Suchergebnisse

Treaty Norms and Climate Change MitigationDarrel MoellendorfCurrently the international community is discussing the regulatory framework to replace the Kyoto Protocol after 2012. The unveiling of the new framework is scheduled to occur at the December 2009 COP in Copenhagen. The stakes are high, since any treaty will affect the development prospects of per capita poor countries and will determine the climate change–related costs borne by poor people for centuries to come. Failure to arrive at an agreement would have grave effects on the development prospects of poor countries, many of which will experience the most severe effects of climate change. The original UNFCCC treaty recognizes these kinds of concerns and requires that further treaty negotiation pay them heed. Any agreement will be required to conform to UNFCCC norms related to sustainable development and the equitable distribution of responsibilities. In this paper I argue that UNFCCC norms tightly constrain the range of acceptable agreements for the distribution of burdens to mitigate climate change. I conclude that any legitimate treaty must put much heavier mitigation burdens on industrialized developed countries. Of the various proposals that have received international attention, two in particular stand out as possibly satisfying UNFCCC norms regarding the distribution of responsibilities.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to present the University of Hawaii at Manoa's (UHM's) initiatives in achieving greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions on campus and at the state level.Design/methodology/approachUHM has taken a "lead by example" approach to climate change mitigation in terms of working to meet the American College & University Presidents Climate Commitment, becoming a founding member of The Climate Registry, and providing university leadership in crafting the policy to meet Hawaii's Climate Change Solutions Act of 2007.FindingsUniversities are uniquely poised to play a role in not only climate change research, education, and community outreach, but also in the regional and national policy‐making arena. In the absence of federal legislation, states are paving the way to create binding US GHG reduction commitments – making crafting innovative and appropriate policy all the more important and meaningful at the state and regional levels.Practical implicationsThe paper discusses the multi‐prong approach UHM is taking in addressing the threats of climate change: from on‐campus GHG measurements and reductions to helping guide overarching state policy.Originality/valueIslands are particularly vulnerable to the effects of climate change. UHM has taken a comprehensive approach to addressing climate change, from forming strategic partnerships with the electric utility, to developing campus and state GHG reduction strategies, to helping mobilize planning for impacts like sea‐level rise. This paper presents the efforts of UHM, including faculty, student and administration‐led projects, specifically illustrating the role of Universities in meeting GHG reduction commitments through a "lead by example" approach at both the university and state levels.

AbstractCourts and scholars have interpreted open-ended legal norms as imposing due diligence obligations on States and other entities to mitigate climate change. These obligations can be applied in two alternative ways: through holistic decisions, where courts determine the level of mitigation action required of defendants; or through atomistic decisions, where courts identify some of the measures that the defendant must take. This article shows that, whilst most holistic cases fail on jurisdictional grounds, atomistic cases frequently succeed. Overall, it is argued that atomistic litigation strategies provide more realistic and effective ways for plaintiffs to prompt enhanced mitigation action.