A legal perspective of carbon rights and benefit sharing under REDD+: A conceptual framework and examples from Cambodia and Kenya

This article discusses two key issues in REDD+ design and implementation at the national level – carbon rights, and benefit sharing. Both carbon rights and benefit sharing can be understood as new legal concepts (although they build on existing law), and as legal concepts they offer a framework for addressing related areas of REDD+ policy. Many countries are currently considering how to manage carbon rights and benefit sharing issues, including Cambodia and Kenya. Both of these countries host existing forest carbon projects and are also in the process of designing national REDD+ programmes. This article uses a conceptual framework for carbon rights and benefit sharing derived from legal analysis to consider the cases of both Cambodia and Kenya, and also includes a general discussion of the challenges countries might encounter when considering how to manage carbon rights and benefit sharing in the context of REDD+ implementation.

Rights and wrongs of Australian government asylum seeker policy

Worldwide, no fewer than 50 million people a year are now fleeing dangerous and often life threatening situations in their countries of origin (UNHCR, 2014c). As one part of this movement, thousands risk journeys through dangerous waters hoping to obtain asylum in Australia. However, Australian Government policies adopted since 2013 aim to ensure that no asylum seeker nor any of the 3,500 detainees held in offshore detention centres will ever be settled on the mainland. To this has now been added a declaration that none of the recent refugees or 6200 asylum seekers waiting in Indonesia in centres run by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) will gain entry (Whyte, 2014a). These immigration policies differ dramatically from those adopted in earlier decades that produced the country’s decidedly multicultural identity. This article reviews these changing perspectives of Australian governments and communities within the context of international obligations and expectations; the experiences of those directly involved in border policing practices and in detention centres; and the attitudes of national media. Relations and conflicts among the interests of the different parties are discussed and the scope for less punitive responses to the plight of asylum seekers is examined. The authors then focus on alternative processes to better address the interests and objectives of legitimately interested parties by processes which successively examine, optimise and reconcile the concerns of each. In so doing, they aim to demonstrate that such methods of sequential problem solving can respond effectively to the multiple concerns of the many significant stakeholders involved in increasingly significant global issues, whereas recourse to such single-goal, top-down programs as are expressed in the government’s current determination to “Stop the boats” at all costs are unlikely to prove sustainable.

Street-level perceptions of procedural rights for young unemployed people - a comparative study between Sweden and Australia

Two types of welfare states are compared in this article. Differences in procedural rights for young unemployed at the level of service delivery are analyzed. In Australia, rights are regulated through a rigid procedural justice system. The young unemployed within the social assistance system in Sweden encounter staff with high discretionary powers, which makes the legal status weak for the unemployed but, on the other hand, the system is more flexible. Despite the differences, there is striking convergence in how the young unemployed describe how discretionary power among street-level staff affects their procedural rights. This result can be understood as a result of similar professional norms, work customs and occupational cultures of street-level staff, and that there is a basic logic of conditionality in all developed welfare states where procedural rights are tightly coupled with responsibilities.

Stabilization of exotic minority phases in a multicomponent self-assembled molecular network

Trimesic acid (TMA) and alcohols were recently shown to self-assemble into a stable, two-component linear pattern at the solution/highly oriented pyrolytic graphite (HOPG) interface. Away from equilibrium, the TMA/alcohol self-assembled molecular network (SAMN) can coexist with pure-TMA networks. Here, we report on some novel characteristics of these non-equilibrium TMA structures, investigated by scanning tunneling microscopy (STM). We observe that both the chicken-wire and flower-structure TMA phases can host 'guest' C60 molecules within their pores, whereas the TMA/alcohol SAMN does not offer any stable adsorption sites for the C60 molecules. The presence of the C60 molecules at the solution/solid interface was found to improve the STM image quality. We have taken advantage of the high-quality imaging conditions to observe unusual TMA bonding geometries at domain boundaries in the TMA/alcohol SAMN. Boundaries between aligned TMA/alcohol domains can give rise to doubled TMA dimer rows in two different configurations, as well as a tripled-TMA row. The boundaries created between non-aligned domains can create geometries that stabilize TMA bonding configurations not observed on surfaces without TMA/alcohol SAMNs, including small regions of the previously predicted 'super flower' TMA bonding geometry and a tertiary structure related to the known TMA phases. These structures are identified as part of a homologic class of TMA bonding motifs, and we explore some of the reasons for the stabilization of these phases in our multicomponent system.

