Suchergebnisse

"The regulation of greenhouse gas emissions from international aviation and maritime transport has proved to be a difficult task for international climate negotiations such as the Paris Agreement in 2015. Almost two decades prior, Article 2.2 of the Kyoto Protocol excluded emissions from international aviation and maritime transport from its targets, delegating the negotiation of sector-specific regulations to the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and the International Maritime Organization (IMO), respectively. However, progress at these venues has also been limited. Regime Interaction and Climate Change maps out the legal frameworks in the Climate, ICAO and IMO regimes, and explores the law-making process for the regulation of international aviation and maritime transport through the lenses of fragmentation of international law and regime interaction. The book sheds light on how interaction between these three regimes occurs, what the consequences of such interaction are and how they can be managed to resolve conflicts and promote synergies. This book will be of great interest to scholars of international environmental law and governance, climate change policy and climate change law."--Provided by publisher.

Introduction and context -- Analytical framework, key concepts and methodology -- Law-making at the climate, ICAO and IMO regimes -- Bunker fuels at the intersection of international legal regimes -- The consequences of regime interaction -- Managing interaction -- Conclusions and prospects

Introduction and context -- Analytical framework, key concepts and methodology -- Law-making at the climate, ICAO and IMO regimes -- Bunker fuels at the intersection of international legal regimes -- The consequences of regime interaction -- Managing interaction -- Conclusions and prospects

Introduction: Loss and Damage after Paris: All Talk and No Action? / Morten Broberg and Beatriz Martinez Romera -- 1. Insurance schemes for loss and damage: fools{u2019} gold? / Linnéa Nordlander, Melanie Pill and Beatriz Martinez Romera -- 2. Parametric loss and damage insurance schemes as a means to enhance climate change resilience in developing countries / Morten Broberg -- 3. Non-economic loss and damage: lessons from displacement in the Caribbean / Adelle Thomas and Lisa Benjamin -- 4. Loss and damage in the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (Working Group II): a text-mining analysis / Kees van der Geest and Koko Warner -- 5. Loss & damage from climate change: from concept to remedy? / Meinhard Doelle and Sara Seck -- 6. Between negotiations and litigation: Vanuatu{u2019}s perspective on loss and damage from climate change / Margaretha Wewerinke-Singh and Diana Hinge Salili -- 7. Interpreting the UNFCCC{u2019}s provisions on {u2018}mitigation{u2019} and {u2018}adaptation{u2019} in light of the Paris Agreement{u2019}s provision on {u2018}loss and damage{u2019} / Morten Broberg -- 8. A human rights-based approach to loss and damage under the climate change regime / Patrick Toussaint and Adrian Martínez Blanco -- 9. Loss and damage: an opportunity for transformation? / Erin Roberts and Mark Pelling.

Although the existing literature identifies a fuel levy imposed by means of a global agreement as the most efficient policy for carbon pricing in the maritime sector, scholars and policy makers debate the possibility for regional measures to be introduced in case a global agreement cannot be achieved. This debate has highlighted several economic, legal, and political challenges that the implementation of an efficient and effective regional scheme would have to face. This paper compares the relative performance of various regional measures for carbon pricing based on the following criteria: jurisdictional basis, data availability, environmental effectiveness and avoidance strategies, impact on competitiveness, differentiation for developing countries, and incentives for reaching a global agreement. The main finding is that, if carefully designed, a cargo-based measure that covers the emissions released throughout the whole voyage to the cargo destination presents various advantages compared with other carbon pricing schemes. These advantages have been largely ignored in the literature.

The Paris Agreement aims to hold the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels (and pursue efforts to limit it to 1.5°C), but does not refer specifically to greenhouse gas emissions from the international maritime transport sector. This Report outlines the findings of a project commissioned by the Nordic Council of Ministers, focusing on opportunities for Nordic countries to achieve a transition to low-carbon shipping at national, regional and global scales. It is informed by discussions at the World Maritime University in Malmö in December 2016 between representatives of governments, businesses, NGOs and the research community. The Report presents a low-carbon roadmap for shipping with actions and outcomes concerning low-carbon technology, ship operations, finance, public policy, and public-private partnerships.

