Journal articles: 'Common but differentiated responsibilities'

1

Weiss, Edith Brown. "Common but Differentiated Responsibilities in Perspective." Proceedings of the ASIL Annual Meeting 96 (2002): 366–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0272503700063850.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

2

Stone, Christopher D. "Common But Differentiated Responsibilities in International Law." American Journal of International Law 98, no. 2 (April 2004): 276–301. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3176729.

Full text

Abstract:

The concept of “common but differentiated responsibilities” (CDR) is receiving increasing recognition in international law. “Common” suggests that certain risks affect and are affected by every nation on earth. These include not only the climate and the ozone shield, but all risk-related global public goods, including peace, public health, and terrorism. In reducing the mutual risks, all nations should “cooperate in a spirit of global partnership.” Responsibilities are said to be “differentiated,” however, in that not all countries should contribute equally. CDR charges some nations, ordinarily the Rich, with carrying a greater share of the burden than others, ordinarily the Poor.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

3

Williams, Mariama, and Manuel F. Montes. "Common but Differentiated Responsibilities: Which Way Forward?" Development 59, no. 1-2 (June 2016): 114–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/s41301-017-0097-6.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

4

Svárovská, Nicol. "Common but Differentiated Responsibilities for Space Debris Removal." Astropolitics 19, no. 1-2 (May 4, 2021): 1–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14777622.2021.2000322.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

5

Feng, Renjie. "Common but Differentiated Strategies." China Quarterly of International Strategic Studies 06, no. 01 (January 2020): 143–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/s2377740020500086.

Full text

Abstract:

The climate policies of China and India have undergone significant changes over recent years. Initially, both bluntly rejected any international mitigation obligations imposed from the outside and held industrialized countries accountable for deteriorating environmental problems. Later, as mounting scientific evidence of the devastating consequences of climate disasters became indisputable and an increasingly number of small island nations, along with Western countries, ratcheted up pressure on Beijing and New Delhi to take more vigorous climate actions, China and India began to adopt more conciliatory and cooperative attitudes toward global climate actions. At the same time, both nations’ evolving climate diplomacy is also driven by domestic realities, such as their rising economic status and growing greenhouse gas emissions. Bureaucratic establishments in the two countries’ political systems play different roles in their respective climate policy-making processes. While Beijing and New Delhi will continue to highlight their developing nation status and push advanced economies to assume the bulk of mitigation responsibilities, both have turned to more flexible policy positions, with Beijing more ready to set more ambitious targets and take on a more proactive role in global climate talks.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

6

Craig, R. K. "Climate Change and Common but Differentiated Responsibilities for the Ocean." Carbon & Climate Law Review 11, no. 4 (2017): 325–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.21552/cclr/2017/4/8.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

7

Lee, Jae Gon. "The International Regulation of Climate Change and ‘Common but Differentiated Responsibilities’." Institute for Legal Studies Chonnam National University 38, no. 2 (May 30, 2018): 219–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.38133/cnulawreview.2018.38.2.219.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

8

Ferreira, Patrícia Galvão. "‘Common But Differentiated Responsibilities’ in the National Courts: Lessons fromUrgendav.The Netherlands." Transnational Environmental Law 5, no. 2 (October 2016): 329–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s2047102516000248.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractThe landmark 2015 decision by the Hague District Court inUrgendav.The Netherlandsrepresents the first time a national court has expressly used the international environmental law (IEL) principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and capabilities (CBDRs) of the climate regime as a complementary tool to interpret the scope of a state’s climate obligations under domestic law. This article highlights that despite the marked engagement of national courts with IEL in recent decades (including engaging with principles such as sustainable development, polluter pays, intergenerational equity, and precaution), until this decision CBDRs had remained outside the purview of environmental law jurisprudence at the national level. The article examines how the Hague Court used CBDRs to help address two common barriers to climate liability: causation and the ‘political question’ doctrine. The article argues that the Court was able to find normative content in a core element of the climate-related CBDRs: the ‘leadership’ role of developed countries in climate action. This core element has remained remarkably consensual throughout the contested history of CBDRs in the climate regime – a history that has gained a new chapter with the signature of the Paris Agreement in December 2015. The article concludes thatUrgendav.The Netherlandsmay serve as a starting point for a more productive and extensive use of CBDRs in climate litigation, provided litigants make more explicit use of the persuasive authority of the principle.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

9

Rosencranz, Armin, and Kanika Jamwal. "Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities: Did This Principle Ever Exist?" Environmental Policy and Law 50, no. 4-5 (March 12, 2021): 291–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/epl-200231.

