INTERNATIONAL CLIMATE CHANGE NEGOTIATIONS: THE ROLE OF POWER, PREFERENCES, AND INFORMATION IN NEGOTIATION OUTCOMES Jeb Shannon Blain B.A., University of California, Santa Barbara, 2005 THESIS Submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS in INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS at CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, SACRAMENTO FALL 2010 INTERNATIONAL CLIMATE CHANGE NEGOTIATIONS: THE ROLE OF POWER, PREFERENCES, AND INFORMATION IN NEGOTIATION OUTCOMES A Thesis by Jeb Shannon Blain Approved by: , Committee Chair Patrick Cannon, Ph.D. , Second Reader Helen Roland, Ph.D. , Third Reader David Andersen, Ph.D. Date: ii Student: Jeb Shannon Blain I certify that this student has met the requirements for format contained in the University format manual, and that this thesis is suitable for shelving in the Library and credit is to be awarded for the thesis. David Andersen, Ph.D., Graduate Coordinator Date Department of Government iii Abstract of INTERNATIONAL CLIMATE CHANGE NEGOTIATIONS: THE ROLE OF POWER, PREFERENCES, AND INFORMATION IN NEGOTIATION OUTCOMES by Jeb Shannon Blain Statement of Problem: Why were states able to reach agreement on the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), but not the Kyoto Protocol? What role did power, preferences, and information play in climate change negotiation outcomes? How do systemic and domestic factors influence international cooperation? Sources of Data: The study relies on qualitative analysis based on secondary and primary sources, including material from the United Nations, European Union, and United States government. Conclusions Reached: Systemic and domestic factors help explain the difference in outcomes of UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol. Both the provision of information and the compatibility of state preferences varied in the two cases, resulting in agreement on UNFCCC but not the Kyoto Protocol. Although the provision of information is partially explanatory, the compatibility of state preferences best explains the difference in negotiation outcomes. An exploration of domestic politics is required in order to determine the compatibility of state preferences in international cooperative efforts. , Committee Chair Patrick Cannon, Ph.D. Date iv TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables…………………………………………………………………………….vii Chapter Page 1. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 1 A. International Relations Theory and Cooperation ....................................................... 3 B. Methods and Cases ..................................................................................................... 5 C. Thesis Outline ............................................................................................................. 6 2. LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................... 7 A. Neorealism .................................................................................................................. 7 B. Neoliberal Institutionalism ....................................................................................... 14 C. Liberal Theory .......................................................................................................... 25 I. State Preferences .................................................................................................... 32 a. Comparative Politics and Republican Liberalism ............................................. 33 b. Political Economy and Material Liberalism ..................................................... 35 3. ENVIRONMENTAL PREFERENCES IN THE U.S. AND GERMANY................... 40 A. Policy Divergence .................................................................................................... 40 B. Environmental Politics in the United States ............................................................. 43 C. Environmental Politics in Germany ......................................................................... 46 v 4. UNITED NATIONS FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE.... 52 A. Discovery of Climate Change and Political Action ................................................. 52 B. Discussion and Analysis ........................................................................................... 66 I. Liberal Theory ........................................................................................................ 67 II. Neoliberal Institutionalism .................................................................................... 77 III. Neorealism ........................................................................................................... 79 5. THE KYOTO PROTOCOL .......................................................................................... 84 A. Negotiations .............................................................................................................. 84 B. Discussion and Analysis ......................................................................................... 104 I. Liberal Theory ...................................................................................................... 104 II. Neoliberal Institutionalism .................................................................................. 113 III. Neorealism ......................................................................................................... 117 6. CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................... 122 A. Study Overview ...................................................................................................... 122 I. Predictions and Outcomes .................................................................................... 127 B. Limitations and Further Research ........................................................................... 128 References ....................................................................................................................... 130 vi LIST OF TABLES Page 1. Table 1 Predictions and Outcomes…………………………………………………..127 vii 1 Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION A number of indicators show that since 1850 global average temperatures have increased by 0.76±0.19oC (Houghton, 2009). Much of the warming appears to be due to changes in the earth‟s energy cycle. The earth‟s surface absorbs solar radiation and re- transmits it as thermal radiation. This thermal radiation is then absorbed by greenhouse gases in the atmosphere; as John Houghton (2009) puts it: “[greenhouse gases act] as a partial blanket for this radiation” (p. 20). 1 This blanketing action, also known as the greenhouse effect, makes the earth habitable by keeping it warm. The greenhouse effect is unproblematic in the presence of naturally occurring levels of greenhouse gases. Without greenhouse gases much more of the thermal radiation released by the earth would be lost to space, making the planet cooler. However, increased amounts of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is problematic because more radiation is absorbed, resulting in warming of the lower atmosphere and surface of the earth. Human actions have been increasing the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, contributing to an enhanced greenhouse effect. Practices such as agriculture, land use changes (e.g. deforestation), and the burning of fossil fuels have all led to increased amounts of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Fossil fuel use is especially at fault: “[since the Industrial Revolution] over 600 thousand tones (or gigatonnes, Gt) of carbon have been emitted into the atmosphere from fossil fuel burning. This has resulted 1 The main greenhouse gases are water vapor, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O). 2 in a concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere that has increased by about 36%, from 280 ppm [parts per million] around 1700 to a value of over 380 ppm at the present day, a greater concentration than for at least 650,000 years” (Houghton, 2009, p. 37). A doubling of carbon dioxide equivalent concentration in the atmosphere is likely to lead to an increase in temperature of 2o to 4.5oC compared with the average temperature in the years 1980-1999 (IPCC, 2007). 2 Rising temperatures are problematic because of the potential effect on other aspects of the earth‟s climate. Possible climate changes include more extreme heat waves, altered precipitation patterns, sea level rise, and more intense hurricanes and typhoons (IPCC, 2007). If such climatic changes occur, the earth‟s ecological, economic and social systems will be altered dramatically. For example, rising sea levels can destroy wetlands, agriculture lands, and submerge low lying islands, resulting in the displacement of people, plants, and animals. Additionally, altered temperatures and precipitation patterns will lead to changes in farming practices and the locations where crops are grown; they will also lead to shifts in the ranges of plants and animals (IPCC, 2007). Despite increasing scientific understanding of climate change and its potential for harm, efforts to address the problem have been slow coming. World leaders have found it difficult to reach climate change agreements that everybody can accept. In order to understand why states have had a difficult time reaching agreements on climate change, it 2 Carbon dioxide equivalent concentration is defined as, “The concentration of carbon dioxide that would cause the same radiative forcing as a given mixture of