The article begins by explaining that carbon neutrality has become a central objective in global climate policy. It is often presented as a universal, urgent, and non-negotiable goal. However, the article argues that behind this scientific and moral language lies a complex structure of political interests, historical responsibility, and global inequality.
For Southeast Asia, carbon neutrality is not only an environmental obligation but also a geopolitical burden. The region is pressured to follow climate agendas shaped by powerful states and global institutions. These agendas often do not fully account for Southeast Asia’s development needs, energy insecurity, poverty, and postcolonial structural gaps.
The article notes that Southeast Asian countries contribute a relatively small share of historical global emissions, yet they face severe climate vulnerabilities. Countries such as Indonesia, Vietnam, and the Philippines must balance climate commitments with industrial development and social needs. This makes externally imposed carbon neutrality targets difficult and politically unequal.
Dominant climate mitigation approaches rely on technical tools such as emissions modelling, carbon pricing, and transition scenarios. The article criticizes these tools for abstracting away from historical and geopolitical realities. They often ignore colonial legacies, economic dependency, financial constraints, and unequal responsibility in the global climate order.
The article identifies a research gap in the climate governance literature. Existing studies often discuss climate finance, adaptation, and renewable energy transition, but they give less attention to how global power and structural inequality shape carbon neutrality pathways in the Global South. Climate action is too often treated as a matter of capacity and technology rather than hierarchy and political subordination.
The article argues that international mechanisms such as the Paris Agreement, REDD schemes, and energy transition financing are often presented as global solidarity but may contain asymmetrical relations. Developing countries are required to follow externally defined targets and procedures in order to access funding and technology. This constrains the policy autonomy of Southeast Asian states.
Empirical examples from Indonesia and Vietnam show how climate finance can come with conditionalities. Indonesia’s Just Energy Transition Partnership involves large funding pledges but is linked to governance reforms, market restructuring, and donor-defined transparency. Vietnam’s energy transition framework is also shaped by foreign investment criteria that may not match local realities.
The article aims to explore how Southeast Asia’s carbon neutrality agenda is shaped by global power relations, conditional finance, and institutional asymmetries. It argues that carbon neutrality should not be treated as a universal pathway imposed from above, but as a context-sensitive process grounded in regional realities, ecological responsibility, political autonomy, and equitable participation in global climate governance.