Full text

Abstract:

This article argues that the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)’s conception of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities (CBDRRC) was never effectively implemented through the Kyoto Protocol. The investments under the Kyoto Protocol’s Clean Development Mechanism suggest that CBDRRC has been used by developed countries to buy a “right to pollute”, i.e., maintaining or even increasing their greenhouse gas emissions, while investing in clean energy in developing nations, thus defeating the essence of CBDRRC as intended under the UNFCCC. Second, it points out that the Paris Agreement reflects a significant shift in the overall concept of CBDRRC, both in terms of its textual understanding as well as its implementation. A qualifier, “in the light of national circumstances”, was added to the principle of CBDRRC in the Paris Agreement, allowing a form of voluntary self-differentiation. This qualifier diluted a top-down, objective analysis of States’ commitments. For several scholars, this shift has meant a softening of the principle, making the “differentiation” more dynamic and flexible. In the authors’ opinion, the qualifier is a fundamental modification of the principle to make it politically more palatable. It completely disregards the notion of historical responsibility for climate change, which was the cornerstone of CBDRRC as conceived under the UNFCCC. Therefore, rather than presenting a more flexible understanding of UNFCCC’s conception of CBDRRC, the Paris Agreement marks a total departure from it. Lacking an explicit redefinition of the principle of CBDRRC, it is misleading to contend that the Paris Agreement is still anchored in it.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

10

Bilqis, Amira, and Arie Afriansyah. "Keberadaan dan Evolusi Prinsip Common But Differentiated Responsibilities dalam Instrumen Hukum Internasional." Jurnal Wawasan Yuridika 4, no. 2 (September 30, 2020): 103. http://dx.doi.org/10.25072/jwy.v4i2.379.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

11

Brunnée, Jutta, and Charlotte Streck. "The UNFCCC as a negotiation forum: towards common but more differentiated responsibilities." Climate Policy 13, no. 5 (September 2013): 589–607. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2013.822661.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

12

Lee, Jae Gon. "IMO’s Regulation of Greenhouse Gas Emission from Shipping and ‘Common but Differentiated Responsibilities’." Korean Journal of International Economic Law 18, no. 2 (July 31, 2020): 173–203. http://dx.doi.org/10.46271/kjiel.2020.07.18.2.173.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

13

Eckersley, Robyn. "The common but differentiated responsibilities of states to assist and receive ‘climate refugees’." European Journal of Political Theory 14, no. 4 (May 21, 2015): 481–500. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1474885115584830.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

14

Davidson Ladly, Sarah. "Border carbon adjustments, WTO-law and the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities." International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics 12, no. 1 (June 18, 2011): 63–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10784-011-9153-y.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

15

Hamdi-Cherif, Meriem, and Henri Waisman. "Global carbon pricing and the “Common But Differentiated Responsibilities”: the case of China." International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics 16, no. 5 (May 21, 2015): 671–89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10784-015-9289-2.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

16

Tomoi, Hiroaki, Takafumi Ohsawa, Jay Mar D. Quevedo, and Ryo Kohsaka. "Is “Common But Differentiated Responsibilities” principle applicable in biodiversity? – Towards approaches for shared responsibilities based on updated capabilities and data." Ecological Indicators 145 (December 2022): 109628. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2022.109628.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

17

Corino, Carsten. "Legal Aspects of the Transfer of Environmentally Sound Technologies." European Energy and Environmental Law Review 6, Issue 12 (December 1, 1997): 344–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/eelr1997050.

Full text

Abstract:

Technology transfer as a key to sustainable development under common but differentiated responsibilities; transfer-related facets of environmental law, trading law, intellectual property rights and development assistance; international, EC and national aspects.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

18

Lutz, Philipp, Anna Stünzi, and Stefan Manser-Egli. "Responsibility-Sharing in Refugee Protection: Lessons from Climate Governance." International Studies Quarterly 65, no. 2 (February 25, 2021): 476–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqab016.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract The international governance of asylum requires states to cooperate to provide the public good of humanitarian protection. The need to establish responsibility-sharing resembles the collective action problem in climate change mitigation. While there is a general consensus on the differentiation of state responsibilities in most environmental agreements, states continuously fail to progress on responsibility-sharing in asylum governance. In this article, we compare the collective action challenges in asylum to those in climate governance and identify the similarities and differences in their characteristics as public goods. We then discuss the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities” that guides global climate change mitigation and demonstrate how equity principles can be applied to differentiate state responsibilities in the context of humanitarian protection. The subsequent analysis of recent efforts to establish effective responsibility-sharing reveals the trade-offs involved in the design of a responsibility allocation mechanism for refugee protection. Our findings provide important lessons for the prospects and limits of responsibility-sharing in asylum governance.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

19

Yuan, Yuan, Ji Xian Liu, and Zhang Fang. "The Allocation Principle of Greenhouse Gas Reduction Responsibilities and International Coalition Patten in the Following 40 Years." Advanced Materials Research 962-965 (June 2014): 1410–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/amr.962-965.1410.

Full text

Abstract:

The allocation principle of greenhouse gas emission reduction responsibilities decides the effective of abatement program, but it is the most controversial problem in climate negotiation. Three common principles are compared in this paper, with the conclusion that allocation according to per capita and allocation according to grandfathering will not be accepted by the whole world, although common but differentiated responsibilities between developed and developing countries can not form a grand abatement coalition, it can effectively control the rise of temperature, and the impact to each countries’ economy is the smallest among the three principle.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

20

Vashist, Sanjay, M. Alam, S. Krishnaswamy, P. Bahouth, V. Bartra, T. Athanasiou, S. Singer, and A. Hill. "Common but differentiated responsibilities' defined on the basis on equity for future climate change regime." IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science 6, no. 11 (February 1, 2009): 112001. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1755-1307/6/11/112001.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

21

Kim, Bo Kyung, and Yeri Shim. "Common or Differentiated Responsibility?: Leveling the Playing Field for the Global South in Sustainable Development with a Focus on Africa." Korea Association of International Development and Cooperation 14, no. 4 (December 30, 2022): 23–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.32580/idcr.2022.14.4.23.

