A Strategic Alliance of Climate Leaders: U.S., China, and India
In 2014, China and the United States reached an agreement to strengthen cooperation in combating climate change. They planned to implement a protocol that would be enforced at the United Nations Climate Conference in Paris at the end of 2015. In that breakthrough deal, the U.S. agreed to reach a reduction target of 28% from its 2005 carbon dioxide emissions levels by 2025, and China agreed to peak its emissions by 2030.
Nearly a year after the joint agreement to cut carbon emissions, representatives from China and the United States convened in Los Angeles on September 15, 2015 to sign a series of agreements aimed at reducing greenhouse emissions. The U.S.-China Climate Leaders Summit concluded on September 16 with several outcomes, such as the formulation of the U.S.-China Climate Leaders Declaration and “Alliance of Peaking Pioneer Cities” (APPC). The Declaration is a statement of intent made by cities, states, and provinces from the U.S. and China to implement effective actions to tackle climate change, while the APPC is an alliance of cities and provinces that have established peaking years earlier than China’s target of 2030. These outcomes emphasize the importance of local level cooperation and actions in the implementation of aggressive national climate targets and also suggest the importance of negotiations between smaller emitters in tackling climate change.
International climate negotiations can be modeled with game theory and also the strong triadic closure property in terms of strategic, side-agreements between nations. An agreement between the U.S. and China is not enough to spur change unless there is also broad cooperation across the globe. At the Paris Climate Talks later this year, trilateral cooperation between the three players, U.S., China, and India, will be critical to negotiations, especially since India’s population will surpass China’s in the next decade. For the triadic relationship to be successful, there must also be alliances between U.S.-India and China-India in addition to the U.S.-China alliance. However, there are great stakes or payoffs for India and its economic growth if it commits to a “low-carbon development path.” It has two strategies: (1) agree to emission reductions and collaborate on regulation and technology or (2) decline to cut emissions and face external scrutiny. Regardless of the strategy that India decides to take, trilateral collaboration is necessary going forward. As Obama said in 2014, “(The joint agreement) is a major milestone in US-China relations and shows what is possible when we work together on an urgent global challenge.”
Though the U.S. and China are committed to reducing emissions, the success of negotiations between smaller emitters is also critical to the climate negotiation process. Similar to the local level implementation of reduction targets in the U.S. and China, commitment from smaller emitters and the formation of alliances and ties between them in a worldwide network is a necessity for reaching global agreements and achieving global cooperation.
Sources:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/us-china-climate-summit_55f8434ae4b00e2cd5e801d6
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/26/opinion/kevin-rudd-paris-cant-be-another-copenhagen.html?_r=0
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/nov/12/china-and-us-make-carbon-pledge
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/11/11/us-china-joint-announcement-climate-change