Editor's note: Jiang Feng, a special commentator for CGTN, is a professor of German and European Studies at Shanghai International Studies University and president of the Shanghai Area Studies Association. The article reflects the author's opinions and not necessarily those of CGTN.

As geopolitical competition intensifies and multilateralism comes under strain, China-EU relations are undergoing profound adjustment, marked by both friction and opportunity.

Climate change is no longer simply an environmental issue. It has become intertwined with economic transformation, energy security, industrial competition and international rulemaking, increasingly shaping the relationship between China and Europe.

Participants from China, Europe and other parts of the world recently gathered in Paris for the eighth Friends of the Paris Agreement High-Level Dialogue to explore these challenges and opportunities. A shared message emerged: With the multilateral order under strain, China and Europe should strengthen climate cooperation and deliver tangible results that bring greater certainty to a turbulent world.

China and the EU have a long history of coordination within multilateral climate frameworks. Together, they have upheld the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Paris Agreement as the cornerstones of global climate governance, accumulating valuable experience along the way.

Yet as climate action translates into technological competition and industrial rivalry, clashes between their immediate interests have become more apparent. The EU prioritizes regulatory constraints and standard-setting, at times turning climate issues into instruments of geopolitical competition. Its strategic view of China as an industrial competitor, and even a systemic rival, has become intertwined with its climate agenda.

China, by contrast, prioritizes development and a gradual transition. It upholds the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, emphasizes the right to development and fairness in governance, and consistently regards the EU as an important strategic partner.

Differences in regulatory approaches, governance structures and stages of industrial development create obstacles to alignment on carbon border measures, carbon footprint certification and green product standards. Geopolitical narratives distort public perceptions on both sides, while technological barriers and export controls raise the cost of green industrial cooperation.

However, such differences also have a positive dimension: They show that climate governance is moving from broad aspirations to practical implementation. Disagreement need not mean confrontation, and challenges can create substantial opportunities for cooperation.

China and Europe have highly complementary resource endowments and industrial capabilities, providing a solid foundation for bilateral cooperation. China has the world's largest renewable energy capacity, comprehensive green manufacturing supply chains and extensive opportunities to deploy transition technologies. It has developed notable industrial strengths in solar and wind power, energy storage, new energy vehicles and ultra-high-voltage transmission.

The EU has considerable expertise in fundamental research for green technologies, green hydrogen development, deep industrial decarbonization, carbon capture and utilization, the circular economy and regulatory approaches. These strengths are not inherently at odds. They can support joint rulemaking, complementary technological development and more closely connected markets.

Global climate governance faces fragmented rules, inadequate financing, barriers to the international flow of green technologies and products, and competing narratives. Europe's efforts to build exclusive green supply chains and extend its regulatory requirements to trading partners risk overlooking differences in national development stages. The transition needs of many Global South countries remain inadequately addressed.

China-EU differences over climate governance and development thus reflect broader tensions and cooperation needs between the Global North and South. Both sides have a responsibility, as major global actors, to help provide inclusive and widely accessible public goods for climate action and development.

Moving beyond zero-sum thinking, China and Europe can strengthen climate cooperation through joint rulemaking, greater public understanding and collaborative technological development, opening new horizons for the broader relationship.

Joint rulemaking is fundamental to resolving institutional differences. Many industrial disputes between China and Europe stem from unilateral European rulemaking and incompatible standards. Moving beyond exclusive regulations and geopolitical divisions, the two should strengthen their environmental and climate consultation mechanisms. They should pursue the alignment and mutual recognition of standards in key areas, including carbon accounting, carbon footprint traceability, green certification, the circular economy and green finance.

An open and inclusive global system of green rules would give more countries a voice in shaping those rules. It would reduce regulatory mismatches and provide greater predictability for bilateral green investment, industrial cooperation and trade, while supporting fair and effective global carbon markets. Climate regulation would then better serve the shared global transition.

Building public understanding is equally important to strengthening trust. Climate governance extends beyond diplomacy between governments: It requires participation across society. More exchanges among governments, researchers, businesses and social organizations are needed. Sharing practical transition experiences, jointly training talent and improving information flows in both directions can foster a clearer understanding that the green transition transcends borders and climate crisis affects everyone.

Collaborative technological development offers a powerful means of unlocking further cooperation. Joint laboratories, demonstration projects and platforms for commercializing research can support collaborative work on deep industrial decarbonization, advanced energy storage, the commercialization of green hydrogen, methane emissions management and zero-carbon transport.

China and Europe can also work with Global South countries on projects in third-country markets. Replacing technological restrictions with collaborative innovation would turn competitive pressure into a shared impetus for green technological progress. This would benefit industries on both sides while providing the world with more affordable low-carbon technologies.

Through practical cooperation, China and Europe can help shape a fairer and more inclusive approach to global climate governance, one that upholds the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and balances emissions reduction obligations with development needs.

Balancing efficiency with fairness, and competition with cooperation, can help narrow differences in Chinese and European perceptions. It can also counter the risk of global climate governance splitting into rival blocs and offer useful principles and practical pathways for green transition across the Global South.

Consensus is difficult; action is harder still. Increasingly severe climate disasters make sustained cooperation all the more urgent. China and the EU should make cooperation on global governance and development an important means of rebalancing their relationship.

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