Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities: Did This Principle Ever Exist?

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Armin Rosencranz ◽  
Kanika Jamwal
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Clean Development Mechanism ◽  
Clean Energy ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
Developing Nations ◽  
Paris Agreement ◽  
Significant Shift ◽  
Historical Responsibility ◽  
Common But Differentiated Responsibilities ◽  
Self Differentiation

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 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.

scholarly journals Beyond the Paris Agreement: Intellectual Property, Innovation Policy, and Climate Justice

Laws ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Rimmer
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Technology Transfer ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Innovation Policy ◽  
Clean Energy ◽  
Paris Agreement ◽  
Climate Justice ◽  
Research Development ◽  
Clean Technologies ◽  
And Diffusion

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.

scholarly journals Shifting Traction: Differential Treatment and Substantive and Procedural Regard in the International Climate Change Regime

2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 427-448 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Huggins ◽  
Md Saiful Karim
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Developing Countries ◽  
Paris Agreement ◽  
Differential Treatment ◽  
Cautionary Tale ◽  
Common But Differentiated Responsibilities ◽  
International Climate ◽  
Treaty Implementation ◽  
Robust Framework ◽  
International Climate Change

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.

Environmental Management - The Double Edged Sword: A Perspective

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (01) ◽  
pp. 35-45
Author(s):  
Durgesh Upadhyay
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Water Pollution ◽  
Environmental Management ◽  
Environmental Issues ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
Developing Nations ◽  
Ultraviolet Rays ◽  
Underdeveloped Countries ◽  
The Developed Countries ◽  
Dangerous Level

Incessant floods and deluge, sudden droughts, tsunami, continuously warming up of the weather, asthma, allergy, breathlessness, time and again, remind of severe problems taking place in our environment. Air pollution and water pollution have kept on baffling us over a period of time since long ages. Initially the advanced countries went for uncontrolled industrialisation ignoring their aftermath on the environment. Dangerous gases mounted up in the environment increasing the pollution in air as well as in water. Not only was it in CO2 and CO mounting up to the above dangerous level but slowly and steadily, damaging the ozone layer too thereby, permitting the ultraviolet rays to reach to the human civilization. Afterwards, the underdeveloped nations have also been following the same path of industrialisation, thereby, adding up to the already preserved prolonged diseases of environment. The developed countries blame developing nations for the pollution issues and greenhouse effect. And the underdeveloped countries cross blame the developed ones for the same. Overall, the environmental issues have come up as the most important issues for the survival of the mankind if the suitable step is not taken to preserve the climate and the environment. Government and the industries have to join hands to combat this menace. This paper proposes to discuss the reasons for the environmental problems and the possible solutions to combat them specially global warming and the climate change.

scholarly journals 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

2019 ◽  
pp. 8-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Kurt Kiessling
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Civil Society ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
Common But Differentiated Responsibilities ◽  
Constructivist Perspective ◽  
Constitutive Norm ◽  
Sociedad Civil ◽  
Different Levels

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.

scholarly journals The U.S. Withdrawal From the Paris Agreement: Challenges and Opportunities for China

2018 ◽  
Vol 04 (02) ◽  
pp. 281-300 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hongyuan Yu
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
United States ◽  
Climate Policy ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Clean Energy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Paris Agreement ◽  
Climate Governance ◽  
The U.S

President Trump’s decision to withdraw the United States from the Paris Agreement on Climate Change is both a major reversal of the Obama administration’s climate policy and a huge blow to global climate governance. The comprehensive regression of President Trump’s climate policy manifests mainly in three aspects: abolition of the clean energy plan, exit from the Paris Agreement, and a return to traditional energy policies, which reflect the cyclical and volatile nature of the U.S. climate policy. With its lasting negative impact, the China-U.S. cooperative leadership in global climate governance is stranded. In this light, China should strive for a bigger role in leading global efforts to address climate change and enhance cooperation through various mechanisms. Under the current U.S. policy environment, China can still strengthen cooperation with the United States in such fields as traditional energy, infrastructure investment, global energy market, and green finance.

Climate Diplomacy

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Light
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Paris Agreement ◽  
Historical Background ◽  
Policy Issues ◽  
The Core ◽  
Climate Stability ◽  
Current State ◽  
Common But Differentiated Responsibilities ◽  
Copenhagen Accord ◽  
Global Agreement

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.

scholarly journals REDD+ and the Clean Development Mechanism: A comparative perspective

2013 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Lovleen Bhullar
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Kyoto Protocol ◽  
Clean Development Mechanism ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
Forest Degradation ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
Policy Framework ◽  
Governance Mechanism ◽  
Change Policy ◽  
Development Mechanism

The program, ‘Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation’ (REDD), which operates within the international climate change policy framework, is projected to emerge as one of the key climate change mitigation mechanisms for developing countries. The existing Afforestation/Reforestation (A/R) mechanism, operating under the Clean Development Mechanism of the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, may prove useful for drawing lessons for the emerging REDD program, since both mechanisms represent flexible means for developed countries to achieve compliance with their mitigation targets under the Kyoto Protocol. The possible means include CDM as the basis for a project-based approach for the implementation of REDD (if adopted) or the inclusion of REDD within CDM. This article compares the features of A/R CDM and REDD, identifies similarities and differences, and analyses the extent to which the former can provide guidance for the development of a carbon governance mechanism for REDD.

