., & Wettestad, J. (2009). The origin, evolution and consequences of the EU emissions trading system. Global Environmental Politics, 9(2), 101–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torney, D., & Biedenkopf, K. (2014). Cooperation on greenhouse gas emissions trading in EU–China climate diplomacy. In J. Men & E. Reuter (Eds.), China–EU: Green cooperation. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNEP Risø Centre (2013). UNEP Risø CDM/JI Pipeline Analysis and Database, 1 January 2013. http://cdmpipeline.org. Accessed 31 January 2013.

  • UNFCCC (2006). Report of the Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol on its first session, held at Montreal from 28 November to 10 December 2005. FCCC/KP/CMP/2005/8/Add.1.

  • UNFCCC (2013a). Clean development mechanism (CDM). http://cdm.unfccc.int. Accessed 10 October 2013.

  • UNFCCC (2013b). CDM in numbers. http://cdm.unfccc.int/Statistics/index.html. Accessed 10 October 2013.

  • Van Eynde, S., & Chang, P. (2013). Explaining the development of China’s renewable energy policies: Comparing wind and solar power. In H. Bruyninckx, Y. Qi, Q. T. Nguyen & D. Belis (Eds.), The governance of climate relations between Europe and Asia: Evidence from China and Vietnam as key emerging economies (pp. 76–106). Cheltenham and Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.  

  • Walsh, S., Tian, H., Whalley, J., & Agarwal, M. (2011). China and India’s participation in global climate negotiations. International Environmental Agreements: Politics Law and Economics, 11(3), 261–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, S., & Duan, M. (2014). China’s domestic offset scheme. Presentation, South–South exchange: Developing domestic offset schemes. 2 March 2014, Mexico City.

  • Wara, M. (2008). Measuring the clean development mechanism’s performance and potential. UCLA Law Review, 55(6), 1759–1803.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wendt, A. (1999). Social theory of international politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • World Bank, Ministry of Science and Technology of China, The Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit & Swiss State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (2004). Clean development mechanism in China: Taking a proactive and sustainable approach. Washington, DC: World Bank.

  • World Bank & NDRC. (2009). Clean development mechanism in China: Five years of experience (2004–09). Washington, DC: World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), Ecofys, & Azure International. (2008). The value of carbon in China: Carbon finance and China’s sustainable energy transition. Beijing and Hong Kong: WWF.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Wind Energy Association (WWEA). (2013). The world wind energy association 2013 half-year report. Bonn: WWEA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, O. (1992). The effectiveness of international institutions: Hard cases and critical variables. In J. N. Rosenau & E.-O. Czempiel (Eds.), Governance without government: Order and change in world politics (pp. 160–194). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Hans Bruyninckx, Oran R. Young, Qi Ye, Michael Wara, Alexander Wendt, Jos Delbeke, Jürgen Lefevere, Damien Meadows, Arthur P. J. Mol, Katja Biedenkopf, Chang Pei-fei, Wang Bingyan, Kris Bachus, Sarah Van Eynde, Emilie Bécault, Joergen Fenhann, Sander Happaerts, Dinh Thi Ngoc Bich, Nguyen Quang Thuan, Nguyen An Ha, Simon Schunz, Jane E. Shey, Axel Marx, Jan Wouters, Stephan Keukeleire, Leonie Reins and Geert Van Calster for sharing their inspiration, assistance, comments and support in the research and writing process of this article. We would also like to extend our gratitude to the various experts and interviewees that we met during the past four years, in addition to two anonymous reviewers and the editors of this journal. Part of this research was funded by the KU Leuven-Tsinghua Fund (University of Leuven, Belgium and Tsinghua University, China).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Leuven International and European Studies, Faculty of Social Sciences, KU Leuven, Parkstraat 45, Box 3602, 3000, Leuven, Belgium

    David Belis

  2. Leuven International and European Studies, Faculty of Social Sciences, KU Leuven, Parkstraat 45, Box 3600, 3000, Leuven, Belgium

    Bart Kerremans

Authors
  1. David Belis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bart Kerremans
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David Belis.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Belis, D., Kerremans, B. The socialization potential of the CDM in EU–China climate relations. Int Environ Agreements 16, 543–559 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-014-9269-y

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-014-9269-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation