ECO-STRATEGIC IMPERATIVE OF DIPLOMACY IN GLOBAL COMPETITION

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

Published: Oct 14, 2026

  Alina Bokhan

Abstract

Purpose of the article. The article aims to conceptualize the eco-strategic imperative of contemporary diplomacy as a system of principles, instruments, and mechanisms for reconciling the economic, environmental, technological, and security interests of states amid intensifying global competition. Subject of the study. The study focuses on the transformation of diplomatic practices under the influence of climate change, resource constraints, competition for critical minerals, the development of green technologies, and the fragmentation of the international economic environment. Methodology. The methodological framework of the study is based on systemic, institutional, comparative, and strategic approaches, complemented by elements of international policy analysis. A theoretical synthesis of recent academic publications and international reports provides a basis for viewing environmental diplomacy not as a narrowly specialized area of foreign policy, but as a cross-sectoral mechanism for strategic risk management and the development of competitive advantages. Results. The study establishes that contemporary competition extends beyond markets and resources to encompass standards, technologies, scientific knowledge, supply chains, and the rules governing the green transition. At the same time, environmental challenges remain global collective-action challenges, making international cooperation necessary even amid geopolitical rivalry. The study identifies priority areas for moving from reactive responses toward strategic resilience, including the development of joint technology projects, strengthened climate finance, and enhanced scientific and expert support for negotiations. Practical implications. The practical value of the study lies in the potential application of the proposed approach to the formulation of states’ foreign economic, environmental, and diplomatic policies, as well as to the development of economic and expert diplomacy instruments.

How to Cite

Bokhan, A. (2026). ECO-STRATEGIC IMPERATIVE OF DIPLOMACY IN GLOBAL COMPETITION. Green, Blue and Digital Economy Journal, 7(2), 106-112. https://doi.org/10.30525/2661-5169/2026-2-13
Article views: 7 | PDF Downloads: 2

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

Keywords

eco-strategic imperative, environmental diplomacy, strategic diplomacy, science and expert diplomacy, climate diplomacy, global competition, geo-economics

References

Constantinou, C. M., & Christodoulou, E. (2024). On making peace with nature: Visions and challenges towards an ecological diplomacy. Review of International Studies, 50(3), 579–599. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0260210524000172

Duarte, P. A. B., Gasparyan, A., da Silva, F. B., et al. (2026). The Environmental Diplomacy of the Belt and Road Initiative: Going Green to Meet External Expectations. Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences, 19, 217–243. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40647-025-00453-4

Rezaei, S., Haakonsson, S., & Mikkelsen, L. H. E. (2026). Catalysing the green transition through collaborative innovation: A longitudinal study of green diplomacy in strategic partnerships between Denmark and China. Asian Business & Management. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41291-025-00315-7

Li, R., Ren, F., & Wang, Q. (2024). China–US scientific collaboration on sustainable development amidst geopolitical tensions. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11, 1448. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03948-9

American Association for the Advancement of Science & The Royal Society. (2025). Science diplomacy in an era of disruption.

World Economic Forum. (2026). The Global Risks Report 2026. Geneva: World Economic Forum.

International Energy Agency. (2025). World Energy Outlook 2025. Paris: IEA.

International Energy Agency. (2025). Global Critical Minerals Outlook 2025. Paris: IEA.

United Nations Environment Programme & International Resource Panel. (2024). Global Resources Outlook 2024: Bend the Trend – Pathways to a Liveable Planet as Resource Use Spikes. Nairobi: UNEP.

United Nations Environment Programme. (2025). Emissions Gap Report 2025: Off Target. Nairobi: UNEP.

United Nations Environment Programme. (2025). Adaptation Gap Report 2025: Running on Empty. Nairobi: UNEP.

IPCC. (2023). Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Sixth Assessment Report. Geneva: IPCC.

World Trade Organization. (2026). Trade and Environmental Sustainability Structured Discussions: Insights and Outcomes from Five Years of Work. MC14 Package.

Bekkers, E., Yilmaz, A. N., Métivier, J., Tresa, E., Iunius, L., & Xu, A. (2025). The impact of decarbonization on trade. WTO Staff Working Paper ERSD-2025-08.

UN Trade and Development (UNCTAD). (2025). Trade and Development Report 2025: On the Brink – Trade, Finance and the Reshaping of the Global Economy. Geneva: United Nations.

Kivimaa, P. (2025). The new Clean Industrial Deal – How can new EU industrial policy support sustainability transitions, competitiveness and resilience? European Commission.

Yale Center for Environmental Law & Policy and Columbia University. (2024). 2024 Environmental Performance Index. Yale University.

World Bank. (2021). Groundswell: Acting on Internal Climate Migration. Washington, DC: World Bank.

Nachiappan, K. (2025). India’s Strategic Climate Diplomacy. Institute of South Asian Studies, National University of Singapore.

World Trade Organization. (2023). Trade Policy Tools for Climate Action. Geneva: WTO.

OECD. (2025). OECD Science, Technology and Innovation Outlook 2025: Driving Change in a Shifting Landscape. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/5fe57b90-en