Full text

Abstract:

Purpose: This article reviews the responsibility gap between the Global North and Global South in implementing Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). It utilizes a conceptual framework which serves as a middle ground between shared responsibility and common but differentiated responsibility (CBDR), thereby applying this to the case of Africa. Originality: While the global initiative of SDGs reaffirmed a collective commitment toward a transformative agenda, there has been lack of explicit discussions regarding how to balance responsibilities between developed and developing countries based on their respective capacities. The study reviews existing discussions on contrasting approaches to responsibilities for the implementation of the development goals and seeks to suggest a fairer option for the Global South. Methodology: The study employs content analysis based on secondary data of development initiatives, including the SDGs, Africa Agenda 2063, and discussions on CBDR. Reviewing the dichotomized approaches to responsibility, ‘customized responsibility based on capacity principle’ is used as a conceptual framework, which bridges the responsibility gap. Result: Applying the customized responsibility concept to the case of Africa, it was found that Africa has been practicing some aspects of both shared responsibility and CBDR in its engagement with global development initiatives and its adoption of regional development agendas. It is also demonstrated that changing global governance and the diversifying partnerships (South-South and triangular cooperation) present both opportunities and risks for the Global South in balancing the responsibility gap vis-à-vis development partners of the Global North. Conclusion and Implication: In an attempt to examine how the Global South can actively reflect upon global initiatives, the study contributes to suggesting the path towards sustainability. Even though the issue of mobilizing financial resources for achieving the SDGs is a highly political one, building on the conceptual analysis of responsibility has important implications to expand realistic alternatives from the viewpoint of the Global South.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

22

French, Duncan. "Developing States and International Environmental Law: The Importance of Differentiated Responsibilities." International and Comparative Law Quarterly 49, no. 1 (January 2000): 35–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020589300063958.

Full text

Abstract:

The protection of the global environment has become one of the central objectives of the international community in recent decades. Issues such as climate change, the depletion of the ozone layer, and the loss of the biological diversity has resulted in a growing international awareness of the problems facing the planet. Moreover, there is also recognition that States will need to act more collaboratively at the international level if effective solutions are to be found to these problems. However, concurrently there is also recognition that many States have pressing socio-economic concerns of their own, and that they have neither the resources nor the capabilities with which to devote to such global issues—so called “developing” States. This article examines the response of international environmental law to these two, potentially opposing, trends, viz., the need for universalism, on the one hand, and sensitivity to the needs of developing States, on the other. In particular, the article will examine the emerging legal principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities”, as well as discussing the various means of operationalising it. Nevertheless, as will be discussed below, there is still much debate as to the conceptual basis of this principle—leading one to question its real aim. Is it to contribute to a fairer world system in which developed States recognise their historical responsibility for past environmental damage, or is it simply an expedient means of ensuring the participation of developing States in what are primarily Northern concerns?

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

23

Munters, Ward, and Philip De Man. "Reciprocal Limits to the Freedom to Use Outer Space by All States: Common but Differentiated Responsibilities?" Air and Space Law 43, Issue 1 (February 1, 2018): 21–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/aila2018003.

Full text

Abstract:

The principle of common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDRs) imputes common responsibility for global problems to all States, while recognizing that variegated levels of responsibility exist for different groups of countries. While the principle of CBDRs is explicitly recognized in international environmental law, it is a staple of sustainable development law that may also be implicitly contained in treaties that establish identical treatment for all parties, while allowing for divergences in the application of their key principles for different States. The present article wishes to initiate a discussion on the question of whether the fundamental principles of international space law may be interpreted as an implicit codification of the principle of CBDRs. In particular, it aims to determine the relation between the concept of variegated levels of responsibility as a core component of CBDRs and the reciprocally phrased limits to the freedom to use outer space ‘on a basis of equality’ for the benefit of all countries, ‘irrespective of their economic and scientific development’, all the while avoiding potentially harmful interference in their activities. Further, the article aims to assess the basis on which different levels of responsibility may be attributed to different groups of States in space law. In so doing, it will identify a number of indicators in the relevant UN and International Telecommunication Union (ITU) conventions that appear to support a flexible system of variegated responsibilities, in line with the pragmatic approach to CBDRs in the 2015 Paris Agreement. These indicators will focus on possible applications of the CBDRs principle in the areas of resource exploitation and space debris, specifically.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

24

Afriansyah, Arie, and Amira Bilqis. "Paris Agreement: Respon Terhadap Pendekatan Prinsip Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities Dalam Kyoto Protocol." Jurnal Penelitian Hukum De Jure 20, no. 3 (September 29, 2020): 391. http://dx.doi.org/10.30641/dejure.2020.v20.391-408.

