Search

Relying on complex interdependence as a theoretical approach, this paper investigates the hypothetical damage that the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Agreement could represent for Africa in terms of climate finance. In June 2017, President Donald Trump publicly declared the U.S. intention to withdraw from further participating in the multilateral Paris Agreement. To keen followers and analysts of the U.S. climate policy beyond its borders, such unilateral action was never a surprise. Rather, it is nostalgic of the experience of the Kyoto Protocol, particularly how more or less similar move unduly prolonged the global climate negotiations up till late 2015 when the Paris Agreement came about. Although the Paris Agreement is remarkable as it represents the first states-wide climate deal, it however left a number of issues unresolved. Notable among which is climate finance which has remained the most contentious and of critical concern to developing countries, particularly in Africa. Pitted against the fact that Africa contributes less to climate change and, ironically, the hardest-hit by the phenomenon, the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Agreement aggravates concerns around climate finance and, indeed, portends additional burdens for a continent that is still struggling to cope with the untoward fallout of climate change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

After two decades of unduly prolonged negotiations that characterized the Conference of the Parties (COP) meetings, the international system only recently witnessed a substantive globally acceptable climate regime, the Paris Agreement (PA). The less legally binding and largely voluntary agreement establishes, amongst other things, a common framework for all Parties aimed at limiting greenhouse gas emissions (GHGEs) to not more than 2°C and more significantly, 1.5°C above the pre-industrial levels. Although the agreement admits that an economy driven by clean energy is indispensable to sustainable development, its demand of a rapid end to fossil fuel places a burden on South Africa to replace its coal and gas with clean energy sources. Meeting such demand, when no credible alternatives are put in place, would only exacerbate poverty for the millions of South Africans whose livelihood and businesses are largely sustained by coal-powered electricity. The objectives of this paper are to: (1) assess the Paris climate agreement and its feasibility; (2) appraise South Africa’s coal-dependent economy; (3) suggest adjustment options aimed at dealing effectively with the situation, and also providing support for the aggregate welfare of South Africans. This article adopts the ‘complex interdependence’ and ‘green’ theories. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]