Differential Treatment in International Environmental Law By LAVANYA RAJAMANI

2008 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 334-336
Author(s):  
M. Stallworthy
Climate Law ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 195-206 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Huggins

The UN climate regime is a domain of international environmental law (IEL) that has developed in distinctive ways. Applying insights from the work of Michel Callon, climate change is a ‘hot’ situation characterized by ongoing controversy, making it difficult to develop stable and sustainable legal frameworks to manage this state of flux. Building on Elizabeth Fisher’s work positing that environmental law has qualities of ‘hot’ law, this article argues that, in the context of the UN climate regime, the ‘hot’ nature of climate law is compounded by the geopolitical tensions among states in IEL, particularly the deep fault lines between developed and developing states. The novel legal and regulatory solutions that have been experimented with to address issues of differential treatment reflect attempts to manage and contain these ongoing controversies. The UN climate regime yields insights into the promises and pitfalls of designing international legal frameworks to respond to highly contested and divisive issues in a context in which states create, implement, and enforce legal rules.


2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 305-328 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philippe Cullet

AbstractDifferential treatment in international environmental law is the broader manifestation of the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDRs). It reflects equity concerns that have underlain most environmental debates on a North-South basis for several decades. Over the past two decades, various forms of differentiation have been introduced in environmental law instruments to the point where it has become an essential element of any international environmental agreement. At the same time, differential treatment has been the object of sustained criticism, arguing that it should be temporary, that it fails to target beneficiaries appropriately, and undermines environmental outcomes. This article takes the opposite view and argues that differentiation remains crucial in a world where widespread inequalities remain. Beneficiaries need to be identified on the basis of environmental and social indicators and differentiation should constitute the basis on which environmental measures are adopted. Worsening environmental conditions and an evolving global context call for adding new elements to the existing framework for differentiation. This requires thinking beyond the current structure centred around nation states and conceptualizing differentiation around common heritage equity. It also requires expanding differentiation beyond the field of environmental law, to include all areas of sustainable development law. Further, differential treatment needs to be implemented in a way that benefits the most disadvantaged in every country. These measures are necessary to foster a vibrant international environmental law which addresses the equity needs of all states in years to come.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document