As expected, US President Donald Trump has once again withdrawn the US from the Paris climate agreement.
Unlike in 2017, everyone saw this one coming — Trump’s commitment to fracking and ignorance of global integration has been broadcast for a long time.
However, other countries that remain part of the agreement still need to develop a way forward. The US departure is a big loss to collective global efforts to reduce global warming, and its former influential position in the agreement means the climate regime might no longer have a leading driver.
States could use two ways to face this situation. First, they could simply replace the driver.
As climate change is complex, cross-national cooperation would always be necessary. China and the EU, given their leading position in renewable energy potential and international stature, could take over the driver’s seat.
Another option is what Taiwan has implemented, known as the “polycentric” strategy, which is to reduce reliance on a single integrated climate regime system, such as the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC), commonly known as the “COP,” and the Paris Agreement.
Other levels of transnational governance — including regional groups, financial market mechanisms, bilateral approaches and even subnational cooperation — could also have a similar impact in helping states develop a strong climate policy framework.
Diplomatic isolation means UNFCCC has not been an option for Taiwan for a long time.
Taiwan is still adopting several Paris Agreement frameworks into its policies, including The National Climate Change Action Guidelines released in 2023.
However, external pressures and diplomatic isolation has necessitated the nation’s climate diplomacy be more creative, diverse and independent.
This has empowered multiple actors such as subnational governments, enterprises and even the civil society organizations to get involved in the transnational real. This is a polycentric strategy at its finest.
Between 2010 and 2022, South Korea reduced its greenhouse gas emissions by 4 percent, while Taiwan reduced them by about 2 percent, data compiled by the International Energy Agency have showed.
Fossil fuels make up 51 percent of South Korea’s energy mix, while for Taiwan it is 35 percent. In addition, both countries have also similar pledges to fulfill net zero emission by 2050.
Jan Petzold, a climate researcher at Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, Germany, said that a polycentric strategy could be effective if it ensures inclusivity and interlinkages, and drives innovation while harnessing local strengths.
Taiwan has set the formula by becoming a prime example in doing all of them.
First, it has interlinkages of multiple actors, which is backed by its high-level of democracy. In climate policy, adaptation requires not just high participation from multiple actors at different levels, but also ensuring all of them know what their roles are.
Policy guidelines in Taiwan have done that — with multiple actors acknowledging that cooperation between the government, private enterprises and non-governmental organizations is important.
This includes the government serving as the planner and helping with financing alongside the private sector, while also delegating coordination responsibilities to civil society organizations.
On another level, academia plays a role in raising awareness and monitoring implementations.
The government is also aware of its local industrial profile and stimulates innovation in according with certain priorities.
For example, former president Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) recognized Taiwan’s climate vulnerability, such as nuclear energy generating one-fifth of the nation’s power supply.
Therefore, the government set a plan to remove nuclear power and gradually increase the supply of renewable energy as part of the “nuclear-free homeland” by this year.
The government has also recognized Taiwan’s significant potential for offshore wind energy, with multiple wind energy subsidy programs being introduced.
President William Lai (賴清德) has shown similar aspirations, such as by announcing his commitment to reducing Taiwan’s dependence on fossil fuels and calling for Taiwan to harness its proficiency in artificial intelligence to transition to a net zero economy, such as through developing a smart grid.
Despite its diplomatic isolation, empowerment of multiple actors in transnational activities has made the nation catch-up with global climate frameworks.
Taiwan shows how inclusivity, democracy, interlinkages and innovation are important for developing a climate mitigation framework.
Other countries could construct their own polycentric strategy so they can also thrive in an era of uncertain global climate governance.
Muhammad Raka Hadiyan is an international relations researcher studying at Universitas Airlangga in Indonesia. He is also a Taiwan Experience Education Program intern at National Kaohsiung Normal University, and a former exchange student at National Taiwan University.
The Chinese government on March 29 sent shock waves through the Tibetan Buddhist community by announcing the untimely death of one of its most revered spiritual figures, Hungkar Dorje Rinpoche. His sudden passing in Vietnam raised widespread suspicion and concern among his followers, who demanded an investigation. International human rights organization Human Rights Watch joined their call and urged a thorough investigation into his death, highlighting the potential involvement of the Chinese government. At just 56 years old, Rinpoche was influential not only as a spiritual leader, but also for his steadfast efforts to preserve and promote Tibetan identity and cultural
Former minister of culture Lung Ying-tai (龍應台) has long wielded influence through the power of words. Her articles once served as a moral compass for a society in transition. However, as her April 1 guest article in the New York Times, “The Clock Is Ticking for Taiwan,” makes all too clear, even celebrated prose can mislead when romanticism clouds political judgement. Lung crafts a narrative that is less an analysis of Taiwan’s geopolitical reality than an exercise in wistful nostalgia. As political scientists and international relations academics, we believe it is crucial to correct the misconceptions embedded in her article,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
RSS