This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Sea level rise presents numerous climate justice issues. Some of the venues where people are addressing the injustices of climatechange are UN climate negotiations, the courts, and community organizing efforts around the world. Climate justice research can help inform these conversations.
Fossil fuels are the main driver of climatechange and the terrifying effects of it that we see happening across the world. That makes this dataset a powerful tool for understanding how each of these entity’s heat-trapping emissions have contributed to climatechange. The fossil fuel industry knew that too.
On March 29, 2023, the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) adopted a resolution requesting an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on States obligations regarding climatechange. ii) Peoples and individuals of the present and future generations affected by the adverse effects of climatechange?
Plans countries have submitted under the ParisAgreement would lead to an increase in overall emissions by 2030 and that trend desperately needs to be reversed. Small scale fixes are what the industries raking in billions of dollars in profit want, so that regulations don’t cut into their bottom line.
While nonbinding, the unanimous advisory opinion offers important support for small island nations facing climate impacts and raises the bar for other nations to reduce their global warming emissions to protect the world’s oceans. Brings together international climateagreements. Lays out polluting nations’ obligations.
UN Photo/ICJ-CIJ/ Frank van Beek This blog post is Part 3 of a three-part series highlighting the main legal arguments presented during the hearings of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on the request for an advisory opinion regarding the obligations of States with respect to climatechange.
If policymakers can reduce short-term, high-impact heat-trapping gases such as methane we can limit warming and keep the ParisAgreement goals within reach. Of course, we also will have to make sharp cuts in CO2 emissions, the main driver of climatechange. The planet has already warmed 1.1
Mexico is also highly vulnerable to climatechange. What’s the state of climate policy in Mexico? The climate issue has to be placed in the broader context of Mexico’s situation. Because of its geography, Mexico is vulnerable to climate impacts.
On May 21, 2024, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) delivered a long-awaited Advisory Opinion on climatechange and international law. This marks the first time that an international tribunal has issued an advisory opinion on State obligations regarding climatechange mitigation.
Can the new advisory opinion interpreting the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) move us beyond the lethargy of unmet climatechange policy needs ? By accepting the COSIS request, ITLOS boldly advanced the international law of climatechange to take full account of its harmful impacts on the marine environment.
It also wants to destroy environmental regulation, especially climate law. There’s no logical connection between a belief in authoritarian government, upholding traditional hierarchies, and views about protecting the environment or the reality of climatechange. Project 2025 favors authoritarian presidential rule.
Despite all the work, all the dedication, of thousands of people around the world, there’s a good chance we’ll blow past the ParisAgreement’s targets. There would be value in slowing down climatechange even if we can’t change how bad it will ultimately get. Suppose we do miss those targets?
Falls Behind Majority of the World in Reducing CO2 Emissions: The Case for Rejoining the ParisAgreement. appeared first on ClimateChange Blawg: ClimateChange Law Blogs, News & Insights. Note you can also download this article as a Word Document or PDF with full footnotes/endnotes below the post.
Trading in disinformation In its climate lobbying report, ExxonMobil deemed 52 associations “aligned” for acknowledging the risks of climatechange, publicly backing the ParisAgreement goal of limiting average global warming to well below 2 degrees Celsius and taking steps to reduce carbon emissions.
Today, Gav Ward, a legal futurist and digital strategist, steps into this lineage with […] The post The Next Nikola Tesla or Marie Curie of ClimateChange Legal Innovation? Gav Ward Proposes Global Law Approach appeared first on ClimateChange Blawg: ClimateChange Law Blogs, News & Insights.
This ruling was released in the context of a surge in climate litigation cases in France and all over world. For France, the “Affaire du Siècle” case was filed in the Administrative Court of Paris in May 2019 by four NGOs against the government for its failure to act on climatechange.
They’re also hoping to circumnavigate efforts to hold them accountable for their contribution to climatechange. Of course, the earth’s climate doesn’t care if emissions are less “intense” relative to another company or production chain. billion last week. 2023 will be a crucial juncture in a long, bumpy trip.
In a transformative moment for European and global climate litigation, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) ruled today that the state has a positive duty to adopt, and effectively implement in practice, regulations and measures capable of mitigating the existing and potentially irreversible future effects of climatechange.
This is in total opposition to the US commitment under the ParisAgreement to achieve a 50-52 percent emissions reduction below 2005 levels by 2030, and net-zero by 2050. These projections show that without additional policies or incentives, the US is very much in danger of not meeting our climate goals.
In this case, environmental and human rights organizations, including Greenpeace and Oxfam (“the plaintiffs”), had taken legal action against the Government of Spain, alleging inadequate action on climatechange. However, the Supreme Court found that the Spanish Government had complied with the ParisAgreement and the EU legislation.
Climatechange is well understood in some ways, but it will set off a chain of reactions that we only partly understand. It’s also difficult to predict the future of ecosystems, future energy prices, technological changes, and a host of other factors relevant to environmental law.
