世界気候外交におけるパキスタン：戦略的関与、気候正義、実施上の課題

Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.

🔬研究者:気候正義と制度主義の枠組みで、途上国の透明性報告と外交効果の関係を分析する事例として有用。

🏢実務担当者:新興国での事業展開や適応金融に関わる企業が、現地の政策実施能力と資金アクセスの制約を把握する材料になる。

🏛政策担当者:気候資金アクセス改善や透明性支援の設計において、受入国の制度分断と能力制約を考慮すべき点を示す。

Climate diplomacy has emerged as one of the key spaces of international relations for the negotiation of the sharing of mitigation responsibilities, adaptation support, climate finance and loss and damage. Pakistan is a specific case as the contribution of the country in global GHG emission is comparatively small but the exposure to the flood, heat, water stress, glacial hazards etc. is quite large. The article explores the role played by multilateral institutions, claims of climate justice and coalition diplomacy in promoting Pakistan's interests in global climate governance and the lack of correlation between international visibility and domestic resilience. The study uses a qualitative documentary analysis of the official Pakistani submissions to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), such as the updated Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) 2021, the Biennial Transparency Report (BTR) 2024, the Third National Communication, NDC 3.0 submitted in 2025, climate-finance and implementation instruments published in 2026, COP decisions, multilateral assessments, and peer-reviewed scholarship. The issue of institutional access and access through repeated negotiation, transparency and coalition building is explored under the lens of liberal institutionalism, while differentiated responsibility, vulnerability, finance and loss and damage are explored under the climate-justice framework. The analysis suggests that Pakistan has become a more visible player on the international stage via its engagements with G77 and China, climate-justice advocacy, and the salience of the 2022 floods, especially in discussions on loss and damage. Institutional fragmentation and limited technical and fiscal capacity, access barriers to climate finance, and a disconnect between international ambition and domestic implementation, however, continue to limit diplomatic effectiveness. The article concludes that vulnerability can be a source of normative legitimacy, but only when it is supported by coalition strategy, institutional capacity, credible implementation and climate-finance readiness.

• openalex https://doi.org/10.59075/jssd.v5i7.336first seen 2026-10-26 04:38:37 · last seen 2026-10-29 04:38:00