It is no secret that since the Industrial Revolution the overall temperature of the Earth’s atmosphere has increased at an unprecedented rate. Only in the past few decades, however, has the international community paid pointed attention through agreements such as the Kyoto Protocol in 1997 and the Paris Climate Agreement in 2015. The issue involves unequal impact, risks, and resources, making it complex to internationally manage. For instance, island nations such as the Philippines have little causal impact and recourse yet suffer larger consequences as natural disasters have become more apparent and frequent. To begin taking sustainable steps toward managing climate change, as global and regional leaders and the world’s two largest carbon emitters, the United States (U.S.) and China should invest in partners in the South China Sea, such as the Philippines, by developing a pilot project for carbon-friendly solutions that have immediate, manifold local impacts and may later be implemented in their own nations.
Earth’s Increasing Global Temperatures Are Already Affecting Us
Climate change is defined as varied average global temperatures over a long period. Specifically, the Earth’s climate is trending toward a warmer climate. Since the late 1800s, the Earth’s average surface temperature has increased by 1°C, largely due to global warming. Prior to the Industrial Revolution, average temperature changes of that magnitude across the Earth would take tens of millions of years. Human activities in the forms of burning fossil fuels, carbon emissions, and the effects of the heat-trapping atmosphere are contributing to a rise in global temperatures. Although climate change is also influenced by external factors such as variations in the Earth’s orbit, human activity has greatly accelerated the rate at which climate change would naturally occur.
The evidence behind and impacts of climate change are robust. Each decade, temperatures reach new record highs. Glaciers are melting, contributing to the rise of sea levels. Ice caps and snow covers are retreating, and ocean temperatures are increasing overall. Arctic animals are becoming displaced, and extreme weather events are increasing, affecting various species of plants and animals. The impacts are not limited to hinterlands and wildlife. There are disruptions to food sources for both animals and people. Shorelines are encroaching on coastal cities. Drought is exacerbating scarcity and famine in places increasingly stricken by conflict. Rising temperatures are allowing pathogen spread to increase. Weather events are negatively affecting island nations, especially ones that are impoverished or rely on agriculture for subsistence. Although the direct impacts are less apparent for some, the problem is global, severe, and increasing.
Global Pact, Uneven Commitments
In 2023, the world’s largest greenhouse gas emitters were the U.S. and China. These three countries contribute 42.6% of the world’s total emissions, while the last 100 countries only contribute approximately 2.9%. The reason is that they are such powerhouse producers and economic competitors. This reveals the key disincentive toward climate change initiatives: that they come at the expense of economic gain. As two of the most developed countries in the world, the effects on the U.S. and China of carbon emissions and rising temperatures are largely mitigated by technological developments that shield residents and citizens from most of the impacts of rapid climate change, including food scarcity, harmed ecosystems, increasing natural disasters, and the spread of diseases. Even proposed international climate funds established by the United Nations and the U.S. have been seldom funded by the U.S. and China to the extent promised. With high costs to curtailing economic activities and the ability to deflect acute consequences, there is limited political and public will to act.
On top of national disincentives, existing frameworks and solutions are insufficient. The Paris Climate Agreement of 2019, for example, imparts goals developed by the United Nations to all participating countries to decrease carbon emissions by a year deadline proposed by each nation. The goal is to ensure that the average temperature of the Earth does not rise more than 2°C. The U.S., China, and India all participated in this agreement and set promising goals. At first glance, a policy proposal like this seems positive and simple. An extensive statistical analysis performed even concluded that the Paris Climate Agreement would also pass the cost-benefit test as an economically favorable pathway if carried out correctly. It features flaws, however, that upend the cost-benefit calculus and overall effect.
The first issue is that countries can self-report results. China, for example, has outlined an impressive “dual carbon” goal, highlighting changes in legislation and boasting its productivity over the European Union and countries like the U.S. in its carbon production goals. Although its reports may be true, many countries are skeptical, and it is difficult to audit or confirm that each country is meeting its objectives.
Second, even if all countries do adhere to their pledge, the Paris Climate Agreement goal of a less than 2°C rise, a considerable and concerning increase over 30 years, is not on track to be met. Thus, even with avid participants willing to endure costs and opportunity costs and a perfect record, this framework will not fulfill crucial aims. Countries must continue to explore alternative, sustainable, effective solutions to address climate change.
