International Decarbonization Regime as a Tool for Implementing Values of the Risk Society

DOI: 10.20542/0131-2227-2022-66-5-112-119
MGIMO University, 76, Vernadskogo Prosp., Moscow, 119454, Russian Federation.
MGIMO University, 76, Vernadskogo Prosp., Moscow, 119454, Russian Federation; 
Institute of Europe, Russian Academy of Sciences (IE RAS), 11-3B, Mokhovaya Str., Moscow, 101000, Russian Federation.

Received 07.06.2021. Revised 29.01.2022. Accepted 01.03.2022.

Acknowledgements. The article was prepared in the framework of a research grant funded by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation (grant ID: 075-15-2020-930).

Abstract. The coronavirus pandemic has actualised the “Global Risk Society” concept. The purpose of this article is to examine the emergence of an international decarbonisation regime in terms of the values of the “global risk society” as updated by the coronavirus pandemic. Under the conditions of “new normality”, new values that determine the socio-political development of society are taking shape. Relying on the “Global Risk Society” theory, the authors derive its emerging values, the emergence of which is associated with the pandemic and its socio-economic effects. Thus, new values include the abandonment of faith in progress and a focus on crisis management (resilience), global solidarity as a key condition for survival, the search for a balance between freedom and security, effective response and regulation, “open innovation” as part of the “global commons”, rethinking of the value of consumption, and finally, the value of the climate agenda as a global green imperative comes to the fore. These values are of importance for a global climate agenda as well, which has become more acute during the pandemic. A key actor here is the European Union, which, through its policy of normative power and environmental ethics, is shaping a new international decarbonisation regime as an instrument for realising these values. And this “new ethic” has no national boundaries. Such international regime aims to create a regulatory framework for responding to climate risks that has the potential to profoundly affect global development and lead to a fundamentally new international climate order.

Keywords: global climate agenda, global values, “global risk society”, international regimes, international decarbonization regime, carbon tax


