Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://ah.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/131859| 題名: | 以責任分擔的公平原則評析巴黎協定的全球氣候承諾 Examining Paris Commitments with Equity Principles in the context of Burden Sharing Framework |
作者: | 郭依潔 Kuo, I-Chieh |
貢獻者: | 李河清 Lee, Ho-Ching 郭依潔 Kuo, I-Chieh |
關鍵詞: | 巴黎協定 公平原則 國家自主減量貢獻 氣候變化 國際合作 責任分擔 Paris Agreement equity principles Nationally Determined Contributions climate change international cooperation burden-sharing |
日期: | 2020 | 上傳時間: | 2-Sep-2020 | 摘要: | 2015年巴黎協定的通過是國際氣候合作的重大突破。然而，協定給予各國對於減緩程度的自由裁量權卻也引起了責任分擔的公平性疑慮，同時也增加了各國作出進一步的減量承諾的合作障礙。本論文主要利用主成份分析和集群分析方法，以過去氣候談判中有關公平原則的基本主張—責任、能力、平等和發展權—為分類依據，依減緩義務程度將國家重新分群，以此作為評估各國國家自主減量貢獻的基準。接著，再利用複迴歸分析方法檢驗公平性指標對於各國減緩目標的影響，從而解析當前世界各國對於巴黎協定的合作態度。本研究希望能為解決巴黎協定目標與現實排放之間的差距提供一個初步的解決方向，進而為國際氣候治理機制奠定良好的合作環境。 The adoption of the Paris Agreement in 2015 was a significant breakthrough in the global climate governance regime. However, the historic achievement of the negotiations came at the price of national discretion in determining the emission reduction levels, which raised fairness concerns in burden-sharing and became an obstacle for further commitments. The main purpose of the study was to include four fundamental propositions related to the equity principles in the international climate negotiations—responsibility, capacity, equality, and right to development—as the references for assessing countries’ mitigation pledges from the nationally determined contributions. Principal component analysis and cluster analysis were employed to deconstruct the existing country group classifications and to re-classify countries to implement equivalent obligations. Subsequently, multiple regression analysis was performed to examine the influence of equity indicators on each country’s climate targets, thereby analyzing the attitude of countries around the world toward compliance with the Paris Agreement. This study was intended to propose a preliminary method to bridge the gap between the current emission levels and the permissible levels to achieve the Paris Agreement’s goals and to provide a favorable environment for international cooperation on climate change. |
參考文獻: | 李河清（2004）知識社群與全球氣候談判。《問題與研究》43（6）：73-102。\n李河清（2014）從科技到政策: 氣候知識如何影響國際氣候談判。《科技社會人2》，林文源等編著，交通大學出版社。頁283-300。\n徐紅艷（2002）沃勒斯坦的世界體系論—要旨與評析。《合肥工業大學學報》社會科學版（2）：23。\n陳世榮（2015）。社會科學研究中的文字探勘應用：以文意為基礎的文件分類及其問題。《人文及社會科學集刊》27（4）：683-718。\n黃光國（1995）。主觀研究與客觀研究：多重典範的研究取向。在知識與行動：中華文化傳統的社會心理詮釋（第三章，頁91-103）。台北市：心理出版社。\n曾怡仁（2018）。馬克思主義。《國際關係理論入門》，包宗和、張登及主編，台北：五南出版社。\n劉坤鱧（2012）。中國的崛起與挑戰：世界體系理論視角的分析。《全球政治評論》40：115-136\nAndresen, S., & Agrawala, S. (2002). Leaders, pushers and laggards in the making of the climate regime. Global Environmental Change, 12(1), 41-51.\nAtik, H., & Ünlü, F. (2019). Economic Development Aids as a Financial Instrument of Global Public Goods: Performance Assessment for Donor Countries. Global Challenges in Public Finance and International Relations. 220-241. IGI Global.\nBarrett, S. (2003). Environment and statecraft: The strategy of environmental treaty-making. OUP Oxford.\nBarrett, S., & Stavins, R. (2003). Increasing participation and compliance in international climate change agreements. International Environmental Agreements, 3(4), 349-376.\nBergsten, C. F. (2009). Two`s company. Foreign Affairs, 88(5), 169-170.\nBrief, C. L. (2002). The Principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities: Origins and Scope. Paper produced for the ‘World Summit on Sustainable Development’, Johannesburg, South Africa, 26.\nBrunnée, J., & Streck, C. (2013). The UNFCCC as a negotiation forum: towards common but more differentiated responsibilities. Climate Policy, 13(5), 589-607.\nCaney, S. (2014). Two kinds of climate justice: avoiding harm and sharing burdens. Journal of Political Philosophy, 22(2), 125-149.\nChu, C. T., Kim, S. K., Lin, Y. A., Yu, Y., Bradski, G., Olukotun, K., & Ng, A. Y. (2007). Map-reduce for Machine Learning on Multicore. Advances in neural information processing systems, 281-288.\nCordato, R. (2004). Toward an Austrian theory of environmental economics. The Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics, 7(1), 3-16.\nCosta, L., Rybski, D., & Kropp, J. P. (2011). A human development framework for CO2 reductions. PLOS ONE, 6(12).