Building a platform to address global climate change

Editor's note: Arvea Marieni, a special commentator on current affairs for CGTN, is German Climate Pact Ambassador of European Commission. She is partner and board member of the management consultancy Brainscapital and shareholder of the French systems engineering company Beam Cube, where she co-leads the development of Ecological Transition Solutions. As a strategy consultant, climate policy expert and innovation manager, she specializes in EU-China environmental cooperation. The article reflects the author's opinions and not necessarily the views of CGTN.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) recently approved an extensive six-year working program in Istanbul, prioritizing climate change adaptation which is among significant agreements reached at the 28th session of the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP28) including commitments to phase out fossil fuels and reduce methane emissions.

But all recent COPs have shown that, without a background of common policies and rules, it is virtually impossible to make decisions that go beyond the now-ritual reaffirmation of political commitments on climate change.

It is therefore necessary to "align" industrial standards and policies with environmental climate change objectives. To ensure that climate protection is a tool for the growth and rebalancing of the global economy, we must bear in mind that different levels of development and "carbon intensity" require different targets and measures for individual countries or groups of countries, as well-represented by the positions of Brazil, China, India, and South Africa group.

As things stand, no COP can hope for positive results unless developed and emerging countries commit themselves to a new framework of international relations based on mutual obligations and "competitive cooperation." In this perspective, COPs may be the place to set environmental targets for climate protection, but certainly not the place to decide on the necessary sectoral policies and rules. Climate change is moving much faster than political decisions.

Binding agreements and verification

We need to break out of the COP rituals, adopt an effective and fast-track negotiating process, and ask the world's major economies – within the framework of "common but differentiated responsibilities" – to decide on rules and policies to tackle the climate crisis before it hits.

A global framework of cross-sectoral policies is needed for a new format for decision-making. Only coordinated action by all actors in the international community can ensure that such important measures are agreed upon and implemented. Responsibility for a global agenda on the economics and geopolitics of climate change must be shared by the highest representatives of governments and international financial institutions, including the major multinational energy and other strategic industries.

This can be done along the lines of the Montreal Protocol to protect the ozone layer, "an example of outstanding international cooperation: probably the most successful agreement between nations," according to former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan. Barbados President Mia Mottley's Bridgetown Initiative is essentially working in the same direction.

At COP28, more than 100 countries were calling for a phase-out of fossil fuels. We can do this if we build a new system for the global economy with binding commitments, starting with the EU and China.

The leadership of China and the EU

2020 was a turning point. The international climate context changed dramatically. For the first time, the political will to act was taking shape. In just a few months, results were achieved that have been unthinkable for 30 years.

Much of the credit goes to the European Union. The EU, followed by other major economies, made unilateral and unconditional commitments (2030-2050) to climate neutrality, breaking the 30-year "prisoner's dilemma" of the COP negotiating system. The Green Deal is central to the vision of von der Leyen's Geopolitical Commission. If successful, it can become the EU's new founding pact in a politically integrated continent. One of its strengths, as we shall see, is the integration of climate and environmental parameters into all EU sectoral policies.

China's "dual carbon" targets – to peak carbon emissions by 2030 and achieve carbon neutrality by 2060 – were formally set by President Xi Jinping at the United Nations General Assembly in September 2020.

Brussels, London, Washington, and Beijing are integrating climate and sustainability into their international trade agreements. The blocs are building a "working modality and blueprint" for the World Trade Organization (WTO) reform that could accelerate the energy transition and the shift to a more sustainable, circular, and resource-efficient economy, in line with the Paris, UN SDGs and biodiversity goals.

In this context, the novelty lies in the definition of common environmental and industrial standards that contribute to economic and market convergence and create a level playing field for all actors. Fiscal measures and price signals address market and competitive distortions, while economic factors change costs and investment decisions.

An EU-China platform for the green economy

The EU and China are in the best position to build a platform to address the global climate challenge, building on their existing cooperation, policies, and ongoing programs on climate change, decarbonization, and the circular economy.

The EU, with its Green Deal, can champion the design of a programmatic and operational platform for global decarbonization, in cooperation with the G20 group and WTO. With a long track record of constructive relations with China on climate and environmental issues, and as a natural ally of the United States, it has an opportunity to build the foundations of the future in the common house.

As far as China is concerned, an alignment on climate and the environment would allow Brussels and Beijing to exploit the competitive advantages gained through smart policies on renewables and green technologies and the development potential inherent in the eco-economic transition, but also to better resist the pressures of the many actors – state and non-state – affected by the ongoing industrial reform.

While competing – fairly – among themselves, they would ensure that there is no "race to the bottom" imposed by trading partners who undermine the transition through their commitment to polluting technologies.

When it comes to energy and energy independence, the geopolitical interests of Beijing and Brussels – two net importers of fossil fuels – are closely linked.

However, the differences between Europe and China cannot be ignored. If national egos and growing geopolitical rivalries prevail over the need and urgency for multilateral management of the common interest, humanity will have very few cards left to play.

(If you want to contribute and have specific expertise, please contact us at opinions@cgtn.com. Follow @thouse_opinions on Twitter to discover the latest commentaries in the CGTN Opinion Section.)