Changes In Global Climate Governance Mechanisms

“The Kyoto protocol” and “the Paris agreement” jointly uphold the principle of "equality,common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities in accordance with different national conditions".On the other hand,in many ways the Paris agreement represents a crucial change from the Kyoto protocol.This paper analyzes the differences between the two treaties from six aspects: country classification,emission accounting method,emission allocation,flexibility grant,financial assistance from developed countries to developing countries and information update.State the differences of classification is to has carried on the arrangement,to the classification of the member countries is cancelled before the binary structure of classification rules,no longer take the Kyoto protocol,advocated by "annex I countries" and "non-annex I countries",but in the item 4,5,6,respectively rules out "developed and emerging developing countries,the least developed countries and small island developing states," the three categories.The differences in emission reduction methods are reflected in the fact that countries will participate in global climate change action in the form of bottom-up "national independent contribution(INDC)" instead of the topdown mandatory allocation of greenhouse gas emission reduction.This paper argues that the difference between “the Kyoto protocol” and “the Paris agreement” is a phenomenon and trend of the transition from hard law to soft law,that is,from mandatory directive regulations and provisions to more flexible and flexible regulations and provisions.This paper analyzes the causes and effects of this change,and holds that the main reason is that when state actors play a role in the international mechanism,they tend to accept the soft law treaty with lower sovereign cost.In the climate field studied in this paper,it is manifested as the infringement of the sovereignty of state actors caused by the mandatory climate governance mechanism,which makes the state expect to use soft law tools to fight against the established hard law.