Full text

Abstract:

Kemampuan dalam menangani permasalahan lingkungan antara negara maju dan berkembang kerap berdampak obligasi yang diatur dalam perjanjian internasional. Prinsip Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities (CBDR-RC) sebagai prinsip yang memimpin dalam hukum lingkungan internasional merupakan jembatan untuk menyeimbangkan kepentingan dua kelompok negara tersebut. Namun, dalam instrumen hukum internasional terdapat implementasi yang berbeda dari prinsip tersebut dengan masing-masing pendekatan yang digunakan. Tujuan penelitian ini untuk menganalisa bagaimana implementasi prinsip CBDR-RC dalam Paris Agreement dibandingkan dengan pendahulunya yaitu Kyoto Protocol. Metode penelitian dalam tulisan ini adalah yuridis normatif yang disajikan secara deskriptif analitis. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa pendekatan yang digunakan dalam Kyoto Protocol sebagai perjanjian yang menetapkan secara kaku besaran emisi yang harus direduksi diidentifikasi sebagai Top-Down. Sedangkan perjanjian penerusnya yaitu Paris Agreement sebagai perjanjian yang didasarkan atas dasar sukarela terhadap besaran emisi yang perlu dicapai diidentifikasi menggunakan pendekatan sebagai Bottom-Up. Pendekatan yang digunakan dari Paris Agreement berbeda sebagai respon dan bentuk evaluasi dari pendekatan yang digunakan dalam Kyoto Protocol yang berakibat tingkat partisipasi dalam usaha reduksi emisi meningkat secara drastis dan mendorong negara Annex I menargetkan reduksi yang lebih tinggi lagi. Terlepas dari kenyataan bahwa Paris Agreement telah menyelesaikan masalah dalam mekanisme Kyoto Protocol, perjanjian ini masih memiliki beberapa kekurangan. Kesimpulannya, transformasi pendekatan yang terjadi dalam kedua perjanjian ini mempengaruhi tren komitmen reduksi emisi dalam rezim perubahan iklim bagi negara maju maupun berkembang.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

25

Deleuil, Thomas. "The Common but Differentiated Responsibilities Principle: Changes in Continuity after the Durban Conference of the Parties." Review of European Community & International Environmental Law 21, no. 3 (November 2012): 271–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9388.2012.00758.x.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

26

Liu, Liyuan, Jing Zhu, Yibin Zhang, and Xiding Chen. "An Optimal Pollution Control Model for Environmental Protection Cooperation between Developing and Developed Countries." International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17, no. 11 (May 29, 2020): 3868. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17113868.

Full text

Abstract:

With the continuous increase in greenhouse gas emissions in the world and the United States announcing withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, the conflicts between environmental protection and economic growth of developing and developed countries have become increasingly challenging. In this paper, following the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities” specified in the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement, we develop an optimal pollution control model based on a dynamic system for both developing and developed countries. We analyze how different perspectives of the developing and developed countries affect their investments in pollution control and how to determine their responsibilities based on the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities. Our aim is to obtain a stable equilibrium mechanism to maximize the social welfare between the developing and developed countries and explore the optimal pollution control and economic growth path. Our results show that it is optimal for the developed countries to help developing countries with pollution control in their initial stage of economic growth. Once the developing countries reach a certain economic development level, they can contribute more to pollution control, while the developed countries can reduce their environmental investment. We show that by following this optimal path, the developing and developed countries can effectively control environment pollution without significant loss of social welfare.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

27

Oktoberina, Sri Rahayu, and Tristam P. Moeliono. "Prinsip Common But Differentiated Responsibility Dalam Pengelolaan Lingkungan Hidup, Sumber Daya Alam Dan Hutan Tropis." Veritas et Justitia 2, no. 2 (December 27, 2016): 278. http://dx.doi.org/10.25123/vej.2268.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractThe common but differentiated responsibility is or will become an important principle of international environmental law, specifically related to the management of tropical rain forest. The issue at hand is how this principle is understood by developing states, which by its geographical position, is entrusted with the responbility to manage tropical rain forest. In this article the author traces the reason justifying the differentiation of (international) responsibilities and attempts to relate this (mis-) understanding of the principle to Indonesia’ s unwillingness or inability to manage its tropical rain forest.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

28

Rajamani, Lavanya. "The Papal Encyclical & The Role of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities in the International Climate Change Negotiations." AJIL Unbound 109 (2015): 142–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s2398772300001720.

Full text

Abstract:

A fundamental theme running through the remarkable 192-page Papal Encyclical on Climate Change is the notion of solidarity—;between nations and peoples, and between and within generations. In the words of the Encyclical, “[w]e require a new and universal solidarity.”. This translates, in the Encyclical’s vision, into principled cooperation between states and peoples, because “[a]ll of us can cooperate as instruments of God for the care of creation, each according to his or her own culture, experience, involvements and talents.”. In the international climate change regime this vision takes the form of the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities (CBDRRC), a principle that the Encyclical explicitly endorses. The CBDRRC principle, however, lends itself to varying interpretations and has thus proven deeply contentious as the basis for climate cooperation. This is in particular in relation to the 2015 climate agreement that is due to be finalized in Paris in December 2015. This short essay explores the extent to which the Encyclical supports one or the other interpretation of this principle, and how closely aligned (or not) the Encyclical’s vision is to the emerging 2015 climate change agreement.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

29

Zaman, Sharaban Tahura. "Recognising Biodiversity Conservation as a “Common Concern of Mankind”: A Legal Appraisal." Environmental Policy and Law 50, no. 3 (December 21, 2020): 171–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/epl-200212.