\nDeCoster, J. (1998). Overview of Factor Analysis. Retrieved May 20, 2020 from http://www.stat-help.com/notes.html\nDeuskar, C., Baker, J. L., & Mason, D. (2015). East Asia`s changing urban landscape: Measuring a decade of spatial growth. World Bank Publications.\nDimitrov, R. S. (2003). Knowledge, power, and interests in environmental regime formation. International Studies Quarterly, 47(1), 123-150.\nDu Pont, Y. R., Jeffery, M. L., Gütschow, J., Rogelj, J., Christoff, P., & Meinshausen, M. (2017). Equitable mitigation to achieve the Paris Agreement goals. Nature Climate Change, 7(1), 38.\nDunteman, G. H. (1994). Principal Component Analysis (PCA). Factor Analysis and Related Techniques.\nFleming Jr, J. C., Peroni, R. J., & Shay, S. E. (2001). Fairness in International Taxation: The Ability-to-Pay Case for Taxing Worldwide Income. Fla. Tax Rev., 5, 299.\nGrasso, M., & Roberts, J. T. (2014). A compromise to break the climate impasse. Nature Climate Change, 4(7), 543-549.\nGuttman, L. (1954). Some necessary conditions for common-factor analysis. Psychometrika, 19(2), 149-161.\nHallegatte, S., Bangalore, M., Bonzanigo, L., Fay, M., Kane, T., Narloch, U., ... & Vogt-Schilb, A. (2015). Shock waves: managing the impacts of climate change on poverty. The World Bank.\nHenson, R. K., & Roberts, J. K. (2006). Use of exploratory factor analysis in published research: Common errors and some comment on improved practice. Educational and Psychological measurement, 66(3), 393-416.\nHeyward, M. (2007). Equity and international climate change negotiations: a matter of perspective. Climate Policy, 7(6), 518-534.\nHöhne, N., & Blok, K. (2005). Calculating historical contributions to climate change–discussing the ‘Brazilian Proposal’. Climatic Change, 71(1-2), 141-173.\nHu, L., Tian, K., Wang, X., & Zhang, J. (2012). The “S” curve relationship between export diversity and economic size of countries. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 391(3), 731-739.\nIPCC. (2007). Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, Pachauri, R.K and Reisinger, A. (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland\nIPCC. (2014). Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, R.K. Pachauri and L.A. Meyer (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland\nIPCC, 2018: Global Warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, H.-O. Pörtner, D. Roberts, J. Skea, P.R. Shukla, A. Pirani, W. Moufouma-Okia, C. Péan, R. Pidcock, S. Connors, J.B.R. Matthews, Y. Chen, X. Zhou, M.I. Gomis, E. Lonnoy, T. Maycock, M. Tignor, and T. Waterfield (eds.)]. In Press.\nJiménez, E. (2017). The Principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities (CBDR&RC) and the Compliance Branch of the Paris Agreement. Retrieved January 13, 2020, from http://www.oas.org/en/sedi/dsd/IWRM/Documentspot/Papers/The%20Principle%20of%20Common%20but%20Differentiated%20Responsibilities%20and%20Respective%20Capabilities%20(CBDRRC)%20and%20the%20Compliance%20Branch%20of%20the%20Paris%20Agreement.pdf\nJolliffe, I. T., & Cadima, J. (2016). Principal Component Analysis: A Review and Recent Developments. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 374(2065), 20150202.\nKendrick, M. S. (1939). The Ability-to-Pay Theory of Taxation. The American Economic Review, 92-101.\nKeohane, R. O., & Oppenheimer, M. (2016). Paris: Beyond the climate dead end through pledge and review? Politics and Governance, 4(3), 142-151.\nKertzer, J. D., & Rathbun, B. C. (2015). Fair is fair: Social preferences and reciprocity in international politics. World Politics, 67(4), 613-655.\nKlinsky, S., Roberts, T., Huq, S., Okereke, C., Newell, P., Dauvergne, P. & Keck, M. (2017). Why equity is fundamental in climate change policy research. Global Environmental Change, 44, 170-173.\nKreft, S., Eckstein, D., & Melchior, I. (2015). Global Climate Risk Index 2017: Who Suffers Most from Extreme Weather Events. Germanwatch.\nLange, A., Löschel, A., Vogt, C., & Ziegler, A. (2010). On the self-interested use of equity in international climate negotiations. European Economic Review, 54(3), 359-375.\nLauria, A., Ippolito, M., & Almerico, A. M. (2009). Principal component analysis on molecular descriptors as an alternative point of view in the search of new Hsp90 inhibitors. Computational Biology and Chemistry, 33(5), 386-390.