An additional layer of challenges involves great power competition between the U.S. and China. Already averse to reducing economic production for solely domestic reasons, the fact that they are competing for economic hegemony and influence raises the stakes. Any feasible solution must address this dimension. I propose an avenue that acknowledges their incentive structures while levying resources toward actors of the greatest need.
The Philippines: A Strategic Climate Partner for the U.S. and China
Although the impacts of climate change may not be as acutely felt by wealthier nations, they are certainly felt by peripheral island nations. Both the U.S. and China have strategic and economic interests in the South China Sea. In particular, the Philippines is an important trading partner to both nations and is situated in an important strategic location for economic development and investments. Currently, they are the Philippines’ largest trading partners. In fact, the largest export from the Philippines to both countries is integrated circuits, which account for vital products such as semiconductors. In February 2025, the Philippines had exported $145 million worth of integrated circuits to China and $146 million in value to the United States. Since both the U.S. and China rely heavily on Taiwan, a source of high contention and rumors of war, for assistance on semiconductor material, the Philippines offers a pressure valve for this strategic commodity. Investingg in the well-being and national interests of the Philippines should be a joint goal for both the U.S. and China, particularly when it is continuously affected by the impacts of climate change.
The U.S. and the Philippines not only have valuable trading ties, but they also have well-established military cooperation. The Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (ECDA), revived in 2023, allows the U.S. to build, support, and access nine Philippine bases, which allows the U.S. a great advantage to project power at a strategic location with greater proximity to other nations in the South China Sea, including China. Investing in the well-being of the Philippines in the face of climate change would allow the U.S. an opportunity to sustain a cooperative role in the Philippines’ path to self-sufficiency in the defense domain.
China’s interactions with the Philippine military are less favorable. This is evidenced by China’s consistent harassment of Philippine fishing boats and the most recent iteration of the Second Thomas Shoal incident. Nonetheless, China could use cooperation on climate change and investment in the Philippines as an opportunity to improve its relations with the Philippines before it loses a trading partner that may be just as valuable as Taiwan.
Filipino leaders appear amenable to arrangements like this as well. Secretary of National Defense Teodoro has also urged countries such as the U.S. to invest in aiding the Philippines through its natural disasters and, in return, to consider the “value proposition” of Filipino resources. The Philippines is a resource-rich nation. As a major exporter of integrated circuit materials, among many other items, to both nations, not only would the U.S. and China benefit from climate research and development yields implemented in the Philippines, but they would also retain and perhaps enhance the supply of key resources in exchange.
At the Mercy of the Storm
The Philippines itself is hardly a contributor of greenhouse gas emissions in relation to the U.S. and China, yet it receives some of the greatest impacts from climate change. While it struggles to combat increasing natural disasters and other deleterious effects of climate change, the population, production, and economies in the U.S. and China continue to grow.
The Philippines experiences some of the largest effects of climate change firsthand. These include rising temperatures, rising sea levels, increased typhoons, longer monsoon seasons, erosion, and increased rainfall. Climate change also negatively impacts forestry, mangroves, coral reefs, marine resources, fisheries, and health.
Since 2000, approximately three million people have been annually affected by natural disasters relevant to these categories. Not only have these natural disasters increased mortal risks to inhabitants of the Philippines, but they also place extreme burdens on the economy. More specifically, it devastates food sources at the provincial level, placing pressure on the domestic population and internal markets.
In 2024, Philippines Defense Secretary Teodoro described to the Australian Strategic Policy Institute the struggles of balancing a defense budget amid domestic needs, especially considering that a large portion of the national budget is set aside for domestic relief following typhoon season annually. Climate change is a pressing issue affecting the Philippines in real time. This stark need in such a key partner nation increases the allure and probability of the U.S. and China finding common cooperative ground on an issue that affects all three.
A Pilot for Progress: Trilateral Climate Cooperation in the Philippines
Addressing the immense impacts of climate change on the Philippines using the resources of both the U.S. and China may strengthen relations between all three countries while investing in the national interests of a shared partner. In addition, it allows both nations a chance to take responsibility for the impacts of emissions produced. Ultimately, the U.S. and China should look to invest in sustainable pilot projects in the Philippines to build infrastructure and manufacture products that reduce carbon emissions. A pilot project would allow both nations to observe the success of a carbon-friendly production, allowing both countries opportunities to determine and onshore winning solutions, infrastructure, and products.
