Abstract
Using the theoretical framework provided by the realist school of international relations, this article tries to explain why U.S. climate leadership has been mostly weak, erratic, and unreliable since the early 1990s, and why the attempt on the part of the Biden administration to revive U.S. climate leadership may yield disappointing results. From a realist perspective, flawed U.S. climate leadership may stem from a combination of three factors inherent to the international system: (1) the importance of material wealth in the international balance of power; (2) the willingness of nations to preserve their sovereignty; and (3) the enduring influence of nationalism, which undermines the ability of nations to trust one another.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Allison, Graham. 2017. Destined for War: Can America and China Escape Thucydides’ Trap? London: Scribe.
Aykut, Stefan, and Amy Dahan. 2015. Gouverner le climat: 20 ans de négociations internationales. Paris: Presses Universitaires de Sciences Po.
Ciplet, David, Robert J. Timmons, and Mizan Khan. 2013. The Politics of International Climate Adaption Funding: Justice and Divisions in the Greenhouse. Global Environmental Politics 13: 49–68.
Dunne, Tim, and Brian C. Schmidt. 2005. Realism. In The Globalization of World Politics, ed. John Baylis, Steve Smith, and Patricia Owens, 99–112. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Energy Information Administration. 2020. Annual Energy Outlook 2020 with Projections to 2050. https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/pdf/AEO2020%20Full%20Report.pdf. Accessed 5 November 2021.
Fact Sheet. 2022. United States and European Commission Announce Task Force to Reduce Europe’s Dependence on Russian Fossil Fuels. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/03/25/fact-sheet-united-states-and-european-commission-announce-task-force-to-reduce-europes-dependence-on-russian-fossil-fuels/#:~:text=Today%2C%20President%20Joe%20Biden%20and,war%20of%20choice%20against%20Ukraine. Accessed 6 April 2022.
Freedman, Andrew. 2021. White House Calls on OPEC+ to Increase Oil Production as Gas Prices Rise. Axios. https://www.axios.com/oil-prices-opec-biden-gas-3f628612-86fc-495e-966e-70d9a42d4edd.html. Accessed 6 April 2022.
Geman, Ben. 2021. US-China Tensions Spill into Climate Talks. Axios. https://www.axios.com/us-china-tensions-climate-change-talks-aa30a55f-0875-4db1-beac-6cddc1ac6b36.html. Accessed 5 November 2021.
Hazony, Yoram. 2018. The Virtue of Nationalism. New York: Basic Books.
Jacques, Peter J., Riley E. Dunlap, and Mark Freeman. 2008. The Organization of Denial: Conservative Think Tanks and Environmental Skepticism. Environmental Politics 17: 349–385.
Koch, Hans-Joachim, and Christin Mielke. 2011. Globalization of Environmental Law. Journal for European Environmental and Planning Law 8: 273–290.
Layzer, Judith. 2012. Open for Business: Conservatives’ Opposition to Environmental Regulation. Cambridge: MIT.
Liu, Peiran R. and Adrian E. Raftery. 2021. Country-Based Rate of Emissions Reductions Should Increase by 80% Beyond Nationally Determined Contributions to Meet the 2 °C target. Communications Earth and Environment 2. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-021-00097-8.
McNeill, John R. 2016. The Great Acceleration. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Mearsheimer, John J. 2003. The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. New York: W. W. Norton.
Pollin, Robert. 2015. Greening the Global Economy. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Rose, Gideon. 1998. Neoclassical Realism and Theories of Foreign Policy. World Politics 51: 144–172.
Sachs, Noah. 2019. The Paris Agreement in the 2020s: Breakdown or Breakup? Ecology Law Quarterly 46: 865–910.
Senate Resolution 98. 1997. https://www.congress.gov/bill/105th-congress/senate-resolution/98/text. Accessed 5 November 2021.
Stalley, Phillip. 2013. Principled Strategy: The Role of Equity Norms in China’s Climate Change Diplomacy. Global Environmental Policy 13: 1–8.
Symons, Jonathan. 2019. Realist Climate Ethics: Promoting Climate Ambition Within the Classical Realist Tradition. Review of International Studies 45: 141–160.
Trump, Donald J. 2017. Statement by President Trump on the Paris Climate Accord. 1 June. www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/statement-president-trump-paris-climate-accord/. Accessed 2 February 2018.
United Nations Environment Programme. 2020. Emissions Gap Report 2020: Executive Summary. https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/34438/EGR20ESE.pdf. Accessed 5 November 2021.
Valantin, Jean-Michel. 2020. L’aigle, le dragon et la crise planétaire. Paris: Éditions du Seuil.
Waltz, Kenneth N. 1979. Theory of International Politics. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Yergin, Daniel. 2020. The New Map: Energy, Climate, and the Clash of Nations. London: Allen Lane.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Collomb, JD. (2022). The Limitations of U.S. Climate Leadership: A Realist Perspective. In: Stricof, M., Vagnoux, I. (eds) U.S. Leadership in a World of Uncertainties. Studies of the Americas. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10260-8_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10260-8_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-10259-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-10260-8
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)