Full text

Abstract:

By analysing the legal provisions of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and its Nagoya Protocol, this article focuses on the legal implications of recognising biodiversity conservation as a “common concern of mankind”. In this context, the “common concern” concept clearly involves precise environmental protection, through actions (and addressing resources) that transcend the territorial sovereignty of individual States; establish common responsibilities towards the international community; and develop international regulations and institutions to secure these objectives. When applied in this context, this concept poses a significant legal implication for national sovereignty and the international community. It restricts sovereignty by requiring States to meet a national-level version of the standard of due diligence, including by adopting laws, and developing strategic plans, as well as entering into partnership with local, indigenous communities, the private sector and international communities for their implementation. It also establishes among the States a “common but differentiated responsibility” towards the entire international community – a duty to cooperate and collaborate for the conservation of biodiversity. These legal implications have been subject to legal debates and challenges, especially when they require the setting of standards of due diligence applicable to all States and most particularly with regard to commitments they have made regarding technical and financial cooperation. It is clearly quite difficult to enforce such legal obligations precisely, particularly under the CBD’s regulatory regime. To uphold the “common concern” approach, all nations will need to participate and to accept both their respective differentiated responsibilities and the restrictions that this approach imposes on national sovereignty. The international regulatory regime also needs to develop a new compliance technique and enforcement mechanism. Such global responses and efforts are indispensable for sustaining life on earth.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

30

Castro, Paula. "Common But Differentiated Responsibilities Beyond the Nation State: How Is Differential Treatment Addressed in Transnational Climate Governance Initiatives?" Transnational Environmental Law 5, no. 2 (October 2016): 379–400. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s2047102516000224.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractMany multilateral environmental agreements have adopted differentiated rules for different countries, based on the recognition of the ‘common but differentiated responsibilities’ (CBDRs) of states. By establishing two rigid groups of countries with and without emissions reduction obligations, the intergovernmental climate regime represents the most extreme case of such differentiation. The regime has struggled to overcome this rigidity and the resulting political deadlock between developing and developed countries. Transnational climate governance (TCG) initiatives have emerged as an alternative to provide mitigation, adaptation or finance outside the multilateral process. By drawing on synergies between public and private actors, it is hoped that they overcome the paralysis of the intergovernmental process. Yet, they take place in the same world of unequal peers, with different levels of capacity and responsibility for climate change. This article investigates the extent to which such TCG initiatives reflect the CBDR principle. Do different types of initiative – involving different types of actor or with different climate-related goals – address differentiation in distinct ways? Does taking account of CBDRs affect the membership of transnational initiatives? This article explores these questions empirically by analyzing a sample of TCG initiatives in terms of how they include differential treatment of states and non-state members. It concludes that TCG initiatives address differentiation in a pragmatic way. Most frequently, they either offer participants flexibility in how to implement their commitments, or provide support to members from developing countries. Such support is, so far, still insufficient to address the limited involvement of developing country actors.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

31

윤성혜. "A Study on the Equality Matter of the "Common but Differentiated Responsibilities"(CBDR) Principle in International Environment Law." 과학기술법연구 19, no. 1 (February 2013): 165–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.32430/ilst.2013.19.1.165.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

32

Segger, Marie-Claire Cordonier, Ashfaq Khalfan, Markus Gehring, and Michelle Toering. "Prospects for Principles of International Sustainable Development Law after the WSSD: Common but Differentiated Responsibilities, Precaution and Participation." Review of European Community and International Environmental Law 12, no. 1 (April 2003): 54–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9388.00344.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

33

Liu, Zhancheng, Xinzi Lu, Ziyi Guo, and Haonan Ye. "Climate Change and Inequality: The Effectiveness and Potential Improvements of the Existing Approaches." SHS Web of Conferences 148 (2022): 01026. http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/202214801026.

Full text

Abstract:

This paper examines the relationship between climate change and inequality, evaluates three existing approaches from both macro principles and micro practices, and proposes the potential improvements for those approaches. Available evidence indicates that climate change exacerbates inequality globally and the existing approaches are insufficient and still need to be more aggressive. More specifically, the principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities (CBDR-RC) in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is blunt to effectively address climate change and respond to inequality even by distributing the common responsibilities differently to the individual countries. Developed countries should take the responsibility to finance climate change due to the principle “the polluter pays” and the obligation to protect human rights; however, developed countries have not yet met their climate finance obligations. Similarly, the international carbon market has been viewed as a feasible measure, while additional actions are still needed to respond to the inequalities exacerbated by climate change.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

34

Hertel, Michael. "Climate-Change-Related Trade Measures and Article XX: Defining Discrimination in Light of the Principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities." Journal of World Trade 45, Issue 3 (June 1, 2011): 653–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/trad2011023.