Sexual harassment and the corporation in Australia and Japan: The potential for corporate governance of human rights

The authors explore the legal and social undercurrents in Australia and Japan which are encouraging corporations to embrace broader social responsibilities. They consider a case study of sexual harassment and its regulation within Australian corporations, uncovering the legal and social conditions that have led to the adoption of sexual harassment policies. The authors propose a model for determining when corporate governance of sexual harassment is likely to be effective and test the model by reference to the experience of sexual harassment in Japan. They draw some conclusions about what the experience of corporate implementation of management of sexual harassment might mean for other areas of human rights.

Private governance of public rights in Japan: Revisiting the Japanese governance debate

Dramatic growth in the Japanese economy in the postwar period – and its meltdown in the 1990s – has attracted sustained interest in the power dynamics underlying the management of Japan’s administrative state. For a long time, scholars and commentators have debated about who wields power in Japan. The question has been asked in different ways. In the 1970s and 1980s, the question was usually posed as: who orchestrated Japan’s economic miracle in the 1960s and 1970s? Today, the question is usually reframed to: who is accountable for the policy failures that plunged Japan into financial crisis and recession during the 1990s? Yet the core issue remains the same – who governs Japan? (Johnson 1995)...

Climate change and human rights: Intellectual property challenges and opportunities

Mitigating and adapting to the effects of climate change will require innovation and the development of new technologies. Intellectual property laws have a key part to play in the global transfer of climate technologies. However, failures to properly utilize flexibilities in intellectual property regimes or comply with technology transfer obligations under international climate change agreements calls for a human rights based analysis of climate technology transfer. Climate change is an unprecedented challenge and requires unprecedented strategies. Given the substantial impact of climate change on all of humanity and the ethical imperative to act, a complete rethink of traditional intellectual property approaches is warranted. This report proposes a series of intellectual property law policy options, through a human rights framework, aimed at promoting access to technologies to reduce the human suffering caused by climate change.

Child rights as perceived by the community members in India

Attitudes, knowledge, and perceptions of an individual influence their behavior as well as culture of a society. The objective of the study was to understand the attitudes and knowledge of 584 Indian community members regarding child rights and their perceptions about whether selected child rights were secured in reality. Overall attitudes of vast majority (96 – 98%) of the participants towards child rights were found to be positive i.e., children should have rights in various respects except issue like right to meet others (Article 15 of CRC). Knowledge of majority of the participants about child rights related legislations was moderate and varied across the cities while participants were unanimous about poor lived experiences of child rights in reality. So far as attitude and perception are concerned about child rights, there was a significant difference in the distribution between cities (p<0.01). Overall, the Rights of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 had the highest awareness (91.3%, n=533), followed by the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 (89.7%, n=523) and the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 (89.6%, n=523). Findings of the present study speak in favor of community awareness about child rights and penalties for violation of child rights.

Mary Robinson's declaration of climate justice: Climate change, human rights and fossil fuel divestment

In her biography, Everybody Matters: My Life Giving Voice, Mary Robinson explained how she became interested in the topic of human rights and climate change, after hearing testimony from African farmers, with Archbishop Desmond Tutu.

Greenwashing the Trans-Pacific Partnership: Fossil fuels, the environment, and climate change

