域外国家与南海周边地缘经济联系强度演化与态势评估

随着全球经济重心逐渐向亚太地区转移以及区域地缘经济联系日趋紧密,南海战略地位日益凸显,南海周边已成为全球重要战略区域和亚洲最重要的国际地缘问题区域。运用社会网络分析法、修正引力模型等方法,从贸易、投资、旅游等视角切入探究域外国家与南海周边区域的地缘经济联系演变及态势。结果表明：① 2005—2019年域外国家与南海周边区域的贸易联系日益紧密但贸易合作的非均衡化现象较为突出,域内出口贸易网络呈现以中国为核心,老挝、文莱和柬埔寨为边缘地带的相对稳定网络结构特征。② 域外国家对南海周边区域的投资规模显著提升但投资规模的两极化差异态势较为明显,投资区位呈现由高度集中向渐进式扩散转变态势。③ 域外国家入境旅游流持续增长,旅游网络由中国为单一核心演变为中国和泰国为双核心的网络结构,旅游目的地日趋多元化。④ 域外国家与南海周边区域地缘经济联系强度有所降低,但与东盟9国地缘经济联系强度整体上升;虽然以美日为代表的域外国家逐渐减弱与中国的地缘经济联系,但地缘经济联系网络整体仍然呈现以中国为核心,以泰国和新加坡为次核心的网络结构。     

The investment climate for climate investment: Joint Implementation in transition countries

Transition countries are expected to become important players in the emerging market for greenhouse gas emission reductions, as they can cut emissions at a relatively low cost. However, the attractiveness of the region as a supplier of emission reductions will not only depend on its cost advantage. It will also depend on the business climate offered to carbon investors—factors like a well-functioning legal and regulatory system, economic and political stability and the capacity to process emission reduction projects efficiently. This paper looks at the carbon investment climate in the transition countries eligible for Joint Implementation (JI)—Russia, Ukraine, Croatia and the EU accession countries. It concludes that JI investors will face a clear trade-off between the scope for cheap JI on the one hand, and the quality of the business environment and JI institutions on the other. The countries with the highest potential for cheap emission reductions also tend to be the countries with the most difficult business climate and the least institutional capacity for JI. The most attractive JI locations may be median countries with a reasonable JI potential and an acceptable business climate, such as Bulgaria, Romania and the Slovak Republic.     

Is industrialization still a viable development strategy for developing countries under climate change?

The implications of climate change for economic development strategies in developing countries are explored, in particular whether industrialization still represents a viable development strategy in the context of climate change. Synthesizing the relevant literature and drawing insights from a comparison of Chinese and Indian experiences, it is argued that industrialization still represents an effective and, to some extent, indispensable development strategy, especially for those low- and low–middle-income countries that are affected by deindustrialization.     

Germany—a pioneer on earthen feet?

Abstract

Germany is one of the two OECD countries having achieved substantial greenhouse gas reductions in the last decade. While a part was large reductions in industry after the economic crash in East Germany, a relevant share is due to the huge public infrastructure investments in East Germany. The real success of German climate policy in the past decade is the strong reduction of methane and nitrous oxide which has been almost unnoticed.

German climate policy is a good example of how lobbying of interest groups leads to a complex maze of hundreds of measures whose effects are difficult to evaluate. Paradoxically, policies have focused on expensive measures and Germany clearly is a pioneer in the most expensive forms of renewable energy. Concerning cost-effective measures and market instruments, Germany is a laggard. Only slowly, policymakers start to notice this distortion and first, shaky steps towards a more cost-efficient policy are made. Several challenges such as nuclear phase-out and trends in household energy consumption will put pressure on government to embrace the Kyoto Mechanisms and to refocus domestic instruments well before the first commitment period.     

Comparing developing countries under potential carbon allocation schemes

Abstract

To stabilise atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations, all countries will eventually need to be included in the effort to limit climate change. This article explores what potential future greenhouse gas allocation schemes might mean for key developing countries. The need for development is widely acknowledged, but growth in non-Annex I country emissions means that such development may need to take a different path to business as usual. The national interests of developing countries in negotiating potential future commitments are shaped by basic characteristics, notably emissions (both annual and historical cumulative), economic growth and population. These factors in turn shape the acceptability of allocations based on ability to pay, emissions intensity, or emissions per capita.