\nLipscy, P. Y., & Lee, H. N. K. (2019). The IMF as a biased global insurance mechanism: asymmetrical moral hazard, reserve accumulation, and financial crises. International Organization, 73(1), 35-64.\nMalmgren, R. D., Stouffer, D. B., Campanharo, A. S., & Amaral, L. A. N. (2009). On Universality in Human Correspondence Activity. Science, 325(5948), 1696-1700.\nMason, R. L., Gunst, R. F., & Hess, J. L. (2003). Statistical design and analysis of experiments: with applications to engineering and science (Vol. 474). John Wiley & Sons.\nMusgrave, R. A., Musgrave, P. B., & Bird, R. M. (1989). Public finance in theory and practice (Vol. 5). New York: McGraw-Hill.\nNomikos, P., & MacGregor, J. F. (1994). Monitoring batch processes using multiway principal component analysis. AIChE Journal, 40(8), 1361-1375.\nNash, J. (2000). Too much market: Conflict between tradable pollution allowances and the polluter pays principle. Harvard Environmental Law Review, 24(2), 465-536.\nNorthrop, E., H. Biru, S. Lima, M. Bouye, and R. Song. (2016). “Examining the Alignment Between the Intended Nationally Determined Contributions and Sustainable Development Goals.” Working Paper. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute.\nOkereke, C. (2010). Climate justice and the international regime. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 1(3), 462-474.\nOkereke, C., & Coventry, P. (2016). Climate justice and the international regime: before, during, and after Paris. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 7(6), 834-851.\nOlivier J.G.J., Janssens-Maenhout G., Muntean M. and Peters J.A.H.W. (2016). Trends in global CO2 emissions; 2016 Report, The Hague:PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency; Ispra: European Commission, Joint Research Centre.\nPage, E. A. (2008). Distributing the burdens of climate change. Environmental Politics, 17(4), 556-575.\nPahuja, N., & Rai, A. (2017). SDG Footprint of Asian NDCs: Exploring Synergies between Domestic Policies and International Goals. The Energy and Resources Institute: New Delhi, India.\nPahuja, N. (2019). SDG Footprint of African NDCs: Advancing the Co-benefits Approach. The Energy and Resources Institute: New Delhi, India.\nPan, X., den Elzen, M., Höhne, N., Teng, F., & Wang, L. (2017). Exploring fair and ambitious mitigation contributions under the Paris Agreement goals. Environmental Science & Policy, 74, 49-56.\nPauw, P., Brandi, C., Richerzhagen, C., Bauer, S., & Schmole, H. (2014). Different perspectives on differentiated responsibilities: a state-of-the-art review of the notion of common but differentiated responsibilities in international negotiations (No. 6/2014). Discussion Paper.\nPosner, E. A., & Sunstein, C. R. (2007). Climate Change Justice. Georgetown Law Journal, 96, 1565.\nPratiwi, D., Fawcett, J. P., Gordon, K. C., & Rades, T. (2002). Quantitative analysis of polymorphic mixtures of ranitidine hydrochloride by Raman spectroscopy and principal components analysis. European journal of pharmaceutics and biopharmaceutics, 54(3), 337-341.\nPhilibert, C. (2004). International energy technology collaboration and climate change mitigation. OECD.\nRathbun, B. C., Kertzer, J. D., & Paradis, M. (2017). Homo Diplomaticus: Mixed-method Evidence of Variation in Strategic Rationality. International Organization, 71(1), 33-60.\nRho, S., & Tomz, M. (2017). Why Don`t Trade Preferences Reflect Economic Self-interest? International Organization, 71(1), 85-108.\nRichter, W. F. (1983). From ability to pay to concepts of equal sacrifice. Journal of Public Economics, 20(2), 211-229.\nRingius, L., Torvanger, A., & Holtsmark, B. (1998). Can multi-criteria rules fairly distribute climate burdens? OECD results from three burden sharing rules. Energy Policy, 26(10), 777-793.\nRingius, L., Torvanger, A., & Underdal, A. (2002). Burden sharing and fairness principles in international climate policy. International Environmental Agreements, 2(1), 1-22.\nRitchie, H., & Roser, M. (2020). CO₂ and Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Published online at OurWorldInData.org. Retrieved May 20, 2020 from: https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-other-greenhouse-gas-emissions\nRoss, K., Rich D., & Ge, M. (2016). Translating targets into numbers: quantifying the greenhouse gas targets of the G20 countries. World Resource Institute. Retrieved May 20, 2020, from https://wriorg.