Climate Justice Under the Paris Agreement: Framework and Substance

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 233-247
Author(s):  
T. Tunbi Onifade
Keyword(s):  
Paris Agreement ◽  
Climate Justice

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 Coal, Climate Justice, and the Cultural Politics of Energy Transition

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 149-168 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Brown ◽  
Samuel J. Spiegel
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Cultural Politics ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Fossil Fuel ◽  
Energy Transition ◽  
Paris Agreement ◽  
Climate Justice ◽  
The World ◽  
Phase Out ◽  
Development Agendas

In the wake of the Paris Agreement on climate change, promises to phase out coal-fired power have suggested cause for optimism around energy transition globally. However, coal remains entangled with contentious development agendas in many parts of the world, while fossil fuel industries continue to flourish. This article discusses these entanglements through a climate justice lens that engages the cultural politics surrounding coal and energy transition. We highlight how recent struggles around phasing out coal have stimulated renewed critical debates around colonialism, empire, and capitalism more broadly, recognizing climate change as an intersectional issue encompassing racial, gender, and economic justice. With social movements locked in struggles to resist the development or expansion of coal mines, power plants, and associated infrastructure, we unpack tensions that emerge as transnational alliances connect disparate communities across the world. Our conclusion signals the need for greater critical engagement with how intersecting inequalities are coded into the cultural politics of coal, and how this shapes efforts to pursue a just transition.

From Paris to Poland

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 27-46
Author(s):  
Tim Cadman ◽  
Klaus Radunsky ◽  
Andrea Simonelli ◽  
Tek Maraseni
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Greenhouse Gas Emissions ◽  
Greenhouse Gas ◽  
Paris Agreement ◽  
Climate Justice ◽  
Gas Emissions ◽  
Social Quality ◽  
United Nations Framework Convention

This article tracks the intergovernmental negotiations aimed at combatting human-induced greenhouse gas emissions under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change from COP21 and the creation of the Paris Agreement in 2015 to COP24 in Katowice, Poland in 2018. These conferences are explored in detail, focusing on the Paris Rulebook negotiations around how to implement market- and nonmarket-based approaches to mitigating climate change, as set out in Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, and the tensions regarding the inclusion of negotiating text safeguarding human rights. A concluding section comments on the collapse of Article 6 discussions and the implications for climate justice and social quality for the Paris Agreement going forward.

Assessing Transnational Climate Governance

2019 ◽  
pp. 161-201
Author(s):  
Alix Dietzel
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Paris Agreement ◽  
Climate Justice ◽  
Final Part ◽  
Climate Governance ◽  
Transnational Actors ◽  
Insight Into ◽  
Climate Change Governance ◽  
Made In ◽  
Transnational Climate Governance

Chapter Six assesses to what extent transnational actors enable the three demands of climate justice set out in Chapter Three. The assessment makes use of both existing climate change governance research and ten examples of transnational climate change governance initiatives, providing an insight into how transnational climate change governance has developed and where it stands today. Chapter Six focuses on one demand of climate justice at a time, assessing both what has been promised by transnational actors and what has been achieved so far. The chapter puts forward that although there is room for cautious optimism, overall transnational actors fail to fully enable any of the three demands of justice. The final part of Chapter Six summarises the findings made in Part II and considers what role both multilateral and transnational actors might play in the post-Paris Agreement regime. This is expanded on in the Conclusion of the book.

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

2019 ◽  
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.

Fairness, equity, and justice in the Paris Agreement: Terms and operationalization of differentiation

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-24
Author(s):  
Ulrike Will ◽  
Cornelia Manger-Nestler
Keyword(s):  
Paris Agreement ◽  
Climate Justice ◽  
Burden Sharing ◽  
Financial Transfers ◽  
Climate Agreements ◽  
Common Criteria ◽  
Long Run ◽  
International Climate Agreements ◽  
Nationally Determined Contributions ◽  
Self Differentiation

Abstract The Paris Agreement (2015) and the Rulebook (2018) introduce the terms ‘fair’ and ‘climate justice’ for burden-sharing and differentiation. The article analyses to what extent these terms amend the existing term ‘equity’ and the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR). The principle of CBDR is an open balancing concept with one clear requirement: Contracting parties contribute to climate protection to a different extent. The terms which appear to have normative weight (‘equity’ and ‘climate justice’), in international climate agreements, are limited to their procedural relevance. They aim at an equal participation in sub-institutions of the Paris Agreement or at making arguments for differentiation transparent. The term ‘fair’ focuses on the discourse on individual concepts of differentiation and on narrowing down common criteria in the long-run. Considering the operationalization of differentiation beyond the terms, it becomes clear that criteria are hardly specified, not weighted against each other and that self-differentiation dominates pre-defined criteria, in particular within the central rules on mitigation and financial transfers. However, the Paris Agreement still specifies criteria with different relevance: Capabilities are followed by vulnerability and the responsibility for emissions. After all, the prevailing procedural terms and rules of differentiation might give orientation, inspire subsequent decisions and the nationally determined contributions (NDCs). The more transparent the various specifications of differentiation are, the more the rules of differentiation can be narrowed. If the reference of criteria to individual states is possible, the Paris Agreement might be implemented effectively which allows for better compliance with the Agreement.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document