In light of the United States' withdrawal from and re-entry into the Paris Agreement, climate relations between the European Union and China warrant closer inspection. As the second- and third-largest cumulative emitters after the United States, their cooperation has a global impact. This paper assesses the current state of their climate and environmental engagement and analyzes post-COVID-19 obstacles affecting this dimension of their relations. Based on interview data, we show that the increasing institutionalization of climate and environmental cooperation has not resulted in improved outcomes. Instead, such engagement remains limited to dialog for the sake of dialog rather than substantive collaboration. We identify four key obstacles to cooperation: perceptual, capacity-related, institutional, and interest-based. This paper addresses pertinent questions about the viability and practicality of joint climate action in the context of rising geopolitical tensions. Our findings contribute to scholarship on global climate governance and EU–China relations, and we propose an analytical framework to inform future research and policy debate.
Policy implications
- Define clear success metrics for China-EU climate and environmental cooperation (CECEC) by developing a success methodology that measures policy and regulatory alignment, tracks completion rates and outcomes of joint projects, and quantifies emissions reductions from joint initiatives. Shift from broad dialog to action-oriented cooperation with increased focus on tangible deliverables monitored against defined timelines.
- Improve internal EU coordination and oversight of climate and environmental cooperation with China by having the Climate, Environment, and Energy Directorates-General create a centralized tracking system. This system should monitor member states' activities with China, record ETS capacity-building projects, financial flows, and potential duplications. Better internal coordination will enhance transparency, optimize resource use, and support a more strategic EU approach.
- Expand the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) dialog under the EU-China High-Level Environment and Climate Dialog (HECD) into a dedicated platform to address the trade-climate nexus. It should focus on competition related to trade, markets, and technology tensions to foster constructive competition and prevent future trade conflicts.
- Ideally and comprehensively, establish a China-EU Climate and Environment Council under HECD, modeled on the past EU-US Trade and Technology Council (TTC). This council should deepen shared perceptions, identify and address capacity and coordination gaps, and reconcile intervening political and economic interests. It should issue recommendations to respective governing bodies to improve cooperation, include streamlined working groups and regular engagement to support sustained, year-round collaboration, and prepare joint action for UN climate negotiations. The TTC format provided a fruitful model for advancing dialog and progress despite intense competition and geopolitical challenges.
Photo by Cup of Couple