Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

58 results

Page 1 of 3

  • Agricultural Exceptionalism in the Climate Change Treaties

  • Alexander Zahar
  • Journal:
    Transnational Environmental Law / Volume 12 / Issue 1 / March 2023
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    11 January 2023, pp. 42-70
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • HTML
    • Export citation

  • Agricultural emissions in most countries have been increasing against a backdrop of decreasing non-agricultural emissions. The climate change treaties contain a qualification that appears to exempt the agricultural sector from mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions where there is a ‘threat to food production’. This potential mitigation exception gives rise to the risk that states will invoke a threat to food production in order to shield their agricultural sector from intensifying mitigation pressure. A systematic analysis of documentation issued pursuant to the climate treaties reveals that many states, both developed and developing, have made statements suggesting that their agricultural sector is relieved of some or all of the pressure placed on other economic sectors to deliver mitigation outcomes. However, this concern that mitigation of agricultural emissions will threaten food production is only weakly supported, even as it threatens achievement of the Paris Agreement's goal of keeping global warming ‘well below 2°C’.

  • ~ B ~ - Environmental Impact Assessment for Greenhouse Gas Emissions Is Pie in the Sky

  • from Debate 11: Climate Assessment
  • Edited by Benoit Mayer, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Alexander Zahar
  • Book:
    Debating Climate Law
    Published online:
    15 June 2021
    Print publication:
    24 June 2021, pp 297-309

  • Summary

    An increasing number of jurisdictions are using environmental impact assessment as a tool for climate change mitigation (in brief, ‘Climate Assessment’, or CA). This chapter debates whether this is a legal obligation, or whether this even makes sense. Benoit Mayer argues that CA is emerging as a rule of customary international law, and that, moreover, it is a potentially useful mitigation tool. Alexander Zahar, by contrast, questions the meaningfulness of CA, arguing that it is impossible to determine what constitutes a significant, excessive, or disproportionate emission of greenhouse gases in the case of a proposed activity subject to CA, or at all.

  • ~ B ~ - Historical Responsibility for Climate Change Is Political Propaganda

  • from Debate 7: Historical Responsibility
  • Edited by Benoit Mayer, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Alexander Zahar
  • Book:
    Debating Climate Law
    Published online:
    15 June 2021
    Print publication:
    24 June 2021, pp 190-205

  • Summary

    This chapter debates historical responsibility for climate change. The argument from historical responsibility has a legal dimension, as it is often used to assert the heightened mitigation and compensation obligations of some states. The debate here begins with the question of whether certain historically high-emitting states are legally bound to provide some sort of compensation for past levels of greenhouse gas emissions. Sarah Mason-Case and Julia Dehm answer this question in the affirmative, arguing that international law, but also notions of justice, provide bases for recognizing historical responsibility and for claiming reparation for the wrongs inflicted. Alexander Zahar, on the negative side, attacks the assumption that historical emissions and their growth rate since Industrialization are known accurately enough, such as to allow for blame to be pinned on certain countries and not others.

  • Conclusion

  • Edited by Benoit Mayer, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Alexander Zahar
  • Book:
    Debating Climate Law
    Published online:
    15 June 2021
    Print publication:
    24 June 2021, pp 431-434

  • Summary

    This conclusion highlights the key themes developed throughout the book. It identifies three main questions to which climate law scholarship seeks to respond: What are states’ obligations? What are the foundations of climate law? How does climate change transform the law?

  • Reflection 4: Climate Finance

  • Edited by Benoit Mayer, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Alexander Zahar
  • Book:
    Debating Climate Law
    Published online:
    15 June 2021
    Print publication:
    24 June 2021, pp 365-378

  • Summary

    This chapter outlines the most debatable points regarding the legal foundations of climate finance, focusing primarily on the provisions of the UNFCCC and Paris Agreement as well as associated instruments. The legally relevant debates about climate finance come down to the question of whether there is an obligation for developed countries to provide climate finance to developing countries, and, if so, what it consists in. In this respect, the chapter – after outlining the main legal provisions – discusses debates about the following points: The chapter also proposes possible future directions for legal reflection. Owing to this volume’s focus, the chapter does not cover all provisions related to climate finance but only the aspects that are legally controversial.

Page 1 of 3