Abstract
First, we describe and analyze the main set of G77 positions in the climate negotiations and the dynamics behind the emergence of these positions. While it is puzzling that the G77 has managed to maintain itself as a group in spite of internal differences along variables as prosperity, emissions and vulnerability to climate change, we claim that a core element behind this cohesion is that these countries share domestic governance problems as much as poverty and economic underdevelopment. Second, we discuss how recent trends of economic and political development in the third world influence the climate policy strategies of the G77 group in the future. The main factor here is the economicand social progress in states like China, India and Brazil, which separates them from the poorer and less powerful G77 states. Increasing heterogeneity along variables like governance, growth, and importance for the international economy is creating an increasing drive among the most successful G77 states towards bilateral agreements with industrialised powers. We do not foresee a departure from traditional G77 positions and membership by these states in the official climate negotiations or a departure from the Kyoto process, but an increasing reliance on bilateral agreements with industrialized countries that link considerations for energy security and the environment. The ability to gain these advantages without commitments may make these states less interested in adopting commitments for the post-Kyoto period. This is unfortunate for the LDCs and the AOSIS groups within the G77, who probably are most vulnerable to climate change.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
The G77 now consists of six chapters in addition to the headquarters in New York. The chapters were established where there was UN presence: Geneva (UNCTAD) and New York (UN General Assembly) in 1964, Paris (UNESCO) in 1969, and Rome (FAO), Nairobi (UNEP HABITAT), Vienna (FAO, UNIDO), and Washington DC (IMF and the World Bank) in 1972 (G77 2007).
Cf. PEW Climate Center, “COP 11 and COP/MOP 1 in Montreal”, http://www.pewclimate.org/what_s_being_done/in_the_world/cop11/, and PEW Climate Center, “COP 12 Report”, http://www.pewclimate.org/what_s_being_done/in_the_world/cop12/summary.cfm#bus. Both accessed in June 2007.
Economies are divided according to 2004 GNI per capita, calculated using the World Bank Atlas method. The groups are: low income, $825 or less; lower middle income, $826–$3,255; upper middle income, $3,256–$10,065; and high income, $10,066 or more. http://www.web.worldbank.org
The data is taken from World Resources Institute (2005). The Climate Analysis Indicators Tool (CAIT) version 2.0, database. http://www.cait.wri.org. Data from 2000. Accessed January 2007.
For a more fine-grained comparison, cf. Gupta (2003).
Cf. BBC’s homepage: “India unveils $628m tsunami aid”, 19 January 2005, http://www.news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4187119.stm. Accessed January 2007.
Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (MNP), “Chinese CO2 emissions in perspective”, press release, http://www.mnp.nl/en/service/pressreleases/2007/20070622ChineseCO2emissionsinperspective.html, accessed November 2007.
In addition to the NDRC and MoFA, the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) plays an important role and has the broadest technical expertise about the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) in China’s climate bureaucracy.
Cf. the website of AP-6: http://www.asiapacificpartnership.org/. Accessed January 2007.
Cf. the website of the Australian Minister for the Environment and Water Resources: “Australia–China climate change collaboration delivers real results”, http://www.deh.gov.au/minister/env/2006/mr23mar06.html, accessed January 2007.
Cf. the website of the European Commission: “Joint Statement”, http://www.ec.europa.eu/comm/external_relations/china/summit_0905/index.htm, accessed January 2007.
It should be mentioned that this situation may become increasingly tense when it comes to the relations to other G77 members. China’s growing efforts to achieve control over oil and other natural resources in Africa is both a sign of the rise of China’s international power and a potential area of contention between China and the African LDCs over resource control and between China and the industrial countries when it comes to efforts to improve transparency and governance among some of the poorest G77 members (Taylor 2006). Cf. also the article: “China's African embrace evokes memories of the old imperialism”, Financial Times, September 28, 2006.
Interview with Ministry of Foreign Affairs official, Beijing November 2004.
“U.S., India Reach Deal On Nuclear Cooperation”, Washington Post, March 3, 2006.
EU press release: “President Barroso to attend 7th EU-India Summit in Helsinki on 13 October 2006”, 12. October 2006, EU’s website: http://www.europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/06/1357&format=HTML&aged=1&language=EN&guiLanguage=en. Accessed January 2007.
European Commission website: http://www.ec.europa.eu/energy/green-paper-energy/index_en.htm. Accessed January 2007.
“Brazil-US: Ethanol Deal Represents Convergence of Multiple Interests” Inter Press Service: http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=36875. Accessed June 2007.
Cf. the article: “Whither adaptation funding”, Hotspot (Newsletter of Climate Action Group), Issue 35 (2004), 1.
References
Adger, N., & Vincent, K. (2005). Uncertainty in adaptive capacity. Comptes Rendus Geoscience, 337, 399–410.
AOSIS (2000). Linking science and climate change policy. Statement by H.E. Ambassador Tuiloma Neroni Slade, Chairman of the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS). Pacific Islands Climate Change Conference. Rarotonga, Cook Islands. Retrieved January 2007 from: http://www.sidsnet.org/aosis/statements/08.html.
AOSIS (2007). Homepage of Alliance of Small Island States. Retrieved January 2007 from http://www.sidsnet.org/aosis/. Accessed January 2007.
Barnett, J., Dessai, S., & Webber, M. (2004). Will OPEC lose from the Kyoto Protocol? Energy Policy, 32, 2077–2088.
Baumert, K., Bhandari, R., & Kete, N. (1999). What might a developing country climate commitment look like? Washington DC: World Resources Institute.
Chayes, A., & Kim, C. (1998). China and the United Nations framework convention on climate change. In M. B. Elroy, C. P. Nielsen, & P. Lydon (Eds.), Energizing China: Reconciling environmental protection and economic growth (pp. 503–540). Newton, MA: Harvard University Press.
