英文摘要 |
For quite a while, the issue of governance regarding to global warming has been established on the basis of multilateral cooperation internationally. Despite the gap or difference existing in the level of economic development and domestic industrial structure from country to country, sovereign states, both north-north and north-south, could make a partnership through various reduction strategies under the ''convention and protocol mode'' within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and Kyoto Protocol (KP). Nevertheless, what was neglected is that the outcome of global warming governance has been far from effectiveness since the KP entered into force in 2005 and has not been changed after the enforcement of the Paris Agreement (PA) in 2016. This paper argues that the governance of global warming based on the multilateralism is increasingly going to be hollowing-out. The flaws of its regime design as well as the misunderstanding of warming governance turn those larger emitting countries into the advantage on the one hand, and into the exception of reducing the amount of carbon dioxide on the other. Ironically, some of such larger emitting countries have cleverly organized the ''fragmentation mode'' beyond the ''convention and protocol mode'', which is more effective than multilateralism. In light of three bilateral agreements signed by larger emitting countries, this paper points out that it is necessary to discard current multilateral mode; by contrast, it is better for the Paris Agreement Work Programme to offer a more flexible and feasible mechanism, in which those larger emitting countries are available and willing to deal with warming problems through the ''fragmentation mode'' rather than multilateral mode from 3-14 December 2018, COP24 in Poland. |