Incorporating international environmental legal principles into future climate change instruments

The article explores the role of international environmental legal principles and their role in future climate change instruments. The five international environmental legal principles explored in this context are: inter and intergenerational equity, the precautionary principle, common but differentiated responsibility, the polluter pays and principle and the principles of responsibility and prevention. Principles are used within regulatory frameworks to guide the interpretation and implementation of the obligations specified within the instrument. It is found that these principles provide a useful basis for the development of international adaptation and mitigation measures that are equitable and ethical in nature. This article argues that these principles must be drafted more strategically into international climate change instruments allowing them to serve as a foundational basis upon which more stringent and equitable binding duties and rights can be derived from. This article makes some recommendations as to the type of obligations that these principles could be used to inform in future climate instruments.

The WTO, the national security exception and climate change

Article XX has been a valuable instrument to justify exceptions from the anti-discrimination provisions of the GATT 1994. In general, this Article is considered by experts to be the most likely defence for any climate change mitigation measure in breach GATT 1994 obligations. That assumption is not in dispute here; rather, this article considers the requirements of the Article XX exceptions, but also explores the conditions of the National Security exception contained in Article XXI. Although it is possible that this exception could be used for climate change mitigation measures, this paper argues that it is unlikely that the National Security exception could be legitimately applied in these circumstances without member agreement to the contrary.

Opportunities for forest finance under the International climate change regime

The international climate change regime has the potential to increase revenue available for forest restoration projects in Commonwealth nations. There are three mechanisms which could be used to fund forest projects aimed at forest conservation, forest restoration and sustainable forest management. The first forest funding opportunity arises under the clean development mechanism, a flexibility mechanism of the Kyoto Protocol. The clean development mechanism allows Annex I parties (industrialised nations) to invest in emission reduction activities in non-Annex 1 (developing countries) and the establishment of forest sinks is an eligible clean development mechanism activity. Secondly, parties to the Kyoto Protocol are able to include sustainable forest management activities in their national carbon accounting. The international rules concerning this are called the Land-Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry Guidelines. Thirdly, it is anticipated that at the upcoming Copenhagen negotiations that a Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) instrument will be created. This will provide a direct funding mechanism for those developing countries with tropical forests. Payments made under a REDD arrangement will be based upon the developing country with tropical forest cover agreeing to protect and conserve a designated forest estate. These three funding options available under the international climate change regime demonstrate that there is potential for forest finance within the regime. These opportunities are however hindered by a number of technical and policy barriers which prevent the ability of the regime to significantly increase funding for forest projects. There are two types of carbon markets, compliance carbon markets (Kyoto based) and voluntary carbon markets. Voluntary carbon markets are more flexible then compliance markets and as such offer potential to increase revenue available for sustainable forest projects.

The International regulation of persons displaced by climate change

It is certain that there will be changes in environmental conditions across the globe as a result of climate change. Such changes will require the building of biological, human and infrastructure resilience. In some instances the building of such resilience will be insufficient to deal with extreme changes in environmental conditions and legal frameworks will be required to provide recognition and support for people dislocated because of environmental change. Such dislocation may occur internally within the country of original origin or externally into another State’s territory. International and national legal frameworks do not currently recognise or assist people displaced as a result of environmental factors including displacement occurring as a result of climate change. Legal frameworks developed to deal with this issue will need to consider the legal rights of those people displaced and the legal responsibilities of those countries required to respond to such displacement. The objective of this article is to identify the most suitable international institution to host a program addressing climate displacement. There are a number of areas of international law that are relevant to climate displacement, including refugee law, human rights law and international environmental law. These regimes, however, were not designed to protect people relocating as a result of environmental change. As such, while they indirectly may be of relevance to climate displacement, they currently do nothing to directly address this complex issue. In order to determine the most appropriate institution to address and regulate climate displacement, it is imperative to consider issues of governance. This paper seeks to examine this issue and determine whether it is preferable to place climate displacement programs into existing international legal frameworks or whether it is necessary to regulate this area in an entirely new institution specifically designed to deal with the complex and cross-cutting issues surrounding the topic. Commentators in this area have proposed three different regulatory models for addressing climate displacement. These models include: (a) Expand the definition of refugee under the Refugee Convention to encompass persons displaced by climate change; (b) Implement a new stand alone Climate Displacement Convention; and (c) Implement a Climate Displacement Protocol to the UNFCCC. This article will examine each of these proposed models against a number of criteria to determine the model that is most likely to address the needs and requirements of people displaced by climate change. It will also identify the model that is likely to be most politically acceptable and realistic for those countries likely to attract responsibilities by its implementation. In order to assess whether the rights and needs of the people to be displaced are to be met, theories of procedural, distributive and remedial justice will be used to consider the equity of the proposed schemes. In order to consider the most politically palatable and realistic scheme, reference will be made to previous state practice and compliance with existing obligations in the area. It is suggested that the criteria identified by this article should underpin any future climate displacement instrument.

