Climate Justice within the UNFCCC Negotiations: The Case of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples from Copenhagen Accord to Paris Agreement

Author(s):  
Mwendwa Adamba Kaleb ◽  
Obiri John ◽  
Agevi Humphrey
Laws ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Rimmer

The multidisciplinary field of climate law and justice needs to address the topic of intellectual property, climate finance, and technology transfer to ensure effective global action on climate change. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change 1992 (UNFCCC) established a foundation for the development, application and diffusion of low-carbon technologies. Against this background, it is useful to analyse how the Paris Agreement 2015 deals with the subject of intellectual property, technology transfer, and climate change. While there was discussion of a number of options for intellectual property and climate change, the final Paris Agreement 2015 contains no text on intellectual property. There is text, though, on technology transfer. The Paris Agreement 2015 relies upon technology networks and alliances in order to promote the diffusion and dissemination of green technologies. In order to achieve technology transfer, there has been an effort to rely on a number of formal technology networks, alliances, and public–private partnerships—including the UNFCCC Climate Technology Centre and Network (CTCN); the World Intellectual Property Organization’s WIPO GREEN; Mission Innovation; the Breakthrough Energy Coalition; and the International Solar Alliance. There have been grand hopes and ambitions in respect of these collaborative and co-operative ventures. However, there have also been significant challenges in terms of funding, support, and operation. In a case of innovation policy pluralism, there also seems to be a significant level of overlap and duplication between the diverse international initiatives. There have been concerns about whether such technology networks are effective, efficient, adaptable, and accountable. There is a need to better align intellectual property, innovation policy, and technology transfer in order to achieve access to clean energy and climate justice under the framework of the Paris Agreement 2015. At a conceptual level, philosophical discussions about climate justice should be grounded in pragmatic considerations about intellectual property and technology transfer. An intellectual property mechanism is necessary to provide for research, development, and deployment of clean technologies. There is a need to ensure that the technology mechanism of the Paris Agreement 2015 can enable the research, development, and diffusion of clean technologies at a scale to address the global challenges of climate change.


2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 149-168 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Brown ◽  
Samuel J. Spiegel

In the wake of the Paris Agreement on climate change, promises to phase out coal-fired power have suggested cause for optimism around energy transition globally. However, coal remains entangled with contentious development agendas in many parts of the world, while fossil fuel industries continue to flourish. This article discusses these entanglements through a climate justice lens that engages the cultural politics surrounding coal and energy transition. We highlight how recent struggles around phasing out coal have stimulated renewed critical debates around colonialism, empire, and capitalism more broadly, recognizing climate change as an intersectional issue encompassing racial, gender, and economic justice. With social movements locked in struggles to resist the development or expansion of coal mines, power plants, and associated infrastructure, we unpack tensions that emerge as transnational alliances connect disparate communities across the world. Our conclusion signals the need for greater critical engagement with how intersecting inequalities are coded into the cultural politics of coal, and how this shapes efforts to pursue a just transition.


2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 27-46
Author(s):  
Tim Cadman ◽  
Klaus Radunsky ◽  
Andrea Simonelli ◽  
Tek Maraseni

This article tracks the intergovernmental negotiations aimed at combatting human-induced greenhouse gas emissions under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change from COP21 and the creation of the Paris Agreement in 2015 to COP24 in Katowice, Poland in 2018. These conferences are explored in detail, focusing on the Paris Rulebook negotiations around how to implement market- and nonmarket-based approaches to mitigating climate change, as set out in Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, and the tensions regarding the inclusion of negotiating text safeguarding human rights. A concluding section comments on the collapse of Article 6 discussions and the implications for climate justice and social quality for the Paris Agreement going forward.


2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 203-209
Author(s):  
Kanika Jamwal

This opinion argues for including indigenous peoples as ‘expert’ consultants in India's Apex Committee for Implementation of Paris Agreement. Alongside its monitoring and reporting functions, the Apex Committee for Implementation of Paris Agreement is expected to perform substantive functions, including, developing policies and programmes to make India's domestic climate actions compliant with its international obligations under the Paris Agreement. The argument is based on the understanding that indigenous peoples possess a deeper understanding of their ecosystems and share a special relationship with it. Therefore, their knowledge is key to sustainable ecosystem management. At the same time, a co-dependent relationship with Nature makes them disproportionately vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. Unlike other vulnerable groups, the impact on indigenous peoples ripples beyond their economic survival, and threatens their collective physical and spiritual identity. Accordingly, this opinion suggests direct participation of indigenous peoples in conceptualising and implementing policies and programmes aimed at addressing climate change. To that end, it problematizes the narrow understanding of ‘experts’ reflected in the gazette notification establishing the Apex Committee for Implementation of Paris Agreement, and draws upon United Nations’ practice(s) enabling participation of indigenous peoples as 'experts' in its specialised agencies and organs. Accordingly, the opinion also suggests a potential means to operationalize their inclusion in the Apex Committee for Implementation of Paris Agreement.


Author(s):  
Andrew Light

This chapter explores the ethical dimensions of diplomatic efforts to form a global agreement on climate change. It offers a brief historical background on the core multilateral climate negotiation body, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, and highlights some contentious moral elements of these negotiations. In particular, it explores the complex ways in which the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities” (CBDR) has driven debates on how burdens for mitigation, adaptation, and finance should be distributed between developed and developing countries. It then considers the transformation in these climate negotiations since 2009, including the move toward a bottom-up architecture as part from the Copenhagen Accord to the Paris Agreement. Finally, it assesses the current state of climate diplomacy in relation to broader diplomatic priorities, arguing that climate diplomacy must be elevated alongside other top-tier foreign policy issues today in order to eventually achieve some level of climate stability.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document