Anthropogenic CO2 emission is the main contributor to Ocean Acidification (OA) because the dissolution of this gas in seawater leads to changes in its chemistry resulting in seawater acidity and a lowering of the calcium carbonate saturation state. Apart from impacting severely life at sea, OA acts in conjunction with other environmental drivers connected to climate, such as increased ocean temperature and lower oxygen content, resulting in combined synergistic or combined negative effects to marine life. Despite the increasing scientific certainty on its scale and consequences, and on the need for immediate action, OA stands as a highly overlooked item on the environmental agenda, generally neglected by policymakers at the international, regional and domestic level. Scholars from different disciplines have pointed out the key challenges in dealing with OA in the current fragmented governance landscape, and highlighted that a coordinated governance effort is needed to address OA effectively. At the international level OA is neither adequately integrated in the climate change regime, which is considered a crucial forum for OA, nor in other multilateral environmental treaties, such as the Convention of Biological Diversity, or the Law of the Sea. At the European level, national policies and legislation addressing OA remains scarce and uncoordinated. ; peer-reviewed

Plastics is all the rage, and mitigating marine litter is topping the agenda for nations pushing issues such as ocean acidification, or even climate change, away from the public consciousness. We are personally directly affected by plastics and charismatic megafauna is dying from it, and it is something that appears to be doable. So, who cares about the issue of ocean acidification anymore? We all should. The challenge is dual in the fact that is both invisible to the naked eye and therefore not felt like a pressing issue to the public, thereby not reaching the top of the agenda of policy makers; but also that it is framed in the climate change narrative of fear - whereby it instills in a fight-or-flight response in the public, resulting in their avoidance of the issue because they feel they are unable to take action that have results. In this article, we argue that the effective global environmental governance of ocean acidification, though critical to address, mitigate against and adapt to, is hindered by the both this lack of perception of urgency in the general public, fueled by a lack of media coverage, as well as a fight-or-flight response resulting from fear. We compare this to the more media friendly and plastics problem that is tangible and manageable. We report on a media plots of plastics and ocean acidification coverage over time and argue that the issue needs to be detangled from climate change and framed as its own issue to reach the agenda at a global level, making it manageable to assess and even care about for policy makers and the public alike? ; Who cares about ocean acidification in the Plasticene? ; Funded by the Horizon 2020 Framework Programme of the European Union. ; publishedVersion

Ocean acidification (OA) is a global problem with profoundly negative environmental, social and economic consequences. From a governance perspective, there is a need to ensure a coordinated effort to directly address it. This study reviews 90 legislative documents from 17 countries from the European Economic Area (EEA) and the UK that primarily border the sea. The primary finding from this study is that the European national policies and legislation addressing OA is at best uncoordinated. Although OA is acknowledged at the higher levels of governance, its status as an environmental challenge is greatly diluted at the European Union Member State level. As a notable exception within the EEA, Norway seems to have a proactive approach towards legislative frameworks and research aimed towards further understanding OA. On the other hand, there was a complete lack of, or inadequate reporting in the Marine Strategy Framework Directive by the majority of the EU Member States, with the exception of Italy and the Netherlands. We argue that the problems associated with OA and the solutions needed to address it are unique and cannot be bundled together with traditional climate change responses and measures. Therefore, European OA-related policy and legislation must reflect this and tailor their actions to mitigate OA to safeguard marine ecosystems and societies. A stronger and more coordinated approach is needed to build environmental, economic and social resilience of the observed and anticipated changes to the coastal marine systems. ; peer-reviewed