Climate Change and Human Displacement

This paper will focus on the legal issues associated with people displaced as a result of water scarcity. Human displacement can lead to internal displacement (displacement of people within their country) and external displacement (displacement of people into another country). If the displacement takes place as a result of climate change these people may be referred to as climate refugees. The majority of work on climate refugees has focused on those people that will lose their homes as a result of sea –level rise. The number of people that could be displaced as a result of prolonged drought and lack of adequate water supplies is likely to be far more significant in number. There are estimates that around 2.8 billion people will suffer water shortages by 2025 and many of these people are at increased risk of internal or external displacement. Certain groups are more likely to be displaced as a result of prolonged drought or water scarcity. These groups include indigenous and minorities groups living in areas that are more susceptible to climate change and groups living in areas with a history of water shortage and supply issues. People displaced as a result of water scarcity are at increased risks of malnutrition and of dehydration. Furthermore the lack of adequate water supplies in such areas increases the risk and spread of disease among the population. In certain instances internal and external displacement may lead to escalation of conflict and competition for water resources in newly settled territories. This paper will use case studies from Australia (indigenous groups and rural landholders) and East Africa (Ethiopia, Sudan and Kenya) to demonstrate the significance of human displacement arising as a result of water scarcity. Climate adaptation policy frameworks will need to address a number of legal issues, arising as a result of climate displacement from water scarcity. There are a number of unresolved legal issues for both categories of environmental displaced people. The major legal issue for externally environmentally displaced people is lack of international recognition and support for these people. The Climate Change Convention, the Refugee Convention, the Desertification Convention and Human Rights instruments all fail to provide recognition for people externally displaced as a result of environmental conditions. Similarly there is a lack of legal recognition and legal support mechanisms to assist those people internally displaced by environmental conditions. The lack of developed environmental rights in most countries contributes to this problem. Polices and governance frameworks must be put in place which aims to prevent such displacement through programs identifying populations at risk and instigating damage mitigation and relocation programs. In addition there are a number of legal issues which may arise such as; rights of compensation, property and tenure disputes, increases on the water demand and environmental degradation in places of relocation and jurisdictional issues arising in federal countries. This paper will provide an overview of the legal issues at the international and national levels arising as a result of climate displacement from water scarcity.  

The Role of the Judiciary in Earth Jurisprudence : An Analysis of Judicial Approaches to Standing in Climate Change and Environmental Justice Litigation

The role of the judiciary in common law systems is to create law, interpret law and uphold the law. As such decisions by courts on matters related to ecologically sustainable development, natural resource use and management and climate change make an important contribution to earth jurisprudence. There are examples where judicial decisions further the goals of earth jurisprudence and examples where decisions go against the principles of earth jurisprudence. This presentation will explore judicial approaches to standing in Australia and America. The paper will explore two trends in each jurisdiction. Approaches by American courts to standing will be examined in reference to climate change and environmental justice litigation. While Australian approaches to standing will be examined in the context of public interest litigation and environmental criminal negligence cases. The presentation will draw some conclusions about the role of standing in each of these cases and implications of this for earth jurisprudence.