Cooperation for Climate Mitigation in Amazonia: Brazil’s Emerging Role as a Regional Leader

2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 401-425 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Antonia Tigre
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Emerging Economies ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Climate Mitigation ◽  
Climate Change Negotiations ◽  
Common But Differentiated Responsibilities ◽  
Nationally Determined Contributions ◽  
Self Differentiation

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.

MECANISMO DE DESENVOLVIMENTO LIMPO (MDL) NO ESTADO DO MARANHÃO: POTENCIAL DA MATRIZ ELÉTRICA PARA NEGÓCIOS NO MERCADO DE CARBONO

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 118
Author(s):  
Carlos Alberto Lima Melo Junior ◽  
Teresa Cristina Rodrigues Dos Santos Franco ◽  
Jaiver Efren Jaimes Figueroa
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Clean Development Mechanism ◽  
Wind Farms ◽  
Paris Agreement ◽  
The State ◽  
Ghg Emission ◽  
Carbon Dioxide Equivalent ◽  
Development Mechanism

<p>As Nações Unidas, desde 1972, vêm buscando solucionar o problema da mudança climática no planeta. Mais recentemente, em 2015, durante o “Acordo de Paris”, foram definidos objetivos de longo prazo para limitar as emissões de Gases do Efeito Estufa (GEEs). Para auxiliar os países integrantes da Convenção Quadro das Nações Unidas sobre Mudança do Clima (UNFCCC) no cumprimento dessas metas, foi criado o Mecanismo de Desenvolvimento Limpo (MDL). No trabalho apresentado, utilizou-se a chamada ACM0002, ferramenta do MDL, para estimar as reduções de  emissões de GEEs oportunizados por usinas eólicas que fazem parte da matriz elétrica Maranhense, bem como o potencial ainda a ser explorado com o crecimento da matriz até 2027. O valor estimado dessas reduções de emissões foi de 6,20 milhões de toneladas de dióxido de carbono equivalente. O estudo contribuiu com dados relevantes para o setor energético renovável, bem como para a gestão ambiental regional. Poderá, ainda,  auxiliar na implementação de novos projetos MDL no Estado do Maranhão.</p><p> </p><p><em>CLEAN DEVELOPMENT MECHANISM (CDM) IN THE STATE OF MARANHÃO: POTENTIAL OF THE ELECTRIC MATRIX FOR BUSINESS IN THE CARBON MARKET</em></p><p>ABSTRACT</p><p>As a United Nations since 1972, it has been seeking to solve the problem of climate change on the planet. More recently, in 2015, during the “Paris Agreement”, long-term goals to limit green house gas (GHG) restrictions were considered. To assist the member countries of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) without meeting these goals, the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) was created. In the work presented, the so-called ACM0002, a CDM tool, was used to estimate the GHG emission reductions provided by wind farms that are part of the Maranhense electrical matrix, as well as the potential yet to be explored with the matrix's growth until 2027. The estimated value of these use reductions was 6.20 million tons of carbon dioxide equivalent. The study contributed relevant data for the renewable energy sector as well as for regional environmental management. It also assisted in the implementation of new CDM projects in the state of Maranhão.</p><p> </p>

Social Media and Environmental Activism: Framing Climate Change on Facebook by Global NGOs

2020 ◽  
pp. 107554702097164
Author(s):  
Hong Tien Vu ◽  
Matthew Blomberg ◽  
Hyunjin Seo ◽  
Yuchen Liu ◽  
Fatemeh Shayesteh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Social Media ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
Developing Nations ◽  
Climate Impacts ◽  
Environmental Activism ◽  
Persuasive Messages ◽  
Impact Action ◽  
Practical Implications

Analyzing Facebook content produced by 289 global climate nonprofits from 18 countries, this study investigates these NGOs’ framing of climate change. Of the three protest frames, diagnostic was most popular. Of the three aspects of climate change, including impact, action, and efficacy, action was used most frequently, while efficacy was the least common. Messages refer to effects at the present time. NGOs from developed countries are more likely than those from developing nations to discuss climate actions. Climate impacts are more likely to appear in these NGOs’ persuasive messages than efficacy. Theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document