Full text

Abstract:

As many countries move towards adopting domestic measures to mitigate the effects of climate change, there has been extensive consideration in academic literature regarding whether unilateral trade measures could be used to offset carbon leakage and competitiveness concerns in a manner that would comply with the rules of the World Trade Organization (WTO).1 However, little consideration has been given to whether such measures would be permissible under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)2 and how this could affect the outcome of a WTO dispute.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

35

Chen, Yuli. "Reconciling common but differentiated responsibilities principle and no more favourable treatment principle in regulating greenhouse gas emissions from international shipping." Marine Policy 123 (January 2021): 104317. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2020.104317.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

36

Kiessling, Christopher Kurt. "Internalización del principio de las responsabilidades comunes, pero diferenciadas: interpretaciones desde la sociedad civil brasileña/Internalization of the Principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities: Interpretations from the Brazilian Civil." Letras Verdes. Revista Latinoamericana de Estudios Socioambientales, no. 25 (February 25, 2019): 8–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.17141/letrasverdes.25.2019.3663.

Full text

Abstract:

El principio de las responsabilidades comunes, pero diferenciadas, ha sido una norma constitutiva de la política climática global. Su interpretación tradicional sostiene que diferentes niveles de protección ambiental deben esperarse entre los países desarrollados y los países emergentes y/o en vías de desarrollo. Sin embargo, dicho sentido comenzó a ser cuestionado y contestado por actores de la sociedad civil, tanto a escala global como en contextos domésticos particulares. En este artículo se describe el proceso de localización del principio de las responsabilidades comunes, pero diferenciadas, en el discurso doméstico brasilero de la sociedad civil organizada sobre cambio climático entre los años 2005 y 2015, desde una perspectiva constructivista de las Relaciones Internacionales. Para alcanzar este objetivo, se plantean las diversas interpretaciones y reinterpretaciones del principio por parte de actores no estatales en Brasil. Abstract The principle of common but differentiated responsibilities has been a constitutive norm since the origins of the global climate policy. The traditional interpretation of this norm maintains that different levels of environmental protection should be expected between developed countries and emerging and/or developing countries. However, this interpretation began to be questioned and challenged by civil society actors, both globally and in particular domestic contexts. This article describes the process of localization of the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities in the Brazilian domestic discourse of organized civil society on climate change between the years 2005 and 2015, from a constructivist perspective of International Relations. To achieve this objective, the different interpretations and reinterpretations of the principle by non-state actors in Brazil are presented.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

37

Yu, Hongyuan. "The Paris Climate Agreement and China’s Role in Global Climate Governance." China Quarterly of International Strategic Studies 02, no. 02 (January 2016): 185–200. http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/s2377740016500160.

Full text

Abstract:

Since the first global summit on climate change was held in 1992, the international community has managed to adopt a series of agreements and action plans to coordinate efforts of all countries to tackle the existing and potential challenges caused by climate change. Yet due to a lack of legally binding mechanisms and the huge discrepancy between developed and developing countries in their respective responsibilities, little progress has been made in international climate negotiation over the past decade. With the joint endeavor of major greenhouse gas emitters, especially emerging economies like China, the first-ever universal, legally binding global climate deal, the Paris Climate Agreement, was adopted in December 2015, setting up the legal framework of Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) and relevant international institutions to combat climate change on a reinterpreted principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR).” Conducive as it is to the institutions and working model of global climate governance, the agreement will attach more responsibilities to developing countries including China. Having developed a strong resolution and given many open international commitments to assume more responsibilities in combating climate change, China should develop a green-growth approach while providing more public goods for the international community, so as to make its best contributions to future global climate governance.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

38

French, Duncan. "From the Depths: Rich Pickings of Principles of Sustainable Development and General International Law on the Ocean Floor—the Seabed Disputes Chamber’s 2011 Advisory Opinion." International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 26, no. 4 (2011): 525–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/157180811x598691.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractIn February 2011, the Seabed Disputes Chamber of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea handed down its Advisory Opinion in Responsibilities and Obligations of States Sponsoring Persons and Entities with respect to Activities in the Area. Although primarily focused on governance of the deep seabed beyond national jurisdiction (‘the Area’), the Opinion has wider relevance for both international environmental law and general international law. More specifically, although sustainable development is not directly referenced in the Opinion, this article argues that it goes a long way towards strengthening many of the emerging normative rules associated with it. Using the International Law Association’s 2002 New Delhi Declaration of Principles of International Law relating to Sustainable Development as a framework, this article specifically analyses the Advisory Opinion’s contribution to the sustainable use of natural resources, the precautionary approach, common but differentiated responsibilities, and the principle of good governance.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

39

Kirk, Elizabeth A. "The Montreal Protocol or the Paris Agreement as a Model for a Plastics Treaty?" AJIL Unbound 114 (2020): 212–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/aju.2020.39.

