RResponding to the challenge of climate change calls for resolute action by all economic players, public and private, producers and consumers alike. They must be part of a coordinated and vigorous framework, at the national level of course, but just as much at the international level.
Contrary to these imperatives, it is on the contrary inaction and confusion that threaten today. Very few countries can claim to have taken measures commensurate with their contributions announced under the 2015 Paris Agreement, and even fewer proportionate to the objective of limiting global warming to 1.5°C. , or even 2°C.
In addition, significant initiatives are rarely part of a cooperative framework, which is the only way to ensure overall consistency. As a result, inaction feeds tensions, with each country blaming its partners for the inadequacy of their efforts; the coordination failure in turn undermines the action, by reducing both its effectiveness and its legitimacy (why accept constraints if you have the impression of being the only one doing it?).
The political economy challenge
Multilateralism, that is to say the organization of international relations on the basis of common rules, is essential to break out of this vicious circle, provided that it is rethought according to this objective. Because time is short and the multilateral pace is slow and based on compromises often based on the lowest common denominator, priority must be given to internal policies.
The task is already considerable, as the fight against global warming presupposes questioning – consumption and production models, social and industrial positions –, while requiring the resources necessary for this great transformation to be found. The most pressing challenge in the fight for the climate is therefore one of political economy: to ward off inaction, we must first create internal climate alliances.
The interesting position of the American administration
This is what the administration of Joe Biden succeeded in getting the Inflation Reduction Act passed by Congress in August 2022. This example is instructive, because it is by conditioning public support for the ecological transition on local content clauses, clearly contrary to the multilateral commitments of the United States, that a coalition has been formed between environmentalists, employees and industrialists. .
Other solutions were possible, which would have better reconciled the American initiative with international coordination. But internal political tensions being what they are, who can say that they were achievable within a reasonable time? This law is open to criticism in many respects and its structure makes Europeans fear that they will suffer from unfair competition in the industries most affected by these decarbonisation subsidies.
You have 52.17% of this article left to read. The following is for subscribers only.