Designing Resilient Low-Carbon Cities: A Joint U.S.–China–Philippines Infrastructure Pilot
The first step in this plan requires the U.S., China, and the Philippines to consult a specialized source on the specifics of engineering a city plan that incorporates low-carbon emission products and developments across the whole city. Ideally, these cities would include a coastal city, such as Manila, and an “inland” city, such as Luzon. This way, the projects could test the impacts and success of applications where technology must constantly be replaced due to natural disasters while determining how these technologies fare with human use over time.
Infrastructure to increase connectivity within and between islands will also be essential. In 2010-2011, the Philippines ranked 113th out of 139 countries in overall infrastructure quality. Its lowest infrastructure rating was its ports, ranked at 114th. Transport infrastructure, such as roads and ports, deteriorates quickly due to weather conditions and poor maintenance. Power outages have also been a major concern due to the impacts of El Niño and rising tides affecting the Philippines’ hydroelectric dams. Thus, testing infrastructure in the Philippines must not only be limited to carbon emissions but should also include resilience to natural catastrophes such as hurricanes and cyclones that manifest in the U.S. as well.
A coalition such as the World Council of Civil Engineers (WCCE) may be able to develop projects that meet these criteria. This council aims to develop novel and adaptable technologies that meet UN Sustainable Development Goals. Although the WCCE has posts in Africa, it does not yet have any in the Pacific, and extending its outreach to those areas would display a positive pivot to focusing on islands in the South China Sea that struggle to combat the impacts of climate change.
Empowering Local Partners: Building with Filipino Organizations and Private Industry
From the perspective of the Philippines, it is important to execute the pilot projects of environmentally sustainable structures within their country in the right manner: through utilizing local companies. Especially since both the U.S. and China compete through infrastructure investments like the Belt and Road Initiative, both countries working to develop pilot projects within the Philippines could easily be perceived the wrong way. Secretary Teodoro emphasized that the Philippines should get to choose whom they do business with, “without the bear hug from an unwanted neighbor.” Working with private sector organizations as opposed to aiding the Philippine government may offer a solution that does not place the government in a position of submission to either the U.S. or China.
This is more than political. A study performed on climate transnational interventions in the Philippines during 2006 and 2009 demonstrated that both interventions’ successes resulted largely from working with local actors. Not only would investing in local, private Philippine manufacturing and civil engineering companies allow for collaboration in the development of these “pilot project” cities, but it would also increase human capital from a considerable organization such as the WCCE to the Philippines if infrastructure must be rebuilt.
One of the most significant challenges in the Philippines workforce is preparing students for specific skills and training for employability. Investing in training through local companies would offer more Filipinos jobs. 64% of its population is in the labor force, yet it suffers the highest unemployment rate of most Southeast Asian countries at 6.1%.
Additionally, allowing local companies to execute these projects will sustain their impacts long after such projects are completed by the U.S. and China. Local organizations can incorporate practices and lessons learned from the programs into local legislation, which is crucial to the practices necessary to make a real difference in climate change.
Turning Inward to U.S. and Chinese Infrastructure
With enough observation of the pilot projects in the Philippines, the last step is to ensure both the U.S. and China can turn their investments internally to develop low-carbon-emitting infrastructure in their own cities. Ideally, private companies partaking in these projects may also influence local legislation and expansion of these low-carbon emission infrastructure developments across both countries. The commitment to this final step of applying it domestically is essential to increasing joint benefits for cooperation and offsetting long-term costs.
As the world’s two largest carbon emitters, the U.S. and China should continue to investigate ways to improve the state of climate change internally, externally, and immediately. Although the impacts may not affect their citizens thus far, it will not be long before major impacts will be felt by all countries in the foreseeable future. Investing in and exploring viable solutions in partners’ areas of high impact that defuse political and economic tensions while workshopping potential answers to climate change is a strong step toward sustainable cooperation and progress.
*Author’s note: The views expressed in this article, book, or presentation are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the United States Air Force Academy, the Air Force, the Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government.
