CAAC's Voice and Realization Path in the International Civil

Aviation Organization: Based on the Case of China's Participation in

the Formulation of Carbon Emission Standards Under the CORSIA

Mechanisms

Yijun Ming

School of Marxism, Civil Aviation University of China, Tianjin, China

Keywords: CAAC's Voice, International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), CORSIA, Carbon Emission Standards.

Abstract: The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) adopted the "Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme

for International Aviation (CORSIA)" in 2016, establishing a global aviation emissions reduction market

mechanism. The rule-making power is dominated by developed countries, leaving China in a predicament of

severe imbalance between participation effectiveness and market position. This paper adopts research

methods such as case analysis to sort out the process of China's participation in the CORSIA rule negotiations

from 2016 to 2023. Thus, analyze the deep-seated reasons for its limited international discourse power: the

technological monopoly of Europe and the United States leads to unfair carbon emission accounting, the

distribution of council seats solidifies the power pattern, the alliance of Europe and the United States squeezes

the negotiation space, and the shortcomings of domestic talents and coordination mechanisms; And through

policy analysis and strategic design, a trinity solution of "technology - system - talent institution" is proposed.

1 INTRODUCTION

The International Civil Aviation Organization

(ICAO), as the core organization of global aviation

governance under the United Nations, has always

been responsible for the formulation of international

aviation rules and technical standards. With the

deepening of the global climate governance process,

the issue of aviation carbon emissions has gradually

become one of the core issues in the ICAO agenda. In

2016, ICAO adopted the Carbon Offset and Emission

Reduction Plan for International Aviation (CORSIA),

which established the aviation emission reduction

market mechanism at the global level for the first

time, marking the international aviation industry has

officially entered the era of "carbon neutral"

governance. By setting carbon emission baseline and

mandatory carbon offset rules, CORSIA has a

profound impact on the operating costs, technical

routes and even market competitiveness of the

aviation industry in various countries. The rule-

making right of CORSIA has become a strategic high

ground for countries to compete for the discourse

power of global aviation governance. At the same

time, the rapid development of China's civil aviation

industry is in sharp contrast to its passive position

under the CORSIA mechanism. By 2023, China has

become the "world's second-largest aviation market",

with an annual passenger transport volume exceeding

600 million person-times, and the scale of its

domestic air route network ranks among the top in the

world. However, in CORSIA rules negotiation and

standards, the participation of Chinese civil aviation

function imbalance and its market position. This

paper will focus on the case of China's participation

in the setting of carbon emission standards under the

CORSIA mechanism, and study the reasons for the

limited discourse power of China's civil aviation in

ICAO and the countermeasures, so as to lay a

foundation for future research.

400

Ming, Y.

CAAC’s Voice and Realization Path in the International Civil Aviation Organization: Based on the Case of China’s Participation in the Formulation of Carbon Emission Standards Under the

CORSIA Mechanisms.

DOI: 10.5220/0014381900004859

Paper published under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Politics, Law, and Social Science (ICPLSS 2025), pages 400-406

ISBN: 978-989-758-785-6

2 LITERAYURE REVIEW

2.1 Power of International Discourse

and Power Dynamics in

International Organizations

Previous studies have focused on the construction of

China's international discourse power in the

transformation of global governance system, and the

enhancement of China's international discourse

power: theoretical consciousness, discourse

innovation and problem response, the promotion path

of China's international discourse power in the

context of profound changes unseen in the world in a

century, the construction and prospect of international

discourse power in the "Global South", and the

construction of China's national image in the

perspective of international discourse power:

Challenges and countermeasures, etc. The importance

and status quo of international discourse power, the

influencing factors of international discourse power

and the way to improve international discourse power

are studied. The academic theoretical system on this

topic has been gradually improved, and multi-

perspective analysis of the problem, combined with

actual case studies, makes the research targeted.

Rights in international organizations dynamic

research, study the developed countries in

international organizations tend to rely on technical

and economic advantages to build power structure,

limited say universal in developing countries. But the

deep research in specific areas, the study of

international voice for static analysis, less attention to

its dynamic change process. This paper will deeply

analyze the voice of civil aviation in International

Civil Aviation Organization; With the development of

the international civil aviation industry and the

adjustment of national policies under the CORSIA

mechanism, the discourse power of China's civil

aviation has changed.

