Talanoa dialogue

下面为大家整理一篇优秀的paper代写范文- Talanoa dialogue，供大家参考学习。这篇论文讨论了塔拉诺阿对话。一直以来，气候变化缔约方会议存在对话低效的问题。塔拉诺阿对话的开启，创造性地回应了这一现实困境，充分发掘国家及其他行为体的自觉性，以更大的包容心参与合作。塔拉诺阿对话更像纽带和桥梁，使得气候变化谈判更有现实针对性，增强提案过程的民主性。同时，对话也促进了全球气候治理主体多元化和议程民主化，通过拓展更多的对话与合作平台机制，进而完善国际气候变化法律制度体系，最终实现全球气候治理的民主化和法治化。

The taranoa dialogue is put forward against the background that global climate governance has entered a new stage after 2015. Before 2015, the global mechanism for climate governance was centered on the Kyoto protocol and its amendments. The Kyoto era established three major market mechanisms, the clean development mechanism, the joint implementation mechanism and the emissions trading mechanism, which are still in use today. These mechanisms are an important reason why the Kyoto era lasted for nearly 20 years. The 2015 Paris agreement, as a landmark international climate agreement, has inspired global climate change actors. In November 2017, COP23 was held in Bonn, and the agenda of the meeting proposed the arrangement of "promoting dialogue in 2018". On 26 January 2018, the UNFCCC opened the gateway to support the taranoa dialogue, which was to be launched in May 2018.

"Taranoa" is a traditional form of dialogue between Pacific island countries represented by Fiji. "Taranoa" was proposed by Fiji, whose prime minister Frank Bainimarama is President of COP23, and he called on all parties to participate in the dialogue. The first part of taranoa's dialogue is about sharing stories and building compassion. "Story sharing" refers to the sharing of action plans and practical experience, summary and exchange of practical experience in tackling climate change. To build "compassion" means that the dialogue parties should enhance their sense of international justice and responsibility, stand in each other's position and perspective, and fully understand the operational difficulties, current situation and future risks of the most vulnerable countries and regions as well as developing countries. The second connotation of the talanoa dialogue is to avoid criticism and accusations and create a safe space for collective decision-making. The talanoa dialogue is an inclusive, constructive and constructive political dialogue on climate change and a solution-oriented dialogue and cooperation mechanism.

The talanoa dialogue aims to engage in a participatory, inclusive and transparent dialogue, to provide countries with reference information on "nationally determined contributions", and to continuously enhance the operational objectives of NDCs to achieve the long-term goals of the Paris agreement as soon as possible. Where are we, Where do we want to go, How do we get there? The talanoa dialogue will carry out extensive discussions and exchanges on the above issues and provide topics and solutions for COP24.

Unlike other major political dialogues in history, the taranoa dialogue was initiated and initiated by the small Pacific country of Fiji and has been widely recognized and actively participated by the international community. The inclusiveness of the dialogue lies in shelving disputes, avoiding criticism and accusations, and sharing and drawing on different practical experience. The participation of the dialogue is reflected in the multiple identities of participants, including parties to the UN convention on climate change and the Paris agreement, as well as non-parties, and actors outside the UN framework, such as citizens' groups, business organizations and representatives of local communities. The facilitation and constructiveness of the dialogue can be reflected in the multi-party talks to reduce the information asymmetry among the parties involved in the action on climate change, reduce the sense of distrust and contribute to the continuous improvement of the action goals.

The global action to deal with climate change largely depends on the domestic climate governance of each country, and the implementation and implementation of international climate agreement is largely transformed into the domestic action of each country. The difficulty of domestic climate governance lies in the fact that the top-level design of the central government cannot effectively transfer to local governments, and it is even more difficult to implement climate governance actions into the daily behaviors of every citizen. Therefore, the global climate governance process needs more democratic participation, with non-governmental organizations, professional institutions, large enterprises and influential and representative individuals sharing their practical experience and making recommendations on cooperative action. In the talanoa dialogue platform under the UN framework, multiple subjects can communicate intersections. For example, a number of large enterprise organizations communicate with each other, and a national delegation listens to the voices of social groups and enterprise organizations in other countries, etc., which can effectively reduce the communication barriers between subjects with different status and improve the level of trust and cooperation between cross-level subjects.