Climate change and reduction of emissions of greenhouse gases from ships : an appraisal

Article 2(2) of the Kyoto Protocol imposes an obligation only on certain developed countries, working through the International Maritime Organisation (IMO), to pursue the reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from marine bunker fuels. The IMO recently took the initiative to adopt a new legal instrument for the reduction of shipgenerated greenhouse gas emissions. Some developing countries have suggested that the proposed IMO initiative should strictly adhere to Article 2(2) of the Kyoto Protocol and the principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibility (CBDR). Against this backdrop, this article intends to review the extent to which it is possible to propose an international legal instrument for the reduction of GHG emissions from marine bunker fuels which is applicable only to ships from developed countries considering the complex characteristics of the international shipping industry. This article also examines how far this approach is justifiable even within the framework of the CBDR principle.

Book Review : Criminological and Legal Consequences of Climate Change. Edited by Stephen Farrell, Tawhida Ahmed and Duncan French (Oxford : Hart Publishing, 272 pp.)

The book addresses a number of pressing social and environmental issues of global concern. It takes the reader on a socio-legal journal of climate change and explores a range of challenging and complex topics including renewable energies, emissions reduction, carbon trading, deforestation, migration and corporate governance.

Rethinking disaster risk management and climate change adaptation

Australian governments face the twin challenges of dealing with extreme weather-related disasters (such as floods and bushfires) and adapting to the impacts of climate change. These challenges are connected, so any response would benefit from a more integrated approach across and between the different levels of government.This report summarises the findings of an NCCARF-funded project that addresses this problem. The project undertook a three-way comparative case study of the 2009 Victorian bushfires, the 2011 Perth Hills bushfires, and the 2011 Brisbane floods. It collected data from the official inquiry reports into each of these events, and conducted new interviews and workshops with key stakeholders. The findings of this project included recommendations that range from the conceptual to the practical. First, it was argued that a reconceptualization of terms such as ‘community’ and ‘resilience’ was necessary to allow for more tailored responses to varying circumstances. Second, it was suggested that the high level of uncertainty inherent in disaster risk management and climate change adaptation requires a more iterative approach to policymaking and planning. Third, some specific institutional reforms were proposed that included: 1) a new funding mechanism that would encourage collaboration between and across different levels of government, as well as promoting partnerships with business and the community; 2) improving community engagement through new resilience grants run by local councils; 3) embedding climate change researchers within disaster risk management agencies to promote institutional learning, and; 4) creating an inter-agency network that encourages collaboration between organisations.

The international regulation of persons displaced by climate change

It is certain that there will be changes in environmental conditions across the globe as a result of climate change. Such changes will require the building of biological, human and infrastructure resilience. In some instances, the building of such resilience will be insufficient to deal with extreme changes in environmental conditions and legal frameworks will be required to provide recognition and support for people relocating as a result of environmental change. International legal frameworks do not currently recognise or assist people displaced as a result of environmental factors. The objective of this chapter is to examine the areas of international law relevant to displacement arising from environmental factors, consider some of the proposed climate displacement instruments and suggest the most suitable international institution to host a program addressing climate displacement. In order to determine the most appropriate institution to address and regulate climate displacement, it is imperative to consider issues of governance. This paper seeks to examine this issue and determine whether it is preferable to place climate displacement programs into existing international legal frameworks, or whether it is necessary to regulate this area in an entirely new institution specifically designed to deal with the complex and cross-cutting issues surrounding the topic...