The Institute for Legal Reform, focused on tort reform, and the Chamber Litigation Center, which represents the Chamber in its many filings against environmental regulators and advocacy groups and has attacked climate accountability litigation , are both headed by the Chamber’s general counsel. The organization received between $2.5
Even if the resolution is adopted, it would not be binding in the same way as a formal international agreement, but it could still impact how countries regulate marine CDR. The Intergovernmental Panel on ClimateChange has concluded that CDR will be needed, alongside deep emissions cuts, to limit global warming to 1.5
Lawyers, bar associations, and law societies have an important but not fully recognized role to play in achieving the net zero goal in the ParisAgreement. ClimateChange as an Increasingly Common Feature of Law Practice Climatechange is no longer an issue of concern only to environmental and energy lawyers.
On 21 May 2024, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) delivered its much anticipated Advisory Opinion on ClimateChange. For instance, Yemen has signed and ratified UNCLOS, but not the ParisAgreement. This is evident from the treaties ITLOS refers to. Why is this important?
Last year, climate negotiators in Glasgow finalized the ParisAgreement rulebook for international cooperation through carbon markets, clearing the way for the expansion of emissions trading and carbon pricing worldwide. – Emissions trading as part of a portfolio of climate policies. Implications for China.
Yet, both the United Nations Framework Convention on ClimateChange (UNFCCC) and the ParisAgreement treat the ocean primarily as a sink of instrumental value to the climate system. The opinion clearly states that complying with the ParisAgreement is not sufficient for compliance with UNCLOS (para.
With increasing pressure to fight climatechange, scientists, and leaders agree that carbon capture, use, and storage (CCUS) is a cost-effective solution to meet emissions goals made under the ParisAgreement. .
History of the Case Background to the Claim In April 2021, a group of plaintiffs led by the Czech Climate Litigation Association ( Klimatick aloba R ), and including a municipality and several individuals, filed a case against the central government of the Czech Republic and four subsidiary ministries for their inaction on climatechange.
Despite the ongoing debate on whether ITLOS has jurisdiction to issue an advisory opinion on climatechange, if the Tribunal asserts jurisdiction (on jurisdiction, see here and here) , there is still much to uncover. However, ITLOS is not responsible for implementing the UNFCCC or the ParisAgreement.
Switzerland , the Grand Chamber established that climatechange is “one of the most pressing issues of our times” and poses a threat to human rights. Notably, the Court responded to (and preempted) criticism as to the undemocratic role of courts in relation to climatechange (paras. 410-414 and 449-451).
That’s because the Canadian agency that is supposed to inform public and private sector decision-making on energy development and climate action continues to provide scenarios that are both unrealistic and pessimistic, and are lacking critical information, such as Canada’s expected greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs).
In part one of this series we introduced you to the huge role that the Canadian financial sector plays in exacerbating the climate crisis. Climatechange could have some very significant negative impacts on the Canadian economy, and therefore your money. In this blog, we’ll discuss how climatechange poses a risk to finance.
In 2019 and again in 2020 , Shell found that CAPP was out of step with Shell’s principles because of lack of support for the ParisAgreement and climate policies such as carbon pricing. Here are three ways Shell’s climate principles are just greenwashing: . and Canada achieving net-zero emissions by 2050.
In this blog post, we will briefly explain (i) the background of climatechange laws in Colombia, (ii) the nature and reach of the ‘ Acción de Cumplimiento ,’ and (iii) the two judgments and their implications for climate action in Colombia. Decree 298 of 2016 on the National ClimateChange System.
At COP27 this November in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt, a call to action to shift all capital for climate came into the spotlight. C) of the ParisAgreement has significant implications for how the global financial system works and will be a centrepiece of the coming years. C) of the ParisAgreement. Article 2.1(C)
While the United States Supreme Court yesterday delivered a major setback to the EPA’s ability to regulate greenhouse gas emissions in West Virginia. EPA , courts in other countries this week have issued decisions that demonstrate that courts worldwide remain an important forum for the potential advancement of climate rights.
Canada promised to cut its greenhouse gas emissions after the 2016 ParisAgreement. It was part of the global agreement where 195 countries all agreed to reduce their emissions, and Canada has set this promise into law. Why financial regulation? The government sets regulations to keep Canadians safe.
Canada finally has an all-star team ready to tackle the biggest gap in Canada’s climate plans: regulations that align Canada’s financial system with climate action. Canada’s financial system is under-regulated on climatechange. We have the opportunity to create a safe climate and stable economy.
Although Canadian financial institutions have taken baby steps to advance climate-aligned finance, regulations still lag behind international best practices. Canada’s financial sector continues to worsen the effects of climatechange and create systemic financial risks.
They are among the worst in the world, pumping $727 billion into fossil fuels since the ParisAgreement was signed, while scoring among the lowest on having policies to rectify this. Scotiabank CEO Brian Porter has also personally served as a cheerleader for oil interests, arguing for more pipelines and less regulation.
This will be the first climatechange case heard before the Supreme Court. Through May 2022, all existing climate litigation cases in Japan concern the construction or operation of coal-fired power plants and refer to citizens’ attempts to stop the use of coal. Japan’s climatechange context. Civil law cases.
Two thirds (65 per cent) support the government passing new sustainable finance regulations in the financial sector, with more preferring mandatory than voluntary regulations. The desire for mandatory regulations is driven by skepticism that financial institutions would respect voluntary regulations.
If all politics are local, but greenhouse gases find their way into the atmosphere’s international space, how can the global community act collectively on climatechange? The United Nations Framework Convention on ClimateChange (UNFCCC) declared climatechange a “common concern of mankind,” and committed 166 countries to tackling it.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 12,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content