For a long time, the governance of global affairs has been promoted by the state as the main body, with important inter-governmental international organizations as the auxiliary and coordinator. However, the governance effect is not ideal. Governance deficit is serious, international institutions lack of democracy and efficiency, countries as the direct implementation of the global agreement, the collective action problem facing the international level is difficult to solve. Since the trump administration came to power, the trend of the us returning to unilateralism has become more and more obvious, and the willingness and ability of the us to provide global public goods and lead the global climate governance have decreased. The disadvantages of the independent participation of countries in climate governance are gradually emerging. Even though the UNFCCC has a good organization and coordination capacity, it is difficult to solve the problems of national policies and international cooperation. The opening of the talanoa dialogue builds action on a platform of cooperation between governments, but not at the national and government level. When the government of a contracting party is unwilling or unwilling to meet its emission reduction obligations, business organizations and civil society groups in that country can exert pressure on the dialogue platform. Initiatives and actions by global civil society organizations and multinational giants also have a positive impact on those who lag behind. The initiatives and lobbying of ngos and civil society groups often have an impact on individual citizens that is difficult for governments and intergovernmental organizations to achieve, and their ideas and actions are more easily accepted and imitated by the public. It is the inevitable requirement and final destination of global climate governance to realize the transition from government management to multi-governance.

At the national behavioral level, achieving the scientific goal of slowing global warming requires countries and their governments to play a leading role. Due to the dominance of such agents, global action to mitigate and adapt to climate change has a natural "top-down" color. In the global climate agreement, the Kyoto protocol era is a typical "top-down" model of climate governance. The effect of this model of climate governance is uneven and not ideal. Australia, the United States and other countries have withdrawn their commitments, and some countries have failed to meet their emission reduction targets or have delayed meeting their targets. The Paris agreement era was a climate governance model with a considerable "bottom-up" component. There is no mandatory national emission reduction obligation in the agreement. Instead, developed countries and developing countries will jointly undertake international emission reduction obligations in line with their respective capabilities by submitting national voluntary contribution plans, showing the flexibility and initiative of member states under the UN framework.

The ideal global climate governance model is a combination of "top-down" and "bottom-up". The talanoa dialogue itself has this characteristic, and through the dialogue mechanism, it will promote the post-paris era to be more democratic, autonomous and binding. The "online" talanoa dialogue embodies governmental, formal and high-level communication, while the "offline" talanoa dialogue realizes non-governmental, informal and civil communication. The talanoa dialogue, both online and offline, is complementary and complementary, taking into full account the demands, positions and roles of non-state actors in global climate governance.

In global climate governance, the phenomenon of "free riding" is common. In the Kyoto era, under the principle of "common but differentiated responsibility", the pattern of responsibility is asymmetric. After the cancun agreement and the doha amendment, the asymmetry of emission reduction obligations between developed and developing countries gradually narrowed. In the post-paris era, the principle of "common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities" has changed the perspective from developed and developing countries to different national conditions. Thus, the asymmetric responsibility mechanism in global climate governance has been gradually diluted. Deng haifeng pointed out that the principle of "common but differentiated responsibilities" should be reinterpreted as "common and proportionate responsibilities". First of all, the key to achieving "proportionate responsibility" is the correct interpretation and goodwill implementation of "respective capabilities", rather than a completely symmetrical distribution of international emission reduction obligations quantitatively. Secondly, the CBDR principle should be seen as the core principle, which should be followed in future climate negotiations and international climate change law. However, in reality, too much emphasis on "differentiated responsibility" will weaken "common responsibility", and thus it is difficult to achieve the established mitigation target; Blind pursuit of "relative responsibilities" while ignoring their respective capabilities, there are implementation difficulties and irreconcilable conflicts in national interests. Therefore, the principle of action and philosophy cannot be divorced from the CBDR principle, but in practice, efforts should be made to assume responsibilities commensurate with "RC". This proportionality is achieved mainly through dialogue and negotiation mechanisms.

The talanoa dialogue mechanism plays an important role in achieving proportionate responsibilities. Through the participation of multiple subjects in communication and story sharing, the concept of "common responsibility" becomes the most important and basic part, and each party should undertake certain mitigation obligations, which cannot be avoided. The NDCS submitted by states parties reflect the requirement to take into account "respective capabilities" under "differentiated responsibilities", and this proportionality assessment needs to be finally made in the form of a UNFCCC resolution. The third party evaluation without multi-party democratic review and free exchange lacks persuasion and authority. The talanoa dialogue aims to realize such an international democratic process, and thus enhance the authority of international institutions and the initiative of action subjects.

According to professor he zhipeng, international rule of law refers to a model and structure that all actors in the international community comply with a set of legal system, restrain state behaviors, define rights and obligations, and deal with international affairs at a supranational level. The criterion of judgment is to realize good international law and good global governance. Global governance on climate change refers to the efforts of countries, international organizations, enterprises, citizen groups and individuals to solve climate change problems and maintain global security and order through binding international law and other international principles, standards, procedures and policies. Good international law should embody global interests in substance and democracy and participation in procedure. Good global governance should avoid the negative impact of great power politics, realize pluralistic co-governance under democratic procedures, realize the return of global power to global civil society, and finally realize the maximization of global interests. International rule of law on climate change is the only way to global governance on climate change. The talanoa dialogue is like a bridge or a link, connecting and coordinating the participation of countries, international institutions, business organizations, civic groups and individuals to promote the rule of law and democratization of climate change governance.