2.2 China's Civil Aviation and Global

Governance

Previous studies have focused on the historical

evolution, problem causes and countermeasures of

China's participation in global governance of civil

aviation, and the international perspective of global

governance of international aviation emissions --

taking the International Civil Aviation Organization

as the center, analyzing the impact of EU GDPR on

cross-border civil aviation data, etc. Generalizes the

history and present situation and analyzes the facing

problems, and explores the significance to improve

voice and countermeasures. But past literature for

more overall analysis of participating in global

governance, the CAAC for CORSIA mechanism

under China's participation in the carbon emissions

standards of special study is less, the lack of the

mechanism of in-depth analysis of the specific

challenges facing China. This article will select

CORSIA mechanism under the specific process of

China's participation in the carbon emissions

standards (2016-2023), analysis of the challenges

facing China's role in it, say to provide targeted

strategy for ascension.

2.3 Air Emissions and Coping

Strategies, the CBDR Principle and

Aviation Carbon Reduction

Mechanism of International

Cooperation

Past research has focused on the international aviation

carbon reduction measures under the aviation carbon

emissions dispute settlement way research, China's

response to the principles of the international aviation

emissions system, eu "aviation emissions directive"

and the Chinese way of dealing with - in the

perspective of principle of common but differentiated

responsibility, carbon tax adjustment and CBDR

principle of consistency of the border, The

connotation of "common but differentiated

responsibilities" look for research -- in the

perspective of the international climate change

negotiations, etc.; The mode, current situation and

countermeasures of aviation emission reduction were

studied. In the study of CBDR principle, the

development history and legal status of CBDR

principle and the application of CBDR principle in

aviation emission reduction are discussed. In terms of

the international cooperation mechanism of aviation

carbon emission reduction, some cooperation

mechanisms led by developed countries fail to fully

consider the actual situation and development needs

of developing countries. Although the existing

research involves the CORSIA mechanism, there are

few in-depth studies on the specific process, practical

difficulties and coping strategies of China's

participation in the formulation of carbon emission

standards under the mechanism. This paper

systematically studies how China can play its own

advantages and play an effective game with other

countries within the framework of CORSIA

mechanism to enhance the discourse power in the

formulation of carbon emission standards.

CAAC’s Voice and Realization Path in the International Civil Aviation Organization: Based on the Case of China’s Participation in the

Formulation of Carbon Emission Standards Under the CORSIA Mechanisms

401

3 RESEARCH METHODS

3.1 Case Study Method

The process of CAAC participating in the formulation

of carbon emission standards under the CORSIA

mechanism (2016-2023) is selected as a typical case.

The applicability of this method lies in the fact that

CORSIA mechanism is a key measure for

international aviation emission reduction, which has

a profound impact on the aviation industry of all

countries. The experience of CAAC in this

mechanism is representative. In terms of operational

steps, this paper first reviews China's specific actions,

proposals and results in the proposal and

implementation stages of CORSIA in detail. The

reasons behind these actions and results are further

analyzed to explore the internal mechanism of the

limited discourse power of China's civil aviation

industry.

3.2 Historical Analysis

Review the historical process of CAAC's

participation in CORSIA mechanism from 2016 to

2023, and summarize the rules and trends from the

development and changes in different stages. By

studying the different period of China's civil aviation

strategy adjustment, the challenge and coping styles,

analysis of China's civil aviation say the dynamic

process of change, for subsequent improve voice to

provide historical experiences for reference.

3.3 Comparative Research Method

To compare the participation of CAAC with that of

European and American developed countries in

CORSIA mechanism. From the aspects of technical

standard formulation, responsibility allocation and

rule negotiation, the paper finds out the gap and

advantages between China and developed countries,

clarifs the position of China's civil aviation in

international aviation governance, and provides

directions for improving the discourse power.

4 THE DISCOURSE POWER

MECHANISM IN THE ICAO

4.1 Constitutive System of Voice Power

in ICAO

The voice power in ICAO is not a single dimension

of power expression, but a compound system of "hard

power, soft power and institutional power", which

interact to form structural advantages in rulemaking.

Hard power control mainly includes the technical

standards, market size and economic contribution.

Among them, technical standards dominate.