Urban Food Security, Urban Resilience and Climate Change

The growing importance of logistics in increasingly globalised production and consumption systems strengthens the case for explicit consideration of the climate risks that may impact on the operation of ports in the future, as well as the formulation of adaptation responses that act to enhance their resilience. Within a logistics chain, seaports are functional nodes of significant strategic importance, and are considered as critical gateways linking local and national supply chains to global markets. However, they are more likely to be exposed to vagaries of climate-related extreme events due to their coastal locations. As such, they need to be adaptive and respond to the projected impacts of climate change, in particular extreme weather events. These impacts are especially important in the logistics context as they could result in varying degrees of business interruption; including business closure in the worst case scenario. Since trans-shipment of freight for both the import and export of goods and raw materials has a significant impact on Australia’s sustained economic growth it was considered important to undertake a study of port functional assets, to assess their vulnerability to climate change, to model the potential impacts of climate-related extreme events, and to highlight possible adaptation responses.

Climate change and financial regulation : challenges for the financial sector post the Global Financial Crisis

Regulation has played a significant role in shaping the financial services sector in Australia over the past few decades. Regulatory changes have included the establishment of the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA), floating the Australian dollar, allowing foreign financial institutions to operate domestically, the introduction of the superannuation guarantee charge, and the removal of interest rate controls. As the economy emerges from the worst financial crisis since the great depression, a new force of change that is recognised as one of the most significant sources of risk and opportunity facing the business community in the foreseeable future is that of climate change. Climate change is expected to be a significant change agent in the financial services sector as extreme weather patterns, sea level rises, and atmospheric changes impact on asset values (both investment and lending), project finance, and risk products. The financial services industry will be particularly affected by these developments, both as a provider of financial products (capital, credit, investment, advice, and insurance), and also through its powerful influence on the economy in terms of capital allocation. In addition, industry constituents will be heavily impacted by government regulation in this area (reporting, emissions trading and environmental policies), with respect to their own business practices and also those of their clients. This study reports the results of interviews conducted with senior members of the finance sector working in the sustainability area to gauge their perceptions of the challenges facing the sector with respect to climate change. Our results confirm that that regulatory intervention will be critical to climate change response gaining traction and momentum. In particular, regulatory certainty will promote engagement, particularly in relation to the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS), with other developments needed in terms of information disclosure, performance and remuneration, and incentive programs. Accordingly, the significant potential risks and opportunities that climate change presents to the sector, and the broader economy, will in part be managed/realised only if a swift and significant regulatory response is achieved.

Protecting World Heritage sites from the adverse impacts of climate change : obligations for States Parties to the World Heritage Convention

Through its mandate to protect and preserve places of ‘outstanding universal value’, the World Heritage Convention provides an unlikely yet effective tool in global efforts to mitigate climate change. The practical efficacy of the Strategy to Assist States Parties to Implement Appropriate Management Responses (‘the Strategy’), which represents the World Heritage Committee’s primary response to the threats posed by climate change to World Heritage sites, is undermined by its weak stance on mitigation. This paper argues that the World Heritage Convention imposes stronger obligations on States Parties than those contained in the Strategy, including a duty on States Parties to commit to ‘deep cuts’ in greenhouse gas emissions. In order to ensure the continuing success of the World Heritage Convention States Parties must engage in extensive mitigation strategies without delay.

Is climate change litigation an effective strategy for promoting greater action to address climate change? What other legal mechanisms might be appropriate?

In recent times a widespread consensus on the reality and gravity of anthropogenic climate change has emerged. Perceived inadequacies in the Australian government’s legal and policy responses to climate change issues have resulted in environmental activists increasingly turning to the courts as a strategy to promote greater action to address adverse climate impacts. The efficacy of this strategy for achieving climate goals is limited by the time and expense of litigating, the restrictions inherent in environmental law administrative challenges, and the possibility that judicial decisions may be overruled by the legislature. To date, climate change litigation in Australia has met with varied success, yet its significance extends beyond the court room as an important mechanism for raising public, political and commercial awareness about climate change issues. Ultimately, however, the types of far-reaching changes needed to mitigate and manage adverse climate impacts require strong regulatory backing. The most effective approach to addressing the complex challenges posed by climate change is a coordinated suite of regulatory measures spearheaded by the Federal Government.