The talanoa dialogue provides a sound environment for international dialogue, optimizes the process of international climate negotiations, revises international climate agreements, improves international climate change laws, and promotes national climate change legislation, so as to form a global climate change legal system and promote the rule of law on climate change. The legalization of the climate governance system and the legalization of the climate governance process have elevated the global climate governance capacity to a higher level.

From the perspective of the dynamic mechanism of global climate governance, the democratization process is to realize the "dialogue-driven" global climate governance process. There are few global dialogue platforms dedicated to climate change action. The talanoa dialogue platform is a landmark attempt to reduce information asymmetry, lower the threshold of dialogue, and avoid bias and cold game.

Effective and democratic climate governance must be based on multilateral participation and full consultation and negotiation. On the one hand, non-state actors are playing an increasingly important role compared with the state. On the other hand, developing countries need to become the new backbone of global emission reduction, Asia needs to increase its regional influence in the world, and China needs to become the leader, coordinator, builder and reformer of global climate governance. From the perspective of the progress of the dialogue, the participation of multiple subjects has become the biggest feature of taranoa dialogue, which is different from the previous political dialogue.

Allen Buchanan and Robert o. keeohane evaluate the legitimacy of global governance mechanisms by three separate criteria: acceptable minimum ethical standards, relative benefits, and integrity. Two essential elements of legitimacy: accountability and transparency. Transparency requirements should be broad, and the ultimate goal of setting transparency is to make the global governance mechanism meet the "compound criteria" of legitimacy, which can be summarized as the realization of convincing public justice. The accountability and accountability mechanisms in global climate governance are not sound enough, and the taranoa dialogue fully reflects the level of transparency that should be achieved. All the dialogue parties engaged in the "online" dialogue on the official platform are required to submit dialogue materials, so that all parties have enough information before the round-table dialogue to improve the effectiveness of the dialogue.

The talanoa dialogue is a process of information sharing and feedback on climate change actions. The implementation effect of existing international multilateral climate agreements is evaluated periodically through the dialogue. Thus, the talanoa dialogue has become a pivotal link linking collective action at the international and domestic levels, and the new political dialogue has become a "bridge" for the generation and amendment of the climate change law.

The rule of law is the only way to governance, and the rule of law is the natural state of global governance. The international rule of law on climate change is in its development stage and faces many uncertain factors. For example, the transformation of climate economy reduces the motivation of developing countries to act, and the fragmentation of the international climate change law is difficult to change in the short term, which makes the level of global cooperation on climate change different. To promote the rule of law in global climate governance, the core is to improve the legal system on climate change. In terms of international law, the improvement of the international climate change legal system needs to start from the effectiveness and systematicness of international law. The three major global climate change agreements are legally binding, but their effectiveness is obviously different. Although the convention has strong legal binding force, it is far from reaching the level of international coercive law. Compared with global human rights, humanitarian and international criminal fields, it is weaker than the latter in terms of mandatory force and importance. The strong binding force of the protocol loses its practical significance as it gradually fades from the historical stage. The Paris agreement is both mandatory and arbitrary, but in the practice of states parties, there are more elements of "soft law" than "hard law". The development of global climate change law in the future should strengthen the "hard law" element, while the optional norms can be developed in regional climate change agreements and bilateral climate change agreements.

The conference of the parties on climate change (cop) has a long history of inefficient dialogue. The opening of the talanoa dialogue creatively responded to this dilemma, fully explored the "conscience" and "consciousness" of the state and other actors, and participated in cooperation with greater tolerance. The talanoa dialogue is more like a bond and bridge, making climate change negotiations more realistic and targeted, and enhancing the democratic nature of the proposal process. At the same time, the dialogue has also promoted the diversification of subjects and democracy of the agenda of global climate governance. By expanding more dialogue and cooperation platforms and improving the international legal system on climate change, the democratization and rule of law of global climate governance can finally be achieved.

51due留学教育原创版权郑重声明：原创paper代写范文源自编辑创作，未经官方许可，网站谢绝转载。对于侵权行为，未经同意的情况下，51Due有权追究法律责任。主要业务有essay代写、assignment代写、paper代写服务。

51due为留学生提供最好的paper代写服务，亲们可以进入主页了解和获取更多paper代写范文 提供作业代写服务，详情可以咨询我们的客服QQ：800020041。