Ocean acidification (OA) is a global problem with profoundly negative environmental, social and economic consequences. From a governance perspective, there is a need to ensure a coordinated effort to directly address it. This study reviews 90 legislative documents from 17 countries from the European Economic Area (EEA) and the UK that primarily border the sea. The primary finding from this study is that the European national policies and legislation addressing OA is at best uncoordinated. Although OA is acknowledged at the higher levels of governance, its status as an environmental challenge is greatly diluted at the European Union Member State level. As a notable exception within the EEA, Norway seems to have a proactive approach towards legislative frameworks and research aimed towards further understanding OA. On the other hand, there was a complete lack of, or inadequate reporting in the Marine Strategy Framework Directive by the majority of the EU Member States, with the exception of Italy and the Netherlands. We argue that the problems associated with OA and the solutions needed to address it are unique and cannot be bundled together with traditional climate change responses and measures. Therefore, European OA-related policy and legislation must reflect this and tailor their actions to mitigate OA to safeguard marine ecosystems and societies. A stronger and more coordinated approach is needed to build environmental, economic and social resilience of the observed and anticipated changes to the coastal marine systems. ; publishedVersion

Ocean acidification (OA) is a global problem with profoundly negative environmental, social and economic consequences. From a governance perspective, there is a need to ensure a coordinated effort to directly address it. This study reviews 90 legislative documents from 17 countries from the European Economic Area (EEA) and the UK that primarily border the sea. The primary finding from this study is that the European national policies and legislation addressing OA is at best uncoordinated. Although OA is acknowledged at the higher levels of governance, its status as an environmental challenge is greatly diluted at the European Union Member State level. As a notable exception within the EEA, Norway seems to have a proactive approach towards legislative frameworks and research aimed towards further understanding OA. On the other hand, there was a complete lack of, or inadequate reporting in the Marine Strategy Framework Directive by the majority of the EU Member States, with the exception of Italy and the Netherlands. We argue that the problems associated with OA and the solutions needed to address it are unique and cannot be bundled together with traditional climate change responses and measures. Therefore, European OA-related policy and legislation must reflect this and tailor their actions to mitigate OA to safeguard marine ecosystems and societies. A stronger and more coordinated approach is needed to build environmental, economic and social resilience of the observed and anticipated changes to the coastal marine systems. ; publishedVersion

Ocean acidification (OA) is a global problem with profoundly negative environmental, social and economic consequences. From a governance perspective, there is a need to ensure a coordinated effort to directly address it. This study reviews 90 legislative documents from 17 countries from the European Economic Area (EEA) and the UK that primarily border the sea. The primary finding from this study is that the European national policies and legislation addressing OA is at best uncoordinated. Although OA is acknowledged at the higher levels of governance, its status as an environmental challenge is greatly diluted at the European Union Member State level. As a notable exception within the EEA, Norway seems to have a proactive approach towards legislative frameworks and research aimed towards further understanding OA. On the other hand, there was a complete lack of, or inadequate reporting in the Marine Strategy Framework Directive by the majority of the EU Member States, with the exception of Italy and the Netherlands. We argue that the problems associated with OA and the solutions needed to address it are unique and cannot be bundled together with traditional climate change responses and measures. Therefore, European OA-related policy and legislation must reflect this and tailor their actions to mitigate OA to safeguard marine ecosystems and societies. A stronger and more coordinated approach is needed to build environmental, economic and social resilience of the observed and anticipated changes to the coastal marine systems. ; peer-reviewed

Ocean acidification (OA) is a global problem with profoundly negative environmental, social and economic consequences. From a governance perspective, there is a need to ensure a coordinated effort to directly address it. This study reviews 90 legislative documents from 17 countries from the European Economic Area (EEA) and the UK that primarily border the sea. The primary finding from this study is that the European national policies and legislation addressing OA is at best uncoordinated. Although OA is acknowledged at the higher levels of governance, its status as an environmental challenge is greatly diluted at the European Union Member State level. As a notable exception within the EEA, Norway seems to have a proactive approach towards legislative frameworks and research aimed towards further understanding OA. On the other hand, there was a complete lack of, or inadequate reporting in the Marine Strategy Framework Directive by the majority of the EU Member States, with the exception of Italy and the Netherlands. We argue that the problems associated with OA and the solutions needed to address it are unique and cannot be bundled together with traditional climate change responses and measures. Therefore, European OA-related policy and legislation must reflect this and tailor their actions to mitigate OA to safeguard marine ecosystems and societies. A stronger and more coordinated approach is needed to build environmental, economic and social resilience of the observed and anticipated changes to the coastal marine systems.