Technical standards are the material basis of

rulemaking, and countries with core technologies can

lock in the right of rulemaking through "standard

first". The second is market size and economic

contribution. Market size determines the scale effect

of rule adoption. A country's economic contribution

in international organizations, such as the proportion

of membership dues and technical assistance funds,

will be directly translated into the influence within the

organization.

Soft power mainly includes experience in

rulemaking, coalition-building and agenda-setting.

Rule-making experience means that countries that

have been involved in international rule-making for a

long time are familiar with the "rule-nesting" strategy

and can embed their own interests into technical

provisions. Secondly, coalition-building capacity, in

which countries expand the concentration of voting

power through regional groups or issue alliances;

Finally, it is the ability of international agenda setting,

in which countries set the priority of controlling

issues and guide the rules to favor their own

advantages.

Institutional power mainly includes the

institutional embeddedness of seats and voting rights.

ICAO council consists of 36 States, and those

members (States of devoted importance in air

transport) accounts for 11 seats, And Category II

(States that make the greatest contribution to the

provision of facilities for international civil air

Navigation) of 12 seats, three members (States

ensuring geographic representation) of 13 seats,

affect the decision-making participation (1944

Chicago Convention). With equal voting rights but

influenced by the power of major powers, the two are

embedded in ensuring the operation of ICAO and

shaping the power structure.

ICPLSS 2025 - International Conference on Politics, Law, and Social Science

402

4.2 Discourse Power Dilemma of

Developing Countries

First, they face the dilemma of "technology-rule

hegemony" led by the West. Developed countries turn

their technological advantages into rules barriers,

forcing developing countries to pay high compliance

costs.

Second, the problem of "unbalanced distribution of

responsibility for emission reduction" is still serious.

Western developed countries cover up differences in

historical responsibilities with the "global unified

market mechanism".

Finally, there is institutional exclusion, the double

paradox of the principle of "consensus". The first is

"the appearance of procedural justice" : ICAO claims

that "consensus" reflects equality, but in practice,

developing countries find it difficult to effectively

participate in technical details negotiations due to

"insufficient technical capacity" and "loose political

alliance". Two is "curing system inertia power

pattern", ICAO council seat allocation rules power

structures after world war ii, the emerging countries

to pay high cost of institutional change.

5 TEH LIMITED

PERFORMANCE AND

REASONS OF CAAC IN THE

FORMULATION OF ICAO

CARBON EMISSION

STANDARDS

5.1 Participation Trajectory Under the

CORSIA Mechanism

5.1.1 CORSIA Proposal Stage in 2016:

Principled Disagreement and

Technological Game

At the beginning of the negotiation CORSIA

framework, based on the United Nations framework

convention on climate change in China "common but

differentiated responsibility" (CBDR) principle, put

forward "differentiated responsibilities allocation",

claims shall bear the responsibility to historical

cumulative emissions of developed countries,

developing countries can fulfil his obligations

according to national conditions, Adopting "per

capita carbon emissions" or "development rights

threshold" as the basis for responsibility sharing. But

the actual result is CORSIA eventually adopted

"based on the market" the global offset mechanism,

did not reflect CBDR principle, China proposed by

the European and American countries joint veto

(IATA CORSIA faced, 2024). At the same time,

technical differences became apparent. The carbon

emission measurement model "Aviation Emission

Dynamic Tool (such as AEDT)" adopted by ICAO is

based on the data of European and American aircraft,

which is not compatible with the data system of

CAAC. As a result, the carbon emission accounting

results of Chinese airlines are systematically

overestimated.

5.1.2 Implementation Stage from 2018 to

2023: Partial Concessions and

Deadlock of Core Rules

With global aviation carbon emissions plummeting

due to the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, China

proposed to adjust the CORSIA baseline from "2019-

2020 average" to "2019 single year data" to avoid the

distortion of emission reduction responsibility by

abnormal data ICAO adopted the baseline

adjustment , but the responsibility allocation

framework was not modified, and China is still

required to assume offsetting obligations that match

the pre-pandemic market size(IATA CORSIA

Handbook,2024).In addition, China's technical

standard-setting was sidelined. ICAO has raised the

certification barrier for domestic models -- the C919's

carbon certification relies on additional reviews from

European and US agencies, leading to delays in

international market access.

