Suchergebnisse

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 overall concept of 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.

Climate change is, undeniably, a global phenomenon, which requires timely and sincere global efforts and commitments to save the planet before it is too late. The island nations in the blue Pacific region are arguably experiencing the destructive nature of climate change more than any other nation in the world. Scientists warn that this slow-motion phenomenon is claiming entire nations, which will not exist on the face of the earth as early as next century. Sea-level rise is one of the biggest existential threats that the region is facing. Countries such as Tuvalu, Kiribati and Marshall Islands have already started sinking with their citizens looking for alternative countries. In Fiji, more than 200 low-lying villages are at risk of sinking and the government hopes to relocate these communities to higher ground, despite the pressure this would place on its weak economy. The relocatees will lose their most precious commodity, the land, which is their identity, status and source of survival. The other most precious commodity to which they attach a sense of belonging and will be lost for life are their ancestral homes, culture and traditional way of life. The relocation plan also creates distance between people and the sea, which is the source of their food. This article argues that despite being considered an effective adaptation mechanism to climate change, the relocation plan is facing multiple hurdles. The plan is far beyond the financial capacity and technical prowess of the Fijian government. The other possible alternative to mass relocation is strengthening the locally-made seawalls into strong durable structures, which can withstand the strength of cyclones and be an effective barrier to further shoreline erosion. The small island developing nations of the Pacific region will need financial and technical assistance from the industrialised nations to implement such a project successfully.

A review essay on books by (1) James M. Griffin, A Smart Energy Policy (New Haven, CT: Yale U Press, 2009); (2) Michael B. McElroy, Energy: Perspectives, Problems, and Prospects (New York: Oxford U Press, 2010); & (3) Charles Weiss & William B. Bonvilliank Structuring an Energy Technology Revolution (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2009).