Full text

Abstract:

The notion that a plastics treaty is necessary is gaining traction, but there is less agreement as to its content. Some, including this author, have suggested that a plastics treaty should be modelled on treaties such as the Montreal Protocol, which sets out a broad commitment to end the use of a particular material and then introduce regulations to ban particular forms of that material over time. This approach has an immediate appeal—it sends a signal to states and to industry that they must change their behaviors and products, while giving time to adapt to the new regulation and develop alternative materials or ways of working. The potential drawback of this approach is that some states simply will not accept such rigid standards. In addition, some states may prefer a second approach that is more obviously rooted in the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, which assigns different obligations to parties according to their respective capacities. Within the climate change regime, the Paris Agreement takes both approaches, asking states to set their own nationally determined contributions (NDCs) to emissions reductions (common but differentiated responsibilities) and then to revise these NDCs over time through an iterative process to deliver progressively more ambitious targets for emissions reduction (moving toward a ban) or mitigation. In reality, neither approach is entirely suited to regulating plastics, so a new approach to treaty-making is required. This new approach should focus on the outcomes desired rather than the practices that need to be regulated.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

40

Peel, Jacqueline. "Foreword to the TEL Fifth Anniversary Issue Re-evaluating the Principle of Common But Differentiated Responsibilities in Transnational Climate Change Law." Transnational Environmental Law 5, no. 2 (October 2016): 245–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s2047102516000327.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

41

YE, Jiang. "Tentative Analysis of the Relationship between the Implementation of the Coming Post-2015 SDGs and the Principle of CBDR." Chinese Journal of Urban and Environmental Studies 03, no. 02 (June 2015): 1550012. http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/s2345748115500128.

Full text

Abstract:

This paper focuses on the relationship between the principle of "Common but Differentiated Responsibilities" (CBDR) and the implementation of post-2015 agenda. Based on analysis of the United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's report "The Road to Dignity by 2030" and the post-2015 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and the studies of the evolution of the principle of "CBDR" and its impact on the implementation of the coming SDGs, the paper sums up that following the principle of "CBDR" will lead developed and developing countries, i.e. North and South, to more successfully implementing post-2015 sustainable goals and targets, both at home and in international development cooperation in the future.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

42

Huggins, Anna, and Md Saiful Karim. "Shifting Traction: Differential Treatment and Substantive and Procedural Regard in the International Climate Change Regime." Transnational Environmental Law 5, no. 2 (October 2016): 427–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s2047102516000170.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractThe Paris Agreement to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) signifies a shift in how the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR) manifests in the international climate change regime. Unlike the UNFCCC and its Kyoto Protocol, the Paris Agreement does not enshrine differentiated substantive mitigation obligations for developed and developing countries. However, an increasingly proceduralized variant of the CBDR principle, which facilitates regard for the interests of developing countries with respect to treaty implementation yet does not guarantee favourable substantive outcomes for these states, is evident in the emerging regime. The experience of the International Maritime Organization’s climate change regime provides a cautionary tale with respect to procedurally oriented differentiation that is not reinforced by effective processes to ensure that developed states honour their finance and technology transfer commitments. Accordingly, this article posits that strong accountability mechanisms are required to transform opportunities for procedural differentiation in the Paris Agreement into a robust framework for procedural regard for the interests of developing states.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

43

Dowd, Rebecca, and Jane McAdam. "INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AND RESPONSIBILITY-SHARING TO PROTECT REFUGEES: WHAT, WHY AND HOW?" International and Comparative Law Quarterly 66, no. 4 (August 22, 2017): 863–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020589317000343.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractWhile countries that receive refugees have certain legal obligations to assist and protect them, the legal duties of other States to step in and help relieve this burden is less clear. Despite multiple proposals, a mechanism to systematically, equitably and predictably allocate responsibilities between States at a global level has still not been agreed. The UN's High-Level Summit on Addressing Large Movements of Refugees on 19 September 2016 held some promise in this regard, but the resulting New York Declaration was more muted than earlier drafts. This article seeks to provide a unique insight into the meaning of responsibility-sharing and international cooperation from the perspective of individual States. It does so by examining statements they have made at various UN fora over the past decade. It focuses on the two main methods of sharing responsibilities, namely the provision of financial and other assistance to host countries, and the admission of refugees. It then considers the extent to which States perceive responsibility-sharing to be a legal obligation, as opposed to a voluntary undertaking, and analyses this in light of expert opinion. Finally, it discusses the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, a concept drawn from international environmental law, and considers whether and how it might apply in the international refugee law context.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

44

Duncan, Gareth. "Common but Differentiated Responsibilities: The Implications of Principle Seven and the Duty to Cooperate on the Implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity." Ocean Yearbook Online 16, no. 1 (2002): 75–112. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/221160002x00123.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

45

WANG, Tian, and Xiang GAO. "Reflection and operationalization of the common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities principle in the transparency framework under the international climate change regime." Advances in Climate Change Research 9, no. 4 (December 2018): 253–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.accre.2018.12.004.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

46

Tigre, Maria Antonia. "Cooperation for Climate Mitigation in Amazonia: Brazil’s Emerging Role as a Regional Leader." Transnational Environmental Law 5, no. 2 (October 2016): 401–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s2047102516000297.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractSince their inception, climate change negotiations have stalled because of the scope of parties’ mitigation responsibilities under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The concept of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities (CBDR-RC) became a core principle of the framework to ensure consensus on a global climate policy in 1992 and to promote differentiation. By letting each country assess its current responsibilities and capacities for climate mitigation through their nationally determined contributions (NDCs), the Paris Agreement has built on the principle of CBDR-RC and promoted self-differentiation. As the concept evolved, the role of emerging economies has been a particular focus of discussions. Academia is still grappling with the revised meaning of CBDR-RC and the newly introduced NDCs. This article contributes to the discussion by analyzing the role of emerging economies in climate governance through the lens of regional responsibility. In particular, it discusses how cooperation can be a more effective way to ensure differentiation, especially by distinguishing emerging economies from other developing countries with fewer capacities. The article uses the Amazon rainforest as a case study, discussing Brazil’s role within the region. Building on lessons from regional schemes that have successfully promoted climate mitigation, the article looks at the Amazon Cooperation Treaty Organization (ACTO) as an avenue for enhanced cooperation at the regional level.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

47

Biniaz, Susan. "Comma but Differentiated Responsibilities: Punctuation and 30 Other Ways Negotiators Have Resolved Issues in the International Climate Change Regime." Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law, no. 6.1 (2016): 37. http://dx.doi.org/10.36640/mjeal.6.1.comma.