5.2 Analysis of the Deep Reasons for

the Restrictions (based on the

Power Structure Theory in Global

Governance)

5.2.1 Technological Disadvantage: The

"Stuck Neck" Dilemma in the

Upstream of the Industrial Chain

Western developed countries monopolize aircraft

emission reduction technology, engine patents and

other core technologies. Such as China sends to the

LEAP development series of CJ - 1000 - a 2025

engine planned equipment domestic large aircraft

C919, but by 2023, its core components are still faces

many technical challenges, lead to the airworthiness

certification progress lags behind. The five C919

aircraft delivered are all equipped with the US-French

joint venture CFM International LEAP-1C engine

(CAAC, 2017). This situation profoundly reflects

CAAC’s Voice and Realization Path in the International Civil Aviation Organization: Based on the Case of China’s Participation in the

Formulation of Carbon Emission Standards Under the CORSIA Mechanisms

403

China's technical shortcomings in the core field of

aviation power. In key technical links, China still

relies on foreign supply, which greatly limits the pace

of independent development of China's civil aviation

industry.

From the perspective of power structure theory,

the imbalance of technical power makes CAAC in a

weak position in the power game of the establishment

of technical standards in ICAO. Due to the technical

"bottleneck" dilemma, China lacks sufficient voice

and influence when participating in the discussion

and rule-making of technology related issues in

ICAO, and it is difficult for China to integrate its own

technical needs and development interests into

international standards.

5.2.2 Political Game: The Suppression of

Structural Power Alliance

One is the obstacle of exclusive technology alliances.

In the field of global aviation carbon emission

reduction technology, political power and technical

power are integrated with each other, forming an

exclusive structural power alliance. In the case of

sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) certification,

standards were approved by the American Society for

Materials and Testing (ASTM) as early as 2009

(Future Think Tank, 2025). This first-mover

advantage has allowed European and American

countries to dominate the SAF certification system

and build a set of certification rules that benefit them.

For the latecector countries in aviation, including

China, it is difficult to carry out the certification of the

new SAF, which lacks system-level criteria,

complicated process and high cost. The use of

aviation kerosene experience at the level of physical

and chemical characteristics and the lack of safety

criteria at the level of engine greatly restrict the

development of China's SAF. It also limits the

discourse power of CAAC in the field of aviation

carbon emission reduction technology.

The exclusive behavior of this technology alliance

is a manifestation of the political game in the power

structure. By setting unreasonable industry standards

and trade barriers, developed countries in Europe and

the United States take advantage of their dominant

position in the power structure to squeeze the

development space of China's civil aviation, and

hinder China from obtaining fair competition

opportunities and discourse rights in the international

aviation market. In the face of such external pressure,

CAAC is often in a state of passive defense in the

process of negotiation and rule-making due to the

lack of strong technical alliance support.

The second is the asymmetry of the decision-

making mechanism. For example, the C919

completed its first flight in 2017 and was delivered to

airlines in December 2022. Its performance is

excellent and the order volume is considerable. In

2024, China invited European representatives to visit

China to discuss the issue of the C919's airworthiness

certificate, indicating that the C919 has submitted

materials and completed relevant flight tests

according toprocedures, and hopes that Europe will

complete the airworthiness certification by 2025.

However, although the EU accepted the application,

it delayed the three-stage review process to a

maximum of seven years, while Airbus's A320neo

took only one year from its first flight to certification.

In July 2024, a delegation from the European Aviation

Safety Agency (EASA) conducted a field inspection

of the C919 and received positive feedback (Global

Times, 2024). But then it said certification was "quite

difficult" and would take five years at the earliest.

Europe and the United States have taken advantage of

their dominant position in the international civil

aviation airworthiness certification system to delay

the certification of the C919, putting China's civil

aviation industry at a disadvantage in the relevant

decisions of the International Civil Aviation

Organization.

Based on the analysis of power structure theory,

Europe and the United States take advantage of their

dominant position in the international civil aviation

airworthiness certification system, there is

asymmetry in the decision-making mechanism, and

there is a delay in the C919 airworthiness

certification, so that China's civil aviation is at a

disadvantage in the relevant decision-making of the

International Civil Aviation Organization, which

reflects the structural power alliance's oppression of

other countries in the political game.

