关键词: 《联合国气候变化框架公约》, 《巴黎协定》, 国家分类, 自我定位

Abstract:

This paper reviews and analyzes the evolution of country classification in United Nation Framework of Climate Change Convention (UNFCCC) system and other multilateral organizations.
In UNFCCC, parties were classified by Annex I (including developed country parties and economies in transition) and non-Annex I, which was further enhanced in Kyoto Protocol where most Annex I Parties (except Turkey and Belarus) bear quantified emission reduction and limitation targets. However, under Paris Agreement, this clear classification was shifted to the differentiation by “developed parties” and “developing parties”, which is ambiguous in term of criteria. The shift reflected the complicated impacts brought by the significant changes of global development structure and irresistible trend towards a uniform framework applicable to all Parties.
Furthermore, this shift interacted with classification methods in other multilateral mechanisms as both cause and effect. M49 standard developed by United Nation Statistic Department (UNSD) once used ‘developed and developing region’ as one of classification method to group countries, but it was canceled in 2021. Similarly, country grouping in Inter-governmental Panel of Climate Change (IPCC) system changed from using UNFCCC method generally in WGIII report of AR5, to using UNFCCC method with minor changes in underling reports of WGIII report of AR6, and finally, to pure geographic classification in SPM of the report. Stability is observed in World Bank classification method, where income is the only criteria used across the time.
By the end of March, 2025, 100 Parties of Paris Agreement submitted the first Biennial Transparent Report (BTR). According to statistics provided by UNFCCC Secretary, 66 developing countries and 34 developed countries submitted BTRs, though the approach to classify countries is not disclosed. After analyzing these 100 BTRs, it was noticed that “self-differentiation” has emerged. For example, Turkey and Russia Federation, Annex I Parties under UNFCCC, announce specifically that they fulfil the responsibility of the Agreement as developing countries, and Israel, for the first time, submitted BTR as a developed country, though it is a non-Annex I Party. And around one fifth Parties do not clearly mention their country’s attribution in term of ‘developed’ and ‘developing’.
These few cases are of typical significance. On one hand, self-differentiation makes sense, as Parris Agreement neither has its own annex, nor has hard linkage with UNFCCC annex, and, particularly, there is no dynamic adjustment mechanism for UNFCCC annex, raising widespread concerns for its mis-matching with the evolving situation; on the other hand, Paris Agreement, taking national-determined contribution as a major instrument, has already become less enforcing when compared with KP in which Annex I Parties took their legally-binding commitments by top-down approach literally; when the grouping of party goes also to the direction of self-differentiation, the Agreement will lose more force certainly. This will release negative signals to global climate governance, though there is also self-upgrading.
When we enter in an era when globalization is seriously challenged, national-determined principle tends to be used in wider situation and self-differentiation becomes possible, the economic indication contained in ‘developed’ and ‘developing’ countries is largely replaced by political perspective, losing its original content of burden-sharing and equity. In order to maintain the effectiveness of UNFCCC system, international society might have to give up the tangling with these two words, and focus on mechanisms like Enhanced Transparent Framework (ETF), Global Stocktake (GST) which have sort of top-down arrangements, fostering the establishment of climate governance based on best efforts and enhanced actions of each Party and non-state actors, in accordance with national circumstance.

Key words: United Nation Framework of Climate Change Convention (UNFCCC), Partis Agreement, Country classification, Self-differentiation