There has been much controversy over the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) – a plurilateral trade agreement involving a dozen nations from throughout the Pacific Rim – and its impact upon the environment, biodiversity, and climate change. The secretive treaty negotiations involve Australia and New Zealand; countries from South East Asia such as Brunei Darussalam, Malaysia, Singapore, Vietnam, and Japan; the South American nations of Peru and Chile; and the members of the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Canada, Mexico and the United States. There was an agreement reached between the parties in October 2015. The participants asserted: ‘We expect this historic agreement to promote economic growth, support higher-paying jobs; enhance innovation, productivity and competitiveness; raise living standards; reduce poverty in our countries; and to promote transparency, good governance, and strong labor and environmental protections.’ The final texts of the agreement were published in November 2015. There has been discussion as to whether other countries – such as Indonesia, the Philippines, and South Korea – will join the deal. There has been much debate about the impact of this proposed treaty upon intellectual property, the environment, biodiversity and climate change. There have been similar concerns about the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) – a proposed trade agreement between the United States and the European Union. In 2011, the United States Trade Representative developed a Green Paper on trade, conservation, and the environment in the context of the TPP. In its rhetoric, the United States Trade Representative has maintained that it has been pushing for strong, enforceable environmental standards in the TPP. In a key statement in 2014, the United States Trade Representative Mike Froman insisted: ‘The United States’ position on the environment in the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations is this: environmental stewardship is a core American value, and we will insist on a robust, fully enforceable environment chapter in the TPP or we will not come to agreement.’ The United States Trade Representative maintained: ‘Our proposals in the TPP are centered around the enforcement of environmental laws, including those implementing multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) in TPP partner countries, and also around trailblazing, first-ever conservation proposals that will raise standards across the region’. Moreover, the United States Trade Representative asserted: ‘Furthermore, our proposals would enhance international cooperation and create new opportunities for public participation in environmental governance and enforcement.’ The United States Trade Representative has provided this public outline of the Environment Chapter of the TPP: A meaningful outcome on environment will ensure that the agreement appropriately addresses important trade and environment challenges and enhances the mutual supportiveness of trade and environment. The Trans-Pacific Partnership countries share the view that the environment text should include effective provisions on trade-related issues that would help to reinforce environmental protection and are discussing an effective institutional arrangement to oversee implementation and a specific cooperation framework for addressing capacity building needs. They also are discussing proposals on new issues, such as marine fisheries and other conservation issues, biodiversity, invasive alien species, climate change, and environmental goods and services. Mark Linscott, an assistant Trade Representative testified: ‘An environment chapter in the TPP should strengthen country commitments to enforce their environmental laws and regulations, including in areas related to ocean and fisheries governance, through the effective enforcement obligation subject to dispute settlement.’ Inside US Trade has commented: ‘While not initially expected to be among the most difficult areas, the environment chapter has emerged as a formidable challenge, partly due to disagreement over the United States proposal to make environmental obligations binding under the TPP dispute settlement mechanism’. Joshua Meltzer from the Brookings Institute contended that the trade agreement could be a boon for the protection of the environment in the Pacific Rim: Whether it is depleting fisheries, declining biodiversity or reduced space in the atmosphere for Greenhouse Gas emissions, the underlying issue is resource scarcity. And in a world where an additional 3 billion people are expected to enter the middle class over the next 15 years, countries need to find new and creative ways to cooperate in order to satisfy the legitimate needs of their population for growth and opportunity while using resources in a manner that is sustainable for current and future generations. The TPP parties already represent a diverse range of developed and developing countries. Should the TPP become a free trade agreement of the Asia-Pacific region, it will include the main developed and developing countries and will be a strong basis for building a global consensus on these trade and environmental issues. The TPP has been promoted by its proponents as a boon to the environment. The United States Trade Representative has maintained that the TPP will protect the environment: ‘The United States’ position on the environment in the TPP negotiations is this: environmental stewardship is a core American value, and we will insist on a robust, fully enforceable environment chapter in the TPP or we will not come to agreement.’ The United States Trade Representative discussed ‘Trade for a Greener World’ on World Environment Day. Andrew Robb, at the time the Australian Trade and Investment Minister, vowed that the TPP will contain safeguards for the protection of the environment. In November 2015, after the release of the TPP text, Rohan Patel, the Special Assistant to the President and Deputy Director of Intergovernmental Affairs, sought to defend the environmental credentials of the TPP. He contended that the deal had been supported by the Nature Conservancy, the International Fund for Animal Welfare, the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative, the World Wildlife Fund, and World Animal Protection. The United States Congress, though, has been conflicted by the United States Trade Representative’s arguments about the TPP and the environment. In 2012, members of the United States Congress - including Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR), Olympia Snowe (R-ME), and John Kerry (D-MA) – wrote a letter, arguing that the trade agreement needs to provide strong protection for the environment: ‘We believe that a '21st century agreement' must have an environment chapter that guarantees ongoing sustainable trade and creates jobs, and this is what American businesses and consumers want and expect also.’ The group stressed that ‘A binding and enforceable TPP environment chapter that stands up for American interests is critical to our support of the TPP’. The Congressional leaders maintained: ‘We believe the 2007 bipartisan congressional consensus on environmental provisions included in recent trade agreements should serve as the framework for the environment chapter of the TPP.’ In 2013, senior members of the Democratic leadership expressed their opposition to granting President Barack Obama a fast-track authority in respect of the TPP House of Representatives Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said: ‘No on fast-track – Camp-Baucus – out of the question.’ Senator Majority leader Harry Reid commented: ‘I’m against Fast-Track: Everyone would be well-advised to push this right now.’ Senator Elizabeth Warren has been particularly critical of the process and the substance of the negotiations in the TPP: From what I hear, Wall Street, pharmaceuticals, telecom, big polluters and outsourcers are all salivating at the chance to rig the deal in the upcoming trade talks. So the question is, Why are the trade talks secret? You’ll love this answer. Boy, the things you learn on Capitol Hill. I actually have had supporters of the deal say to me ‘They have to be secret, because if the American people knew what was actually in them, they would be opposed. Think about that. Real people, people whose jobs are at stake, small-business owners who don’t want to compete with overseas companies that dump their waste in rivers and hire workers for a dollar a day—those people, people without an army of lobbyists—they would be opposed. I believe if people across this country would be opposed to a particular trade agreement, then maybe that trade agreement should not happen. The Finance Committee in the United States Congress deliberated over the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations in 2014. The new chair Ron Wyden has argued that there needs to be greater transparency in trade. Nonetheless, he has mooted the possibility of a ‘smart-track’ to reconcile the competing demands of the Obama Administration, and United States Congress. Wyden insisted: ‘The new breed of trade challenges spawned over the last generation must be addressed in imaginative new policies and locked into enforceable, ambitious, job-generating trade agreements.’ He emphasized that such agreements ‘must reflect the need for a free and open Internet, strong labor rights and environmental protections.’ Elder Democrat Sander Levin warned that the TPP failed to provide proper protection for the environment: The TPP parties are considering a different structure to protect the environment than the one adopted in the May 10 Agreement, which directly incorporated seven multilateral environmental agreements into the text of past trade agreements. While the form is less important than the substance, the TPP must provide an overall level of environmental protection that upholds and builds upon the May 10 standard, including fully enforceable obligations. But many of our trading partners are actively seeking to weaken the text to the point of falling short of that standard, including on key issues like conservation. Nonetheless, 2015, President Barack Obama was able to secure the overall support of the United States Congress for his ‘fast-track’ authority. This was made possible by the Republicans and dissident Democrats. Notably, Oregon Senator Ron Wyden switched sides, and was transformed from a critic of the TPP to an apologist for the TPP. For their part, green political parties and civil society organisations have been concerned about the secretive nature of the negotiations; and the substantive implications of the treaty for the environment. Environmental groups and climate advocates have been sceptical of the environmental claims made by the White House for the TPP. The Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand, the Australian Greens and the Green Party of Canada have released a joint declaration on the TPP observing: ‘More than just another trade agreement, the TPP provisions could hinder access to safe, affordable medicines, weaken local content rules for media, stifle high-tech innovation, and even restrict the ability of future governments to legislate for the good of public health and the environment’. In the United States, civil society groups such as the Sierra Club, Public Citizen, WWF, the Friends of the Earth, the Rainforest Action Network and 350.org have raised concerns about the TPP and the environment. Allison Chin, President of the Sierra Club, complained about the lack of transparency, due process, and public participation in the TPP talks: ‘This is a stealth affront to the principles of our democracy.’ Maude Barlow’s The Council of Canadians has also been concerned about the TPP and environmental justice. New Zealand Sustainability Council executive director Simon Terry said the agreement showed ‘minimal real gains for nature’. A number of organisations have joined a grand coalition of civil society organisations, which are opposed to the grant of a fast-track. On the 15th January 2013, WikiLeaks released the draft Environment Chapter of the TPP - along with a report by the Chairs of the Environmental Working Group. Julian Assange, WikiLeaks' publisher, stated: ‘Today's WikiLeaks release shows that the public sweetener in the TPP is just media sugar water.’ He observed: ‘The fabled TPP environmental chapter turns out to be a toothless public relations exercise with no enforcement mechanism.’ This article provides a critical examination of the draft Environment Chapter of the TPP. The overall argument of the article is that the Environment Chapter of the TPP is an exercise in greenwashing – it is a public relations exercise by the United States Trade Representative, rather than a substantive regime for the protection of the environment in the Pacific Rim. Greenwashing has long been a problem in commerce, in which companies making misleading and deceptive claims about the environment. In his 2012 book, Greenwash: Big Brands and Carbon Scams, Guy Pearse considers the rise of green marketing and greenwashing. Government greenwashing is also a significant issue. In his book Storms of My Grandchildren, the climate scientist James Hansen raises his concerns about government greenwashing. Such a problem is apparent with the TPP – in which there was a gap between the assertions of the United States Government, and the reality of the agreement. This article contends that the TPP fails to meet the expectations created by President Barack Obama, the White House, and the United States Trade Representative about the environmental value of the agreement. First, this piece considers the relationship of the TPP to multilateral environmental treaties. Second, it explores whether the provisions in respect of the environment are enforceable. Third, this article examines the treatment of trade and biodiversity in the TPP. Fourth, this study considers the question of marine capture fisheries. Fifth, there is an evaluation of the cursory text in the TPP on conservation. Sixth, the article considers trade in environmental services under the TPP. Seventh, this article highlights the tensions between the TPP and substantive international climate action. It is submitted that the TPP undermines effective and meaningful government action and regulation in respect of climate change. The conclusion also highlights that a number of other chapters of the TPP will impact upon the protection of the environment – including the Investment Chapter, the Intellectual Property Chapter, the Technical Barriers to Trade Chapter, and the text on public procurement.