5.2.3 Institutional Barriers: Structural

Defects in the Ability to Participate in

the Rules

First, there is a shortage of relevant talent reserves in

China. For example, in 2015, China's entire

airworthiness certification team had more than 200

people, while the FAA airworthiness certification

system had more than 1,300 people. In addition, there

is not a single academician in the field of civil aviation

in China, and high-end talents are scarce (CAAC

News, 2015). As a result, there is a gap between China

and foreign countries in airworthiness certification

technology research, standard and specification

formulation, and the lack of sufficient professionals to

ICPLSS 2025 - International Conference on Politics, Law, and Social Science

404

provide strong support when participating in the

rulemaking in the International Civil Aviation

Organization, which in turn affects China's discourse

power.

From the perspective of power structure, the talent

reserve gap reflects China's shortcomings in the power

resources to participate in ICAO rulemaking. The lack

of professional talents means that China lacks

effective participation tools in the power structure, and

it is difficult for China to fully exert its influence in the

complex international rulemaking process, and it is

unable to compete with European and American

developed countries in technology and policy level,

which leads to the limitation of discourse power.

Secondly, there is a lack of domestic coordination

mechanism. At the 69th Annual meeting of the

International Air Transport Association (IATA), IATA

proposed the resolution of "Achieving Carbon Neutral

Growth of Aviation (CNG2020) Strategy"

(IATA,2013). At that time, Chinese airlines strongly

opposed the resolution, but due to the lack of domestic

coordination mechanism, lack of communication and

information sharing among airlines, scientific research

institutions and government departments, it was

impossible to form a unified and powerful strategy in

the negotiations. For example, the forecast data of

Chinese scientific research institutions on the future

development trend of China's aviation industry and the

growth of carbon emissions were not provided to

government departments and airlines in time, which

made it impossible to accurately quantify the emission

reduction pressure faced by China's aviation industry

in the negotiations.

In the global governance power structure, the lack of

domestic synergy mechanisms has weakened the

overall competitiveness of China's civil aviation

industry. This internal incoordination makes China

unable to form a unified force, efficiently integrate

resources and formulate strategies in the face of

international affairs such as ICAO rulemaking, thus

being at a disadvantage in the power game, which

further limits the discourse power of CAAC in ICAO.

6 THE PATH TO ENHANCE THE

DISCOURSE POWER OF CAAC

IN ICAO

First, China needs to make technological

breakthroughs and build an independent standard

system. Test flight data in 2023 show that the carbon

emission data of COMAC C919 is in line with

international standards, and its carbon emission per

unit seat is 12%-15% lower than that of similar

models,) proving its energy efficiency advantage (Wu

Guanghui, 2023). China can establish an "Emerging

Countries Aircraft Certification Working Group" with

ICAO to promote the establishment of a diversified

technology evaluation system and break the monopoly

of Europe and the United States on the "carbon

emissions-technical performance" index. Third, China

will set up a special fund for green aviation

technology, focusing on supporting the development

of new high and new technologies such as the SAF,

hydrogen aviation and electric vertical take-off and

landing. At the same time, China has strengthened ties

at home and abroad and attracted international experts

to participate in China's technology research and

development.

Second, we need to strengthen institutional

empowerment and promote multilateral cooperation

and agenda setting. China can refer to the Nationally

Determined Contribution (NDC) mechanism of the

Paris Agreement and promote the adoption of

"differentiated emission reduction pathways" in

ICAO. Secondly, through the Green Development

Alliance of the Belt and Road Initiative, China can

join with countries such as India, which advocates the

principle of historical responsibility, and Brazil, which

emphasizes the fairness of biofuels, to propose a

"dynamic allocation model of carbon emission

reduction responsibility", incorporating indicators

such as "per capita carbon emissions" and "access to

aviation services", and build a "fairness framework for

aviation emission reduction". Thirdly, policy linkage

should be established. The data of CAAC carbon

market should be submitted to ICAO to prove the

credibility of its monitoring, reporting and verification

system.

