Climate change is one of the most severe global problems of the 21st Century. China, as the biggest polluter in the world since 2007, undeniably needs to play an important role in the climate...Show moreClimate change is one of the most severe global problems of the 21st Century. China, as the biggest polluter in the world since 2007, undeniably needs to play an important role in the climate change negotiations to combat this worldwide problem. In 2017, the US (the second largest polluter responsible for global emissions) announced its withdrawal from the 2015 Paris climate change treaty. This made scholars wonder what China’s role in combating global climate change would be in the future. When looking at its first reaction in 2017, it seems that China’s is more willing to cooperate in combating climate change than it did before. This study shows when this changed occurred by analysing two recent climate change negotiations, the 2009 Copenhagen summit (COP15) and the 2015 Paris summit (COP 21). This study also shows how China's view has changed during these two COPs. This thesis concludes that 1) China has shifted from a realist approach to a more liberalist approach from 2009 to 2015, 2) China has recently been using the principle of "common but differentiated responsibilities" more as a way to protect itself from undertaking actions that are too big of a burden for the country, rather than an excuse to not have to commit to mitigation actions at all as it did before, and 3) China’s more liberal attitude seen in 2017 is already noticeable during the 2015 Paris climate change negotiations.Show less
Advanced master thesis | Political Science (Advanced Master)
open access
Why do some self-determination movements manage to achieve autonomy, while others fail to extract such salient concessions during peace negotiations? Although one would expect supporters of the...Show moreWhy do some self-determination movements manage to achieve autonomy, while others fail to extract such salient concessions during peace negotiations? Although one would expect supporters of the self-determination movement to unite in their struggle against the incumbent regime, recent literature has demonstrated that they tend to fight each other just as often as they fight the government in their competition for political relevance. Yet, little has been done to explain the effects such infighting has on the peace negotiations. Based on the comparison of the cases of Southern Sudan and Darfur, this study shows that more cohesive movements are able to extract much more salient concessions that address the conflict’s master cleavage and reflect the characteristics of a club good. The findings further suggest that fragmented movements tend to be paid off rather than yielded to by the incumbent government, thus rendering the achievement of peace utterly unattainable. Future research will have to examine whether these findings hold an explanatory power in contexts outside of Sudan.Show less