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/Translating_Targets_into_Numbers.pdf\nRowlands, I. H. (1995). Explaining national climate change policies. Global Environmental Change, 5(3), 235-249.\nRowlands, I. H. (1997). International fairness and justice in addressing global climate change. Environmental Politics, 6(3), 1-30.\nRussell, D. W. (2002). In search of underlying dimensions: The use (and abuse) of factor analysis in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(12), 1629-1646.\nSârbu, C., & Malawska, B. (2000). Evaluation of lipophilicity of piperazine derivatives by thin layer chromatography and principal component analysis. Journal of Liquid Chromatography & Related Technologies, 23:14, 2143-2154, DOI: 10.1081/JLC-100100477\nSavaresi, A. (2016). The Paris Agreement: A New Beginning? Journal of Energy & Natural Resources Law, 34(1), 16-26.\nSheriff, G. (2019). Burden Sharing Under the Paris Climate Agreement. Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, 6(2), 275-318.\nShlens, J. (2014). A tutorial on principal component analysis. Retrieved May 20, 2020 from http://www.cs.cmu.edu/helaw/papers/pca.pdf\nSilge, J., & Robinson, D. (2016). Tidytext: Text Mining and Analysis Using Tidy Data Principles in R. J. Open Source Software, 1(3), 37.\nSprinz, D., & Vaahtoranta, T. (1994). The interest-based explanation of international environmental policy. International Organization, 48(1), 77-105.\nTavoni, A., Dannenberg, A., Kallis, G., & Löschel, A. (2011). Inequality, communication, and the avoidance of disastrous climate change in a public goods game. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(29), 11825-11829.\nThal, A. (2020). The Desire for Social Status and Economic Conservatism among Affluent Americans. American Political Science Review, 1-17.\nTian, W. A. N. G., & Xiang, G. A. O. (2018). Reflection and operationalization of the common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities principle in the transparency framework under the international climate change regime. Advances in Climate Change Research, 9(4), 253-263.\nTurner, B. L., Matson, P. A., McCarthy, J. J., Corell, R. W., Christensen, L., Eckley, N., ... & Martello, M. L. (2003). Illustrating the Coupled Human–Environment System for Vulnerability Analysis: Three Case Studies. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 100(14), 8080-8085.\nUnderdal, A., & Wei, T. (2015). Distributive Fairness: A Mutual Recognition Approach. Environmental Science & Policy, 51, 35-44.\nUNISDR (2015). The human cost of weather-related disasters, 1995–2015. United Nations, Geneva.\nUnited Nations. (1997). Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.\nUnited Nations. (2015). Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. New York: United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs.\nUnited Nations. (2015). Paris Agreement. United Nations Treaty Collect, 1-27.\nUnited Nations. (2017). Catalysing the Implementation of Nationally Determined Contributions in the Context of the 2030 Agenda through South-South Cooperation.\nUtz, S. (2001). Ability to pay. Whittier Law Review, 23, 867.\nVictor, D. G. (2011). Global Warming Gridlock: Creating More Effective Strategies for Protecting the Planet. Cambridge University Press.\nWesten, P. (1982). The Empty Idea of Equality. Harvard Law Review, 537-596.\nWinkler, H., Letete, T., & Marquard, A. (2013). Equitable Access to Sustainable Development: Operationalizing Key Criteria. Climate Policy, 13(4), 411-432.\nZhang, Y., Shen, J., & Li, Y. (2018). An Atmospheric Vulnerability Assessment Framework for Environment Management and Protection Based on CAMx. Journal of environmental management, 207, 341-354. | 描述: | 碩士 國立政治大學 外交學系 105253023 |
資料來源: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G1052530231 | 資料類型: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | 學位論文 |
Files in This Item:
| File | Description | Size | Format | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 023101.pdf | 2.37 MB | Adobe PDF2 | View/Open |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.