Clapham, C. (1998). Degrees of statehood. Review of International Studies, 24, 143–157.
Commission of the European Communities (2007). Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament: Towards an EU-Brazil strategic partnership. Brussels: Commission of the European Communities.
Depledge, J. (2002). Continuing Kyoto: Extending absolute emission caps to developing countries. In K. A. Baumert et al. (Ed.), Building on the Kyoto protocol: Options for protecting the climate (pp. 84–96). Washington, DC: World Resources Institute.
Dessai, S. (2004). An analysis of OPEC as a G77 member at the UNFCCC. Report for WWF. Retrieved January 2007 from http://wwf.panda.org/downloads/climate_change/opecfullreportpublic.pdf.
Economy, E. (1997). Chinese policy-making and global climate change: Two-front diplomacy and the international community. In M. A. Schreurs & E. Economy (Eds.), The internationalization of environmental protection (pp. 19–41). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Economy, E. (2007). The great leap backward. Foreign Affairs, 86, 38–60.
ENB (Earth Negotiations Bulletin) (1995). COP-1 final. Earth Negotiations Bulletin, 12 (21).
ENB (Earth Negotiations Bulletin) (2002). COP-8. Earth Negotiations Bulletin, 12 (207).
ENB (Earth Negotiations Bulletin) (2005). COP-11. Earth Negotiations Bulletin, 12 (291).
Geldart, C., & Lyon, P. (1980). The Group of 77: A perspective view. International Affairs, 57, 79–101.
Grubb, M., Vrolijk, C., & Brack, D. (1999). The Kyoto Protocol. A guide and assessment. London: Earthscan.
Gupta, J. (2000). “On behalf of my delegation,...” A survival guide for developing country climate negotiators. Washington, DC: Center for Sustainable Development of the Americas.
Gupta, J. (2003). Engaging developing countries in climate change: (KISS and Make-Up!). In D. Michel (Ed.), Climate policy for the 21st century: Meeting the long-term challenge of global warming (pp. 233–264). Washington, D.C: Centre for Transatlantic Relations, Johns Hopkins University.
G77 (2007). http://www.g77.org. Accessed January 2007.
Harris, N. (1986). The end of the third world: Newly industrializing countries and the decline of an ideology. London: Tauris.
Heggelund, G. (2007). China’s climate change policy: domestic and international developments. Asian Perspectives, 31, 155–191.
Ikeme, J. (2003). Climate change adaptational deficiencies in developing countries: the case of Sub-Saharan Africa. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 8, 29–52.
Jackson, R. H. (1993). Quasi-states. Sovereignty, international relations, and the third world. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Keith, R. (Ed.) (2005). China as a rising world power. London: Taylor & Francis.
Klein, R., Schipper, E. L., & Dessai, S. (2003). Integrating mitigation and adaptation into climate and development policy: Three research questions. Norwich: Tyndall Working Paper 40.
Long, T., Salter, L., & Singer, S. (2002). WWF: European and global climate policy. In R. Pedler (Ed.). European union lobbying. Changes in the arena (pp. 87–103). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Michaelowa, A. (2005). Leaving the Kyoto oasis—the climate caravan moves on. Intereconomics, 40, 2–4.
Migdal, J. (2004). State-building and the non-nation state. Journal of International Affairs, 58, 17–30.
Najam, A. (2005). Developing countries and global environmental governance: From contestation to participation to engagement. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 5, 303–321.
NCCCC (National Climate Change Co-ordination Committee) (2006). Qihou bianhua Guojia Pinggu baogao [First national climate change assessment, in Chinese]. Beijing: Science Press.
NDRC (National Reform, Development Commission) (2007). China’s national climate change programme. Beijing: National Reform and Development Commission.
Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (MNP). Chinese CO2 emissions in perspective. Press release retrieved in November 2007 from: http://www.mnp.nl/en/service/pressreleases/2007/20070622ChineseCO2emissionsinperspective.html.
Newell, P. (2000). Climate for change: Non-state actors and the global politics of the greenhouse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rapley, J. (2006). The new middle ages. Foreign Affairs, 85, 95–103.
Tangen, K., Heggelund, G., & Buen, J. (2001). China’s climate change positions: at a turning point? Energy and Environment, 12, 238–252.
Taylor, I. (2006). China’s oil diplomacy in Africa. International Affairs, 82, 937–959.
Williams, M. (1997). The Group of 77 and global environmental politics. Global Environmental Change, 7, 295–298.
Williams, M. (2005). The third world and global environmental negotiations: Interests, institutions and ideas. Global Environmental Politics, 5, 48–69.
Wilson, D., & Purushotanam, R. (2003). Dreaming with BRICS: The path to 2050. Global Economics Paper No. 99. Washington: Goldman Sachs.
World Resources Institute (2005). The Climate Analysis Indicators Tool (CAIT) version 2.0, database. Retrieved January 2007 from http://www.cait.wri.org.
Yamin, F., & Depledge, D. (2004). The international climate change regime. A guide to rules, institutions and procedures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Zhang, Z. (2003). The forces behind China’s climate change policy: Interests, sovereignty, prestige. In P. G. Harris (Ed.), Global warming and East Asia: The domestic and international politics of climate change (pp. 66–85). London and New York: Routledge.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Thanks to Ida Bjørkum for interview as well as writing assistance. Thanks to Lynn Nygaard for language editing. Funding from the Norwegian Research Council via the “Key Actors”-project is gratefully acknowledged. Comments from NIEA´s two reviewers greatly appreciated.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kasa, S., Gullberg, A.T. & Heggelund, G. The Group of 77 in the international climate negotiations: recent developments and future directions. Int Environ Agreements 8, 113–127 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-007-9060-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-007-9060-4