  1. Gautam S. COVID‑19: Air Pollution Remains Low as People Stay at Home. Air Quality, Atmosphere & Health, 2020, vol. 13, pp. 853-857. DOI: 10.1007/s11869-020-00842-6
  2. Masterson J.H., Peacock W.G., Van Zandt S.S., Grover H., Schwarz L.F., Cooper J.T., Jr. The New Era of Catastrophes. Planning for Community Resilience: A Handbook for Reducing Vulnerability to Disasters. Washington, Covelo, London, Island Press, 2014, pp. 5-24.
  3. Beck U. Critical Theory of World Risk Society: A Cosmopolitan Vision. Constellations. International Journal of Critical and Democratic Theory, 2009, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 3-22. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8675.2009.00534.x
  4. Beck U. Ecological Politics in an Age of Risk. Cambridge, Polity Press, 1995. 224 p.
  5. Beck U. From Industrial Society to the Risk Society. Theory, Culture and Society, 1992, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 97-123. DOI: 10.1177/026327692009001006
  6. Giddens A. The Politics of Climate Change. Cambridge, Polity Press, 2009. 264 p.
  7. Giddens A. The Consequences of Modernity. Stanford, Stanford University Press. 1990. 188 p.
  8. Luhmann N. Theory of Society, Vol. 1. Stanford, Stanford University Press, 2012. 488 p.
  9. Zubkov V.I. Risk as an Object of Sociological Analysis. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya, 1999, no. 4, pp. 3-9. (In Russ.)
  10. Zubkov V.I. Introduction to the Risk Theory (Sociological Dimension). Moscow, INION RAS, 1998. 108 . (In Russ.)
  11. Zubkov V.I. Sociological Risk Theory. Moscow, RUDN Press, 2003. 230 p. (In Russ.)
  12. Kravchenko S.A. Complicated Social Reality Emerging: New Vulnerabilities Problem. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya, 2013, no. 5, pp. 3-12. (In Russ.) Available at: (accessed 19.02.2022).
  13. Kravchenko S.A. Risk and Security Sociology. Moscow, Urait, 2016. 302 p. (In Russ.)
  14. Yanitskii O.N. The Risk Sociology. Moscow, LVS, 2003. 191 p. (In Russ.)
  15. Daly H.E. Beyond Growth: The Economics of Sustainable Development. Boston, Beacon Press, 1996. 264 p.
  16. Ophuls W. Ecology and the Politics of Scarcity: Prologue to a Political Theory of the Steady State. New York, W.H. Freeman & Co., 1977. 303 p.
  17. Bardi U. The Limits to Growth Revisited. New York, Springer, 2011. 119 p. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4419-9416-5
  18. Tsygankov P.A. Universal Values in World and Foreign Policy. Moscow, Moscow University Press, 2012. 224 p. (In Russ.)
  19. Romanova T.A. Resilience Category in the European Union. Contemporary Europe, 2017, no. 4, pp. 17-28. (In Russ.) Available at: (accessed 19.02.2022).
  20. Guadagno L. Migrants and the COVID‑19 Pandemic: an Initial Analysis. International Organization for Migration, 2020. 28 p. Available at: (accessed 19.02.2022).
  21. Arapova E.Ya. Asia: on the Way to a Consumer Society. World Economy and International Relations, 2017, vol. 61, no. 7, pp. 45-53. (In Russ.) Available at:
  22. Arapova E. Determinants of Household Final Consumption Expenditures in Asian Countries: a Panel Model, 1991–2015. Applied Econometrics and International Development, 2018, vol. 18 (1), pp. 121-140. Availbale at: (accessed 19.02.2022).
  23. Ibragimova K.A., Barabanov O.N. The Right for Development: Innovations as the Global Common. Polis. Political Studies, 2020, no. 2, pp. 8-20. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2020.02.02
  24. Minteer B.A., Collins J.P. From Environmental to Ecological Ethics: Toward a Practical Ethics for Ecologists and Conservationists. Science and Engineering Ethics, 2008, vol. 14, pp. 483-501. DOI: 10.1007/s11948-008-9087-0
  25. Varner G. Utilitarianism and the Evolution of Ecological Ethics. Science and Engineering Ethics, 2008, vol. 14, pp. 551-573. DOI: 10.1007/s11948-008-9102-5
  26. Levoyannis C. The EU Green Deal and the Impact on the Future of Gas and Gas Infrastructure in the European Union. Mathioulakis M., ed. Aspects of the Energy Union. New York, Springer, 2021, pp. 201-224. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-55981-6_10
  27. Hafner M., Raimondi P.P. Priorities and Challenges of the EU Energy Transition: from the European Green Package to the New Green Deal. Russian Journal of Economics, 2020, vol. 6, pp. 374-389. DOI: 10.32609/j.ruje.6.55375
  28. Elkerbout M., Egenhofer C., Ferrer J.N., Catuti M., Kustova I., Rizos V. The European Green Deal after Corona: Implications for EU Climate Policy. Policy Insights, 2020, no. 6, pp. 1-12. Available at: (accessed 19.02.2022).
  29. Skjærseth J.B. Towards a European Green Deal: The Evolution of EU Climate and Energy Policy Mixes. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 2021, vol. 21, pp. 25-41. DOI: 10.1007/s10784-021-09529-4
  30. Krasner S.D., ed. International Regimes. Ithaca, Cornell University Press, 1983. 384 p.
  31. Keohane R.O. The Demand for International Regimes. International Regimes. Ithaca, Cornell University Press, 1983, pp. 141-172.
  32. Young O.R. International Cooperation: Building Regimes for Natural Resources and Environment. Ithaca, Cornell University Press, 1989. 264 p.
  33. Gerrits A., ed. Normative Power Europe in a Changing World: A Discusson. The Hague, Netherlands Institute of International Relations Clingendael, 2009. 96 p. Available at: (accessed 19.02.2022).
  34. Marini V. Institutional Initiatives to Foster Green Finance at EU Level. Migliorelli M., Dessertine P., eds. The Rise of Green Finance in Europe. Cham, Palgrave Macmillan (Springer), 2019, pp. 119-149. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-22510-0_6


  1. Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2021. Available at: (accessed 20.01.2022).
  2. Global Renewables Outlook: Energy Transformation 2050. The International Renewable Energy Agency. Abu Dhabi, 2020. 291 p. Available at: (accessed 19.02.2022).
  3. Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council Establishing a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism. Brussels. European Commission. COM(2021) 564, 2021/0214 (COD), 2021. Available at: (accessed 19.02.2022).

Registered in System SCIENCE INDEX

For citation:
Barabanov O., Maslova E. International Decarbonization Regime as a Tool for Implementing Values of the Risk Society. World Eonomy and International Relations, 2022, vol. 66, no. 5, pp. 112-119.

Comments (0)

No comments

Add comment






Dear authors! Please note that in the VAK List of peer-reviewed scientific journals, in which the main scientific results of dissertations for the degree of candidate and doctor of sciences should be published for the “MEMO Journal” the following specialties are recorded:
economic sciences:
5.2.5. World Economy.
5.2.1. Economic Theory
5.2.3. Regional and Branch Economics
political sciences:
5.5.4. International Relations
5.5.1. History and Theory of Politics
5.5.2. Political Institutions, Processes, Technologies


Current Issue
2024, vol. 68, No. 7
Topical Themes of the Issue:
  • The Supporting Structure of Global Security
  • Institutional Features of the Fourth Energy Transition
  • The Evolution of Modern German Christian Democracy
  • The Monarchies of the Persian Gulf and Central Asia
Submit an Article
The Editorial Board invites authors to write analytical articles on the following topics:
  • changes in the processes of globalization in modern conditions
  • formation of the new world order
  • shifts in civilization at the stage of transition to a digital society

The editors are also interested in publishing synthesis articles / scientific reviews revealing the main trends in the development of certain regions of the world - Latin America, Africa, South Asia, etc.