Full text

Abstract:

International climate change negotiations have a long history of being contentious, and much has been written about the grand trade-offs that have allowed countries to reach agreement. Issues have often involved, for example, the level of ambition, differentiated treatment of Parties, and various forms of financial assistance to developing countries. Lesser known are the smaller, largely language-based tools negotiators have used to resolve differences, sometimes finding a solution as subtle as a shift in the placement of a comma. These tools have operated in different ways. Some, such as deliberate imprecision or postponement, have “resolved” an issue by sidestepping it and allowing Parties to preserve their positions. Other tools have enabled resolution by “splitting the difference” between opposing views. Still others have involved optical fixes, flexibility, or non-prejudice that helped one or more Parties go along with a particular outcome. This compendium of textual examples, presented in rough chronological order, is drawn from my personal involvement in international climate negotiations and is by no means exhaustive. The examples may be of interest to those who follow climate change in particular, as well as of potential use to those who work in other international fields.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

48

Fitzmaurice, Malgosia. "Biodiversity and Climate Change." International Community Law Review 23, no. 2-3 (June 29, 2021): 230–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/18719732-12341473.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract This article analyses the question of a relationship between biodiversity and climate change. The legal framework for the protection of biodiversity from climate change is contained in the climate change system of treaties, i.e. the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change; the 1997 Kyoto Protocol; the 2015 Paris Agreement, on one hand; and the 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity on the other. There are also important global Conventions which contribute to combating of impacts of climate change on biodiversity, such as the Desertification Convention and the Ramsar Convention. The article discusses the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities within the context of climate change and biodiversity. The case study is the Arctic, which illustrates the impact of climate change on biodiversity.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

49

Amelina, Fitri. "PERAN HUKUM DI INDONESIA DALAM PENANGGULANGAN DAMPAK PERUBAHAN IKLIM." Jurnal Hukum Lingkungan Indonesia 1, no. 1 (February 25, 2020): 181. http://dx.doi.org/10.38011/jhli.v1i1.9.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstrakPerubahan iklim telah menjadi permasalahan global yang memberikan dampak pasti dan tidak terelakan lagi di tingkat regional maupun internasional. Meningginya permukaan air laut, mencairnya es di kutub, sampai kerugian ekonomi di wilayah Pasifik sebagaimana dilansir oleh Asian Development Bank di tahun 2013. Meningkatnya pemanasan global dan produksi gas rumah kaca memberikan ancaman tersendiri untuk pembangunan berkelanjutan. Adanya komitmen warga dunia dalam menjalin kerja sama guna menekan produksi gas rumah kaca dan menanggulangi dampak perubahan iklim dapat dilihat dari beberapa instrumen internasional terkait hal tersebut yang secara bertahap telah dihasilkan dan diemplementasikan. Adanya kerja sama dari negara-negara maju sebagai penyumbang gas emisi terbanyak dengan negara-negara berkembang seharusnya mampu menghasilkan kolaborasi yang cukup baik dalam upaya penanganan dampak perubahan iklim. Indonesia, dalam hal ini sesuai dengan prinsip common but differentiated responsibilities turut serta dalam upaya penanganan perubahan iklim dengan ratifikasi perjanjian internasional, implementasi melalui satuan petugas khusus di bidang perubahan iklim, dan penegakan hukum dalam upaya melestarikan lingkungan. AbstractClimate change has become a global problem and has certain and uninevitable impacts globally or internationally. Sea level rising, ice melting in the pole or even economic damages in Pacific region released by 2013 Asian Development Bank. Increasing of global warming and greenhouse gasses production provide a separate threat to sustainable development. The commitment of the worldwide community to cooperate in order to reduce the production of greenhouse gasses and mitigate the impact of climate change could be seen from several international instruments related to it has gradually produced and implemented. The cooperation of the developed countries as the largest contributor to the emissions and developing countries should be able to produce a pretty good collaboration in efforts to address climate change impacts. Indonesia, in this case in accordance with the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities to participate in efforts to address climate change with the ratification of international treaties, the implementation through a special unit of officers in the field of climate change, and law enforcement in an effort to preserve the environment.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

50

Ferreira, Adriano Fernandes, Diego da Silva Souza, and Oswaldo Negreiros Correa. "A mitigação do princípio das responsabilidades comuns, mas diferenciadas, no direito ambiental internacional/ The principle of common but differentiated responsibilities’ mitigation in international environmental law." Brazilian Journal of Development 8, no. 4 (April 12, 2022): 26225–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.34117/bjdv8n4-230.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

Journal articles on the topic 'Common but differentiated responsibilities'

Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles