scholarly journals Domestic Courts and the Paris Agreement's Climate Goals: The Need for a Comparative Approach

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-54 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna-Julia Saiger

AbstractDomestic courts enjoy generous attention in international political and legal climate change literature. As a result of the reluctance of national governments to pursue climate protection measures, courts are called on to enforce international climate goals. This article assesses two domestic climate change cases (the Thabametsi Case and the Vienna Airport Case) in the light of Anthea Roberts’ functional understanding of the role of domestic courts in international law. It argues that domestic courts play a pivotal role in linking international obligations of conduct with national obligations of result. This role depends on domestic contexts and, therefore, requires a comparative approach.

2021 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 120-143
Author(s):  
Amiel Ian Valdez

The era of super typhoons is here and is predicted to linger due to anthropogenic climate change. Disasters triggered by these typhoons have caused not only loss of lives, but also displacements of people who are left without houses, properties and livelihoods. Using the Philippine experience, this article examines the legal standard of right to adequate housing under the international human rights law and international climate change law, and the Philippines' commitments to these regimes. It argues that the Philippine government's post-typhoon responses are fragmented, reactive, and ephemeral, and that there are gaps in the current housing laws. It is then argued that these issues are incongruent with the minimum standards of adequate housing. To ensure that the housing rights of climate displaced persons are protected, the role of domestic courts in enforcing the government's adaptation commitments under the Paris Agreement using the writ of continuing mandamus is considered.


2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 379-395
Author(s):  
Marcela Cardoso Guilles Da Conceição ◽  
Renato de Aragão Ribeiro Rodrigues ◽  
Fernanda Reis Cordeiro ◽  
Fernando Vieira Cesário ◽  
Gracie Verde Selva ◽  
...  

The increase of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere raises the average temperature of the planet, triggering problems that threaten the survival of humans. Protecting the global climate from the effects of climate change is an essential condition for sustaining life. For this reason, governments, scientists, and society are joining forces to propose better solutions that could well-rounded environmentally, social and economic development relationships. International climate change negotiations involve many countries in establishing strategies to mitigate the problem. Therefore, understanding international negotiation processes and how ratified agreements impact a country is of fundamental importance. The purpose of this paper is to systematize information about how climate negotiations have progressed, detailing key moments and results, analyzing the role that Brazil played in the course of these negotiations and the country’s future perspectives.


Author(s):  
Annalisa Savaresi

This chapter discusses how international law has responded to climate change, focusing on the challenges that have faced implementation of existing climate treaties, and on the suitability of the Paris Agreement to address these. Expectations of this new treaty could scarcely be greater: the Paris Agreement is meant to provide a framework to improve international cooperation on climate change, and to keep the world within the global mean temperature-change goal identified by scientists as safe. Yet, whether and how this important objective will be reached largely depends, on the one hand, on the supporting political will and, on the other, on the redesign of the international architecture for climate governance. This chapter specifically reflects on international law-making and on the approach to climate change governance embedded in the Paris Agreement, drawing inferences from the past, to make predictions on what the future may hold for international climate change law.


Climate Law ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Zahar

This article is the fifth in a series of papers on the International Law Association’s assertion that the principle of prevention (i.e. the obligation of states in international law to prevent transboundary harm, also known as the no-harm rule) properly belongs to the corpus of international climate change law.1 I have been the only participant in the debate so far to refute the ila’s position. Here, I respond to the fourth article in the series, by Benoit Mayer. While Mayer has produced a lucid and helpful argument, he commits several errors in the process of defending and elaborating the ila thesis. I address them under this essay’s broad title because they are essentially errors of method.


Author(s):  
Jane McAdam

This chapter examines the scope of existing international law to address ‘climate change-related displacement’, a term used to describe movement where the impacts of climate change affect mobility decisions in some way. It looks into the role of international refugee law, human rights law, and the law on statelessness in protecting people displaced by the impacts of climate change. The extent to which international law and international institutions respond to climate change-related movement and displacement depends upon: whether such movement is perceived as voluntary or forced; the nature of the trigger; whether international borders are crossed; the extent to which there are political incentives to characterize movement as linked to climate change or not; and whether movement is driven or aggravated by human factors, such as discrimination. The chapter also considers the extent to which existing principles on internal displacement provide normative and practical guidance.


Climate change presents one of the greatest challenges of our time, and has become one of the defining issues of the twenty-first century. The radical changes which both developed and developing countries will need to make, in economic and in legal terms, to respond to climate change are unprecedented. International law, including treaty regimes, institutions, and customary international law, needs to address the myriad challenges and consequences of climate change, including variations in the weather patterns, sea level rise, and the resulting migration of peoples. This book provides an authoritative overview of all aspects of international climate change law as it currently stands, with guidance for how it should develop in the future. This book sets out to analyse the legal issues that surround this vitally important but still emerging area of international law. This book addresses the major legal dimensions of the problems caused by climate change: not only in the content and nature of the international legal frameworks, which need implementation at the national level, but also the development of carbon trading systems as a means of reducing the costs of meeting emission reduction targets. After an introduction to the field, the book assesses the relevant institutions, the key applicable principles of international law, the international mitigation regime and its consequences, and climate change litigation, before providing perspectives focused upon specific countries or regions.


Author(s):  
Patricia Kameri-Mbote

This chapter describes the roles of the forty-nine least developed countries (LDCs) in the international climate change regime and climate change law. It investigates the following questions: How has the historical role of the LDCs evolved in relation to the climate change regime? What are the key legal challenges facing these countries? In order to address these questions, this chapter examines the role of the LDCs through five phases of the climate negotiations thus far: Pre-1990 (Phase 1), 1990—1996 (Phase 2), 1997—2001 (Phase 3), 2001—2007 (Phase 4), and 2008—2013 (Phase 5). Together, they have contributed the least to the climate change problem, but experienced the highest climate change impacts, because of their higher levels of vulnerability and lower adaptive capacity. The chapter also discusses how the LDCs are caught in the cross-fire between the emerging economies, Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), and developed countries.


2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-28
Author(s):  
Charlotte Streck

The 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change abandons the Kyoto Protocol’s paradigm of binding emissions targets and relies instead on countries’ voluntary contributions. However, the Paris Agreement encourages not only governments but also sub-national governments, corporations and civil society to contribute to reaching ambitious climate goals. In a transition from the regulated architecture of the Kyoto Protocol to the open system of the Paris Agreement, the Agreement seeks to integrate non-state actors into the treaty-based climate regime. In 2014 the secretariat of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Peru and France created the Non-State Actor Zone for Climate Action (and launched the Global Climate Action portal). In December 2019, this portal recorded more than twenty thousand climate-commitments of private and public non-state entities, making the non-state venues of international climate meetings decisively more exciting than the formal negotiation space. This level engagement and governments’ response to it raises a flurry of questions in relation to the evolving nature of the climate regime and climate change governance, including the role of private actors as standard setters and the lack of accountability mechanisms for non-state actions. This paper takes these developments as occasion to discuss the changing role of private actors in the climate regime.


2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 933-951
Author(s):  
Maiko Meguro

AbstractLitigation has presented itself as a serious means to vindicate normative commitments about climate change by forcing governments to review their policy priorities. Today, the use of such litigation is not limited to the domestic arena. International law now provides the new principal avenue for such litigation. Two litigation strategies stand out: obligations strategy and rights strategy. Obligations strategy consists of bestowing an erga omnes character to existing obligations regarding the protection of the global environment, thereby providing standing for a non-injured party before international courts. Rights strategy, on the other hand, significantly increases in practice. It consists in the invocation, before national and international courts, of remedies for environmental damages through the legal categories of human rights law.This article sheds light on the potential and limits of these litigation strategies in international law. The argument builds on the specific evolution in the legal architecture of international obligations under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The current structure of the UNFCCC now makes it substantially impossible to bring a claim against individual states regarding their specific measures against climate change. The article, by referring to the history of drafting which produced the specific structure, questions the ability of these litigation strategies to remedy the lack of international consensus and to accommodate the technical intricacy of how to turn normative commitments into actual action for climate change.


2012 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 137-152 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charlotte Streck

AbstractThis article describes the challenges of using the constrained tools of international law to negotiate a sustainable framework to address climate change. It sets out to show how the particularities of the problem have led to creative and innovative solutions expanding the borders of international law. To this end, the article discusses carbon market mechanisms, the compliance regime of the Kyoto Protocol, and the emerging framework to create incentives to reduce land-based emissions in developing countries. These examples illustrate that the recognition of the role of sub-national and private entities in mitigating climate change has had significant impact on the rules of the climate regime. But the article also asserts that the un process, while recognizing the role of private actors, is still inadequately equipped to involve non-state actors in a meaningful way. The climate regime therefore challenges the traditional thinking about interstate relationships. No longer solely a matter for international environmental law, contemporary environmental governance has become a global affair, which makes the lens of transnational law a useful tool to think about these issues in practice in a more intellectually fruitful and relevant way. This article thereby provides a snapshot of the type of issues and discussion that readers of this journal can look forward to in the years to come.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document