贝伦气候大会与国际气候制度重组:衰退表征、渐进机制及其限度OACHSSCD

Focusing on issues including the updating of Nationally Determined Contributions(NDCs),the quantification of indicators for the Global Goal on Adaptation,the operationalization of the Loss and Damage Mechanism,and climate finance arrangements,the Belém Climate Conference(COP30)continued the operation of the Paris Agreement framework while simultaneously revealing the weakening of three core functions of the international climate regime:constraint,redistribution,and integration.Why has institutional decline not resulted in the breakdown of the Paris Agreement framework?How has the international climate regime undergone gradual restructuring under the pressure of decline?These questions constitute the central analytical issues for understanding the institutional significance of the Belém Climate Conference.Here,decline does not refer to the failure of rules or the termination of multilateral processes;rather,it refers to a persistent mismatch between institutional functions and implementation responsibilities.Likewise,restructuring does not indicate the emergence of an entirely new institutional order,but rather the reinterpretation,reattachment,and reconfiguration of existing rules under conditions of path dependence.Examining the trajectory of institutional evolution since the Glasgow Climate Conference,the Belém Climate Conference has not yet become a critical juncture capable of disrupting the existing institutional path;instead,it represents a node that exposes institutional tensions and promotes directional adjustments.The continued operation of mitigation mechanisms alongside weakened binding constraints indicates a drift in core institutional functions.The advancement of adaptation agendas through quantification and platform-based approaches reflects the continuous layering of new rules onto existing frameworks.Meanwhile,the long-term dialogue arrangement established around Article 2.1(c)of the Paris Agreement demonstrates that climate finance issues are shifting from a focus on obligations of public support toward interfaces of financial governance.The international climate regime is undergoing a defensive restructuring,moving from a governance model supported by strong political consensus and responsibility allocation toward one characterized by procedural maintenance,technical advancement,and rule reconfiguration.However,this restructuring remains insufficient to resolve persistent deficits in equity,financing,implementation,and governance coherence.