Private power and new media: The case of the corporate suppression of WikiLeaks and its implications for the exercise of fundamental rights on the internet

Globalization, along with its digital and information communication technology counterparts, including the Internet and cyberspace, may signify a whole new era for human rights, characterized by new tensions, challenges, and risks for human rights, as well as new opportunities. Human Rights and Risks in the Digital Era: Globalization and the Effects of Information Technologies explores the emergence and evolution of ‘digital’ rights that challenge and transform more traditional legal, political, and historical understandings of human rights. Academic and legal scholars will explore individual, national, and international democratic dilemmas--sparked by economic and environmental crises, media culture, data collection, privatization, surveillance, and security--that alter the way individuals and societies think about, regulate, and protect rights when faced with new challenges and threats. The book not only uncovers emerging changes in discussions of human rights, it proposes legal remedies and public policies to mitigate the challenges posed by new technologies and globalization.

Taxes and decision rights in multinationals

We examine how a multinational's choice to centralize or decentralize its decision structure is affected by country tax differentials. Within a simple model that emphasizes the multiple conflicting roles of transfer prices in multinational enterprises (MNEs)—here, as a strategic precommitment device and a tax manipulation instrument—we show that centralization is more profitable when tax differentials are large. When tax differentials are small, decentralization can be performed in two different ways each providing the highest profits in a particular range of the tax differential. Hence, the paper emphasizes the organizational flexibility that MNEs have in pursuing tax optimization.

Corporate accountability in relation to human rights: Have RIOs done enough?

This chapter focuses on the development of corporate human rights standards since the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, better known as the Earth Summit was held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. One of the important agendas for this Summit was human rights (apart from the climate change issue). This chapter provides a critical evaluation of institutional change in human rights guidelines and associated corporate (non) accountability in relation to human rights in line with the RIO summit. Based on a review of the media reports, archival documents and a case study, we argue that while there are a number of international organisations working towards the creation of corporate accountability in relation to human rights, there is limited real change in corporate action when faced with no government regulation. A radical (reform-based) approach, such as mandatory monitoring (compliance audit) and disclosure requirements is necessary to ensure corporate accountability in relation to human rights.

Human rights performance disclosure by companies having operations in high risk countries: Evidence from Australian mineral sector

The aim of this study is to explore whether Australian mineral companies operating in high human rights risk countries provide more human rights disclosures than companies operating in low risk countries. A content analysis instrument containing 88 specific human rights performance items derived from a number of international human rights guidelines has been developed to investigate the annual reports, social responsibility reports and corporate websites of the top 50 Australian mineral companies (2010/2011). The findings show that human rights performance disclosures by companies with operations in high human rights risk countries are significantly higher than companies with operations in the low risk countries. By disclosing extended human rights performance information, companies operating in high risk countries appear to ease community concerns about human rights violations. The finding is consistent with legitimacy theory which posits that organisations respond to community concerns in relation to particular social issues.