Negotiating Weights for Burden Sharing Rules in International Climate Negotiations: An Empirical Analysis

Refereed Journal // 2021
Refereed Journal // 2021

Negotiating Weights for Burden Sharing Rules in International Climate Negotiations: An Empirical Analysis

We have collected data from a world-wide survey among COP delegates to empirically investigate preferences for certain burden sharing rules among key groups in a setting that reflects the possibility of observing concessions from negotiating partners. In our survey, the participants had the opportunity to select and combine up to eight (predefined) burden sharing rules and to assign relative weights to the selected rules in their preferred bundle. We examine whether such a mechanism helps to overcome the currently strictly (self-interested) strategic claims on equity in the negotiation process. We observe that delegates from different groups of countries show a general willingness for concessions. However, the degree to which different burden sharing rules are taken into consideration partly differs between countries. As a key insight we report that the individual assessment of the polluter-pays rule based on current emissions does not only stress the persistence of the traditional Annex-B/Non-Annex B division but also suggests tendencies for a more fragmented grouping with different positions between, for example, delegates from developing countries (i.e. G77 members) and emerging countries (i.e. BASIC). At the same time, we observe tendencies for a more harmonized view among key groups towards the ability-to-pay rule in a setting of weighted burden sharing rules.

Kesternich, Martin, Andreas Löschel and Andreas Ziegler (2021), Negotiating Weights for Burden Sharing Rules in International Climate Negotiations: An Empirical Analysis, Environmental Economics and Policy Studies 23(2) , 309-331