The 2015 Paris Climate Negotiation Agreement is considered to be a milestone in climate change global governance, on the one hand the global goal of the 2 ℃ limit has been reached, on the other hand, the introduction of Intended National Determined Contributions (INDC) have enabled actors to have more initiatives, challenging the top-down governance model in the pre-Paris Agreement scenario. This article concentrates on the Paris agreement and INDC texts, the dichotomous divide between the administrative and the political discourse is discovered. This research also illustrates how actors conquer their natural parochial emotions in order to reach agreement on cooperation through experimentalist governance model.
Transnational cooperation in climate change has often been plagued by the different stages of development of the actors involved. In the Paris negotiations in 2015, the governance logic of the experimental paradigm was introduced. Through the peer supervision and real-time feedback and modification mechanisms, the actors at the sovereign state level were given more autonomy, achieving common global goals and consensus, Paris Agreement has become a milestone of global climate governance.
This paper uses the method of text analysis to explore the efforts of the “Paris Agreement” and the independent contribution in terms of the mechanism setting to build up “globalism”. This includes: peer-to-peer supervision, real-time feedback and revision of the INDC, giving the actors more autonomy. On the other hand, international cooperation and support are the backing of countries to respond more actively to climate change. But at the same time, this paper also finds that due to the influence of the ruling party of a country and the influence of geopolitics, the discourses of INDCs texts split into two types: one is the administrative discourse to maintain the status quo; the other is the political discourse, promoting the revolution of current international system. The division of ideology is also a question worth considering in the process of promoting global climate change cooperation.
The tension between globalism and nationalism can be adjusted through the coexistence of universalism and pluralism. Due to the reality of the international order with sovereign states as the basic unit, the state is the most powerful executive body of international cooperation. The realization of globalist goals and action planning is also a more dialectical understanding and treatment of nationalism. Based on the findings of case studies, this paper proposes that in the context of international governance and cross-border collaboration, parochial emotions, as a natural state of priority for sovereign states, need to be coordinated with global goals through effective governance and communication mechanisms. Through the maintenance of a stable international cooperation and support environment; granting more discretion and action power to sovereign states; real-time communication at different levels and peer-to-peer monitoring mechanisms; and geopolitical, domestic party politics, ideology and other factors will also have be given full consideration when helping a country to transcend parochial emotions.