Finally, we should strengthen the construction of

talents and institutions, and strengthen the original

research on the power of discourse. In the discipline

setting. It is possible to set up a major of "International

Aviation Governance" in civil aviation colleges such

as Civil Aviation University of China and China Civil

Aviation Pilot Students, and systematically learn

relevant courses such as ICAO operation rules,

aviation carbon emission measurement, and

international climate negotiation strategies. And

cooperate with the Geneva Institute of International

Relations to carry out the student exchange program,

and send talents to the ICAO secretariat for internship,

in order to enhance the original research and

international competence of talents in the ICAO

aviation carbon emission discourse. In addition,

special research institutions, such as the "CORSIA

Implementation Support Center", have been set up to

CAAC’s Voice and Realization Path in the International Civil Aviation Organization: Based on the Case of China’s Participation in the

Formulation of Carbon Emission Standards Under the CORSIA Mechanisms

405

provide one-stop services for enterprises in "carbon

offset project development" and "international

certification application" to reduce compliance costs.

7 CONCLUSIONS

Based on the case of China's participation in the

formulation of carbon emission standards under the

CORSIA mechanism, this paper reveals the

fundamental reasons for the limited discourse power

of CAAC in ICAO: technical disadvantage restricting

the right to set standards, institutional power

imbalance solidifies the discourse power pattern,

political game suppressing the negotiation space, and

the shortcomings of domestic coordination and talent

reserve. China needs to solve the dilemma with the

three-in-one strategy of "technology, system and

talent organization" 。 At the technical level,

accelerate the research and development and

certification of domestic core technologies. For

example, promote the implementation of key

technological achievements such as the domestic

large aircraft C919 and the CJ-1000A engine, and

break the existing standard barriers through

technological innovation; At the institutional level,

relying on regional cooperation mechanisms, such as

the Belt and Road Green Development Alliance,

actively restructure the international aviation rule

agenda, promote the adoption of the nationally

Determined Contributions (NDC) model of the Paris

Agreement by the International Civil Aviation

Organization (ICAO), and enhance the say in rule-

making. At the level of talent and institutional

building, on the one hand, the "International Aviation

Governance" major is established in universities to

systematically cultivate professional talents. On the

other hand, professional institutions such as the

"CORSIA Compliance Support Center" are set up to

enhance the competitive ability in international

aviation affairs. Looking ahead, China's civil aviation

should keenly grasp the new trends in international

aviation governance, take advantage of the global

wave of technological innovations such as hydrogen

aviation and electric vertical take-off and landing

(eVTOL), and seize the initiative in formulating

international aviation standards.

REFERENCES

He,H1.Xing,Z.H2.Li,D.J1.et al.2019.Promotion AND

application of sustainable aviation biofuel, INDUSTRY

impact and countermeasures. CHEMICAL

INDUSTRY AND ENGINEERING PROGRESS,

38(8),2497-3507.

LIAO,W.J.2020.Analysis of the impact of Carbon

Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International

Aviation on different countries. CHINA

POPULATION, RESOURCEW AND

ENVIRONMENT, 30(6),10-19.

Li,L.2023.Path selection of international aviation carbon

emission reduction and China's response.Journal of

Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics

(Social Sciences Edition),36 (6),186-193.

Shen,Q.X.2023.Promoting the International discourse

power of Chinese-style modernization: Opportunity,

challenge and path.

IssuesofContemporaryWorldSocialism,4，151-165.

SUN,J.S.2022.Construction of China's international

discourse power in the transformation of global

governance system. Global Governance and

International Pattern,10,16-21.

SUN,J.S.2024.The construction and prospect of

International discourse power in "Global South".

Global Governance and International Pattern,7,38-44.

WANG,H.Y.2022.The promotion path of China's

international discourse power under the background of

great changes unseen in the world in a century. World

Socialism Studies,12,108-132.

Xu,Y.T.2022,Historical evolution, problem causes and

countermeasures of China's participation in civil

aviation global governance. Qinghai Social

Sciences,3,142-151.

Yang,C.X.&WANG,Z.2023.Research on the settlement

path of aviation carbon emission dispute under

international aviation carbon emission reduction

measures. Journal of Beijing University of Aeronautics

and Astronautics (Social Sciences Edition),36(6),162-

172.

Yang,W.L.2015.International perspective of global

governance of international aviation emissions:

centering on ICAO. Journal of Beijing Institute of

Technology (Social Sciences Edition),17(4),123-128.

ICPLSS 2025 - International Conference on Politics, Law, and Social Science

406