Results for six major developing countries (China, India, Brazil, South Africa, Argentina and Nigeria) show that the implications for developing countries differ widely. For example, ability to pay does not favour Argentina; a reduction based on emissions intensity is not appropriate for Brazil; and per capita allocations would be problematic for South Africa. It is difficult to conceive of a single allocation scheme that would be appropriate for all developing countries. This points to the need for differentiation between developing countries in terms of any potential future commitments.     

Creating incentives for avoiding further deforestation: the nested approach

Since 2005, Parties to the UNFCCC have been negotiating policy options for incentivizing reductions of (greenhouse gas) emissions from deforestation and degradation (REDD) in a future climate regime. Proposals on how to operationalize REDD range from market-based to pure fund-based approaches. Most of the current proposals suggest accounting for REDD at the national level. Accounting for emission reductions and implementing policy reform for curbing deforestation will take time and imply high levels of technical and institutional capacity. Therefore it is essential that developing countries receive sufficient support to implement national REDD programmes. To save time and ensure prompt action in reducing deforestation, a REDD approach is proposed that integrates project-level and subnational REDD schemes into national-level accounting. This ‘nested approach’ can achieve meaningful reductions in GHG emissions from improved forest governance and management, while allowing for an immediate and broad participation by developing countries, civil society and the private sector.     

Performance of renewable energy technologies under the CDM

While many different greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation technologies can be implemented under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), renewable energy technologies (RETs), in particular, are often viewed as one of the key solutions for achieving the CDM's goals: host-country sustainable development and cost-efficient emissions reductions. However, the viability of emission reduction projects like RETs is technology- and country-specific. To improve the CDM with respect to the diffusion of RETs, it is crucial to understand the factors that ultimately drive or hinder investments in these technologies. This study develops a methodology based on project-level, regional and global variables that can systematically assess the financial and environmental performance of CDM projects in different country contexts. We quantitatively show how six RETs (PV, wind, hydro, biomass, sewage, landfill) are impacted differently by the CDM and how this impact depends on regional conditions. While sewage and landfill are strongly affected independently of their location; wind, hydro and biomass projects experience small to medium impacts through the carbon price, and strongly depend on regional conditions. PV depends more on regional conditions than on the carbon price but is always unprofitable. Furthermore, we determine the carbon prices necessary to push these six RETs to profitability under various regional conditions. Based on these results, we derive policy recommendations to advance the interplay between international and domestic climate policy to further incentivize GHG emission reductions from RETs.     

Who picks up the remainder? Mitigation in developed and developing countries

A fair, effective, flexible and inclusive climate regime beyond 2012 will need several political balances. Mitigation and funding will be at the heart of the agreement. The IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report indicates that absolute reductions will be needed in Annex I (AI) countries and substantial deviation from baseline in some non-Annex I (NAI) regions by 2020. Although the latter was not explicitly quantified by the IPCC, the EU subsequently proposed a range for developing countries. Sharing the burden for mitigation is essentially zero-sum: if one does less, the other has to do more. We critically examine the implicit assumption that NAI countries would pick up the remainder of the required global effort minus the AI contribution. We suggest that greater levels of ambition can be achieved by turning the formula around politically, starting from the achievable ‘deviation below baseline’ given NAI's national programmes and appropriate international support. AI countries may have to exceed the IPCC ranges or pay for the remainder. For notional levels of NAI mitigation action, Annex I has to reduce by between ?52% and ?69% below 1990 by 2020, only dropping to a domestic ?35% with commitments to offset payments through the carbon market. Given the large mitigation gap, a political agreement on the question of ‘who pays’ is fundamental. The carbon market will provide some investment, but it mainly serves to reduce costs, particularly in developed countries, rather than adding to the overall effort. Market-linked levies and Annex I public funding will therefore be crucial to bridge the gap.     

Improving the visibility of hydrological sciences from developing countries

Abstract

The increasing level of competition in scientific publishing arguably has a greater negative impact on hydrologists from developing countries and specifically young scientists. This paper discusses the constraints they face and offers suggestions to authors and the hydrological community about how these may be mitigated. These include a lack of access to resources to assist with creating good publications, the difficulty of publishing research based on relatively scarce data, a common problem in many developing countries, and a lack of familiarity with the process of publishing scientific material together with limited access to mentorship from experienced authors. A key point is to ensure that the research question addressed has a broad interest beyond the local study area. However, the more limited hydrological knowledge and the water resources problems of developing countries represent opportunities for internationally relevant research, particularly within the nexus between hydrology and society, or between science and practice. Both of these are high on the international hydrological research agenda.

Editor D. Koutsoyiannis