Discussing International Climate Regulations in a Post-colonial World : A Content Analysis on EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM).

In a contemporary with intense concerns towards global warming, this thesis has investigated the matter of how trade regulation policies, responding to climate change, are rhetorically motivated and discussed within international forums. Particularly by looking at the European Union’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism and by critically dissecting how the EU has been navigating its conflicting position; on one hand, as the self-appointed leader of progressive climate actions, on the other hand, as the guardian of the common economic interests of the Union – and on a third stand, as a prominent member of the World Trade Organization, with binding obligations to not violate its rules. On the basis of a theoretically post-colonial perspective, this paper has explored the power-relational tensions operating within discussions, practically by investigating the narrating presence of post-colonial tendencies. The study has additionally been interested in contributing to wider discussions on ideas and processes influencing the evolvement of international trade regulations on climate, and similarly, to constructively nuance the leadership role shouldered by the EU. This has been completed through an operationalization of three theoretical concepts; Universalism, Otherness/Self and Hegemony - and by implementing a mixed-method approach, bringing forward both qualitative and quantitative results answering up to the question on how the EU’s motivation in favour of the CBAM has been carried out rhetorically – both within internal discussions and during official WTO meetings. Based on two data-cases reflecting the nature of EU’s rhetoric within the two forums, and in relation to the three theoretical concepts - intentionally developed to detect different post-colonial features - this study resulted in interesting outcomes demonstrating distinct rhetorical patterns. While in WTO contexts, emphases were put on asserting the EU as the natural leader and the CBAM as the most ambitious and effective environmental tool – internal discussions revealed contrastingly higher emphases on motivating the CBAM in terms of being a convenient regulation, serving the climate objective - most importantly - without interfering, nor jeopardizing the sovereignty of EU’s economic position. In fact, comparing between the two data-cases, the frequency of code-words motivating economic interests were 178% higher in internal EU discussions. It has therefore been verified that EU’s internal discussions on how to tackle global warming are strongly interlinked with reasonings around economic matters of interests. On the contrary, this is exceedingly toned down during official WTO-meetings