A review of China’s climate governance: state, market and civil society

Wang, Pu; Liu, Lei; Wu, Tong

doi:10.1080/14693062.2017.1331903

Cited by 39 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, adding a carbon price and air pollution costs to coal power price is important to help enhance the relative market competitiveness of wind and solar power and reduce coal power. Moreover, China’s environmental policies in the past have featured one-size-fits-all designs 25 , such as mandating the same retrofitting technology for coal-fired plants in all provinces. But such policies have imposed heavy and unsustainable costs to the government, plants owners, and end users.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Location-specific co-benefits of carbon emissions reduction from coal-fired power plants in China

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Climate policies that achieve air quality co-benefits can better align developing countries’ national interests with global climate mitigation. Since the effects of air pollutants are highly dependent on source locations, spatially nuanced policies are crucial to maximizing the achievement of co-benefits. Using the coal power industry as a case study, this study presents an interdisciplinary approach to assessing facility level co-benefits at every specific source location in China. We find that co-benefits range from US$51-$278 per ton CO2 reduction nationwide and are highly heterogeneous spatially, with “hotspot” regions that should be the priority of emissions reduction policies, and that provinces should use different techno-economic strategies to reduce emissions. The location-specific co-benefit value plus a carbon price serves as a unified environmental indicator that enables policy makers to more accurately understand the social costs of electricity generation from coal burning and provides a scientific framework for geographically nuanced policymaking.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Location-specific co-benefits of carbon emissions reduction from coal-fired power plants in China

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Firstly, in China the government at various levels steers climate governance by formulating climate policies, setting national and local mitigation targets, establishing regulatory frameworks, and supervising market activities. 37 This state-controlled, policy-oriented climate governance leaves courts, as judicial organs of the state, with comparatively less space for dispute settlement than is the case in the US or Australia. Nevertheless, this dynamic is changing because of the increasing involvement of market actors and civil society in climate governance in recent years.…”

Section:    mentioning

confidence: 99%

Mitigation and Adaptation through Environmental Impact Assessment Litigation: Rethinking the Prospect of Climate Change Litigation in China

He¹

2021

TEL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There are two general pathways towards climate change litigation in China: tort-based litigation to hold carbon emitters accountable in civil law, and administrative litigation against the government to demand better climate regulation. While the first pathway is gaining momentum among Chinese scholars, this article argues that legal barriers to applying tort-based rules to climate change should be fairly acknowledged. The article argues that China's legal framework for environmental impact assessment (EIA) provides more openness and flexibility for the resolution of climate change disputes. Therefore, EIA-based climate lawsuits, which challenge environmental authorities for not adequately taking climate change factors into account in decision-making processes, encounter relatively fewer legal barriers, require less radical legal or institutional reform, and have greater potential to maintain existing legal orders. The regulatory effects produced by EIA-based litigation suggest that the scholarship on climate change litigation in China should take such litigation seriously because it could influence both governments and emitters in undertaking more proactive efforts. This China-based study, with a special focus on judicial practice in the largest developing country, will shine a light on China's contribution to transnational climate litigation.

show abstract

“…The boundary between market mechanisms and command-andcontrol steering in China is opaque [52], which, to some extent, is attributed to excessive government intervention.…”

Section: Policy Instruments Portfoliosmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating Climate Change Governance Using the “Polity–Policy–Politics” Framework: A Comparative Study of China and the United States

Gong¹,

Sun²

2020

Prime Archives in Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Climate change governance has attracted increasing academic interest. However, holistic reviews on the dynamic complexity and stability of climate change governance have received little attention. This study addresses this research gap by conducting a structurally comparative analysis between China and the United States based on the -polity-policy-politics‖ framework. Three analytical facets are identified for each dimension of the framework, including institutional settings, the nature of policy mechanisms used in climate change practices, and the degree of multi-actors' involvement under two governance scenarios. Results show that climate change governance in the two countries differs substantially. The process of climate governance in China is driven by strong leadership at the national level alongside policy continuity, whereas wellfunctioning market mechanisms and robust regulatory systems are still lacking. A more meaningful involvement of social forces is also critically needed when addressing increasingly complex and uncertain climate change. By contrast, the US federal climate policies are considered inadequate compared with subnational actions and persistent efforts of non-state actors, to which the success of climate practices is largely attributed. This study systematically uncovers the divergence of climate mitigation under different political-institutional contexts, and Prime Archives in Sustainability 3 www.videleaf.com evaluates the effectiveness of governance arrangement in the two countries, which helps policymakers to understand the potential of improving the performance of climate change governance.

show abstract

A review of China’s climate governance: state, market and civil society

Cited by 39 publications

References 41 publications

Location-specific co-benefits of carbon emissions reduction from coal-fired power plants in China

Location-specific co-benefits of carbon emissions reduction from coal-fired power plants in China

Mitigation and Adaptation through Environmental Impact Assessment Litigation: Rethinking the Prospect of Climate Change Litigation in China

Evaluating Climate Change Governance Using the “Polity–Policy–Politics” Framework: A Comparative Study of China and the United States

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About