美国宣布退出《巴黎协定》后全球气候减缓、资金和治理差距分析

发布时间：2018-03-21 05:44

本文选题：特朗普政府　切入点：《巴黎协定》　出处：《气候变化研究进展》2017年05期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：2017年6月1日,美国总统特朗普正式宣布退出《巴黎协定》,有关美国退协原因、后续影响和应对策略的研究成为国际社会关注的焦点。本文基于自主构建的美国政策评估模型,综合定性定量分析,系统评估了美国宣布退出《巴黎协定》可能造成的全球气候变化减缓、资金和治理"三大赤字",并据此提出中国的应对策略和建议。研究表明,考虑美国退协对后续政策的影响,美国2030年的排放将有可能达57.9(56.0~59.8)亿t CO_2-eq,仅相当于在2005年的水平上下降12.1%(9.1%~15.0%),相对自主贡献目标情景将上升16.4(12.5~20.1)亿t CO_2-eq,额外增加8.8%~13.4%的全球减排赤字。美国拒绝继续履行资金支持义务还将使得本不充裕的气候资金机制更加雪上加霜,绿色气候基金(GCF)的筹资缺口将增加20亿美元,而长期气候资金(LTF)的缺口每年将增加50亿美元左右。这就要求欧盟和日本对GCF的捐助至少上升40%,同时欧盟及其成员国的长期资金支持至少上浮25.2%才能填补上述资金赤字。美国是全球气候博弈的重要一方,且美国退协的影响已蔓延至全球治理的主要议事平台,期望中欧、基础四国+等模式短期内迅速填补美国退出后全球气候治理的治理赤字是不现实的,政治推动乏力的情况可能会在今后一段时期内始终存在。虽然国际社会对中国领导全球气候治理充满期待,但中国应有清醒认识,全面评估"接盘"美国领导力的成本、效益和可行性,并秉持"国家利益"优先的原则,谋定而后动。同时,中国应聚焦国内工作,凝聚应对气候变化的战略共识,做好长期战略谋划,并积极推动国际社会从合作中寻找出路应对"三大赤字"难题。
[Abstract]:In June 1st 2017, US President Trump formally announced his withdrawal from the Paris Accords. The research on the reasons for American withdrawal, the follow-up effects and coping strategies has become the focus of attention of the international community. Synthesizing qualitative and quantitative analysis, this paper systematically assesses the possible global climate change mitigation, capital and governance "three deficits" caused by the withdrawal of the United States from the Paris Accords, and puts forward China's coping strategies and suggestions accordingly. Considering the impact of the withdrawal of the United States on the follow-up policy, In 2030, the United States will likely have emissions of 57.9 million tons or 56.0 million tons or 59.8 million tons of CO2-eq. which is only equivalent to a drop of 12.19.1g / 15.0 at the 2005 level, and the relative self-contribution target scenario will rise by 16.4mb 12.520.1 million tons of CO2-eqand an additional 8.813.4percent increase in the global emission reduction deficit. The United States refuses to continue to honour its funds. The obligation to support will also add to the woes of the otherwise inadequate climate finance mechanism, The funding gap for the Green Climate Fund (GCF) will increase by $2 billion. The gap in long-term climate finance will increase by about $5 billion a year. This will require the European Union and Japan to contribute at least 40 percent more to the GCF, while long-term financial support from the EU and its member states will rise by at least 25.2% to fill this amount. The gold deficit. The United States is a major player in the global climate game. Moreover, the impact of the US withdrawal has spread to the main deliberative platforms of global governance. It is unrealistic to expect the CEIBS, the basic four countries and other models to quickly fill the governance deficit of global climate governance after the US withdrawal in the short term. The lack of political impetus is likely to persist for some time to come. While the international community is looking forward to China's leadership of global climate governance, China should be soberly aware of the costs of "picking up" US leadership. Efficiency and feasibility, and adhering to the principle of "national interest" as the priority, China should focus on its domestic work, consolidate its strategic consensus on combating climate change, and make long-term strategic plans. And actively promote international cooperation to find a way to deal with the "three deficits."
【作者单位】：国家应对气候变化战略研究和国际合作中心;清华大学现代管理研究中心;
【基金】：中国清洁发展机制基金项目“主要缔约方2015协议下自主贡献的公平性和力度评估”(2014094) “中美气候变化务实合作技术支撑项目”(2013019) 科技部改革发展专项研发项目巴黎会议后应对气候变化急迫重大问题研究“INDC及其全球盘点机制的影响及对策研究”
【分类号】：D871.2;D996.9;P467

【参考文献】