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
×

39 results

Page 1 of 2

International Courts versus Non-Compliance Mechanisms
  • Comparative Advantages in Strengthening Treaty Implementation
  • Edited by Christina Voigt, Caroline Foster
  • Coming soon
  • Expected online publication date: January 2024
  • Print publication: 31 January 2024
  • This book explores the best mechanisms for helping bring about compliance with international treaties. In recent years, many international treaties have included non-compliance mechanisms (NCMs) to facilitate implementation and promote parties' compliance with their obligations. These NCMs exist alongside the formal dispute resolution processes of international courts and tribunals. The authors bring together a wide legal and geographical spectrum of views from different parts of the world representing novel insights into NCMs' contribution to treaty implementation and compliance. The research has cast important light on how procedural innovations may help render NCMs more effective, as well as on the circumstances in which they may be needed, including particularly where nations share common interests, populations are interdependent, and implementation makes significant administrative, regulatory and political demands. This title is also available as Open Access on Cambridge Core.

  • 2 - Oceans and Climate Change

  • from Part II - Tackling Multiple Pressures on the Oceans
  • Edited by Froukje Maria Platjouw, Norwegian Institute for Water Research (NIVA), Alla Pozdnakova, Universitetet i Oslo
  • Book: The Environmental Rule of Law for Oceans
  • Published online: 21 February 2023
  • Print publication: 20 April 2023, pp 17-30
    • Chapter
      • You have access
      • Open access
    • PDF
    • HTML
    • Export citation

  • Summary

    The projected impacts of climate change and greenhouse gas emissions pose a significant threat to marine life and biodiversity. Ocean warming might affect fish stocks, their health and migratory routes. Ocean acidification and de-oxygenation are two phenomena that affect certain marine species as well as entire marine ecosystems. Rebuilding of overexploited and depleted fisheries and managing fisheries sustainably will require comprehensive governance structures for port, flag, coastal and market States, which also need to address the causes and impacts of climate change. Addressing both concerns under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) could open opportunities for comprehensive and synergetic regulation. This Chapter addresses potential synergies between oceans and climate governance. Suggestions to this end include (i) increasing ocean-based renewable energy, (ii) decarbonizing ocean-based transport, (iii) pursuing integrated management of fisheries and aquaculture, and (iv) enhancing CO2 uptake in ocean ecosystems.

  • Introduction - International Courts and the Environment: the Quest for Legitimacy

  • Edited by Christina Voigt, Universitetet i Oslo
  • Book: International Judicial Practice on the Environment
  • Published online: 15 April 2019
  • Print publication: 18 April 2019, pp 1-22

  • Summary

    No special international court exists for international environmental affairs, so states and other actors address transboundary issues in international and regional courts (ICs), leading to challenges via various fora and strategies. In the absence of a specialist court, ICs try different avenues to achieve desired outcomes, with constructive effects. They may be asked to handle similar environmental legal questions, leading to more diverse judicial practice. Those addressing similar issues refer to each others' judgments, to counter the fragmented structure of international law and lead to more consistency. ICs' diverse approach to such claims should be seen as an advantage rather than a constraint. There are also challenges. In the absence of an international environmental court, disputes are addressed by ICs with general jurisdiction (ICJ) or with specific non-environmental competence (WTO Dispute Settlement Body or regional human rights courts). Environmental legal issues arise before ICs as either justified exceptions or extensions of legal rights and obligations, not as the basis of claims. Such legitimacy questions are addressed in the six parts of the book.

International Judicial Practice on the Environment
  • Questions of Legitimacy
  • Edited by Christina Voigt
  • Published online: 15 April 2019
  • Print publication: 18 April 2019
  • More and more environmental cases are being heard and decided by international courts and tribunals which lack special environmental competence. This situation raises fundamental questions of legitimacy of the environmental practice of international courts. This book addresses inter alia questions of who has legal standing to bring an environmental claim before an international court, on which legal norms is the case decided and whether judges have the necessary expertise to adjudicate environmental cases of often complex nature. It analyses which challenges international courts face, which possibilities they have and which advances international judicial practice has been able to make in protecting the environment. Through the prism of legitimacy important insights emerge as to whether international courts and tribunals are fit for addressing some of the most pressing global challenges of our time.

  • ‘Dynamic Differentiation’: The Principles of CBDR-RC, Progression and Highest Possible Ambition in the Paris Agreement

  • Christina Voigt, Felipe Ferreira
  • Journal: Transnational Environmental Law / Volume 5 / Issue 2 / October 2016
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 October 2016, pp. 285-303

  • The Paris Agreement has struck a careful balance between the need for ambitious and effective climate action and for fair effort sharing among parties based on differentiation. This article provides an overview of the negotiation history of differentiation and analyzes the ‘dynamic differentiation’ as built into the architecture of the Agreement. While being set against the normative background of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the Paris Agreement adopts a more diversified way of differential treatment among parties, approaching it in three complementary ways: firstly, on a principled basis, reflecting common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities (CBDR-RC), in the light of different national circumstances; secondly, in the content of its articles, in particular on mitigation, finance and transparency; and thirdly, on the basis of the principles of progression and highest possible ambition, which represent new and dynamic aspects of differentiation. The authors argue that ‘highest possible ambition’ is reflective of a duty of care that states now need to exercise. It implies a due diligence standard, which requires each government to act in proportion to the risk at stake and to take all appropriate and adequate climate measures according to its responsibility and its best capabilities. By expecting parties to apply this standard at each successive preparation of nationally determined contributions (NDCs), and to progress beyond previous ones, the Paris Agreement has set up reiterative processes, an ‘international normative pull’ and a collective learning environment. This, in turn, creates a reflexive approach to parties’ determination of effort, promoting the evolution of voluntary cooperative behaviour.

Page 1 of 2