Jutta Brunnée

The UNFCCC as a negotiation forum: towards common but more differentiated responsibilities

The principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities (CBDRC) captures the idea that it is the common responsibility of states to protect and restore the environment but that the levels and forms of states’ individual responsibilities may be differentiated according to their own national circumstances. This principle has shaped the evolution of the climate regime and has played an important role in promoting compromise and agreement. It is argued that some twenty years after the adoption of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the principle of CBDRC remains as relevant as ever. The practice of Parties under the regime and, most recently, the concerted efforts to shape and flesh out the meaning of the principle, underscore the central role that it plays. At the same time, the binary understanding of CBDRC in the Kyoto Protocol is being replaced with a more nuanced, multifaceted understanding. The evolving interpretation of CBDRC is considered, and its continued relevance as the nucleus of a global burden-sharing regime for addressing climate change is demonstrated. Policy relevance The development of a common understanding of the principle of CBDRC is essential for the burden sharing and responsibilities under a future climate agreement. The CBDRC principle captures the idea that it is the common responsibility of states to protect and restore the environment, but that the levels and forms of states’ individual responsibilities may be differentiated according to their own national circumstances. This article informs the international climate change negotiations by considering the development of the principle of CBDRC under the UNFCCC over time. It is concluded that, although there has been a significant shift in how the principle is understood, it remains crucial to the integrity and stability of the climate regime.

A globally integrated climate policy for Canada

A Globally Integrated Climate Policy for Canada builds on the premise that Canada is in need of an approach that effectively integrates domestic priorities and global policy imperatives. Leading Canadian and international experts explore policy ideas and options from a range of disciplinary perspectives, including science, law, political science, economics, and sociology. Chapters explore the costs, opportunities, or imperatives to participate in international diplomatic initiatives and regimes, the opportunities and impacts of regional or global carbon markets, the proper mix of domestic policy tools, the parameters of Canadian energy policy, and the dynamics that propel or hinder the Canadian policy process.

Climate Change Liability: Transnational law and practice

Part I. Legal, Scientific and Policy Aspects: 1. Introduction Jutta Brunnee, Silke Goldberg, Richard Lord and Lavanya Rajamani 2. The scientific basis for climate change liability Myles Allen 3. Overview of legal issues relevant to climate change Jutta Brunnee, Silke Goldberg, Richard Lord and Lavanya Rajamani 4. Policy considerations Jutta Brunnee, Silke Goldberg, Richard Lord and Lavanya Rajamani Part II. National Laws: Asia and Pacific: 5. Australia Ross Abbs, Peter Cashman and Tim Stephens 6. China Deng Haifeng 7. India Lavanya Rajamani and Shibani Ghosh 8. Indonesia Mas Achmad Santosa, Rifqi Assegaf and Josi Khatarina 9. Japan Yukari Takamura Africa/Middle East: 10. Egypt Dalia Farouk and Lamiaa Youssef 11. Israel Issachar Rosen-Zvi 12. Kenya Patricia Kameri-Mbote and Collins Odote 13. South Africa Debbie Collier and Jan Glazewski Europe and Eurasia: 14. European Union Ludwig Kramer 15. Germany Hans-Joachim Koch, Michael Luhrs and Roda Verheyen 16. Poland Bartosz Kuras, Maciej Szewczyk, Dominik Walkowski, Tomasz Wardynski and Izabela Zielinska-Barlozek 17. English law Silke Goldberg and Richard Lord 18. Russia Fiona Mucklow Cheremeteff, Max Gutbrod, Daria Ratsiborinskaya and Sergei Sitnikov North America: 19. Canada Meinhard Doelle, Dennis Mahony and Alex Smith 20. United States of America Michael B. Gerrard and Gregory E. Wannier Central and South America: 21. Brazil Yanko Marcius de Alencar Xavier and Pedro Lucas de Moura Soares 22. Mexico Jose Juan Gonzalez Marquez.

Slouching Towards New ‘Just’ Wars: The Hegemon after September 11th

Twentieth-century international law was in large part a struggle to reduce the evil of war by codifying a restrictive doctrine of ‘just war’. The US Administration under George W. Bush has made concerted efforts to resurrect an expansive doctrine of just war: one rooted in broad moral, rather than restrictive legal, assessments of threats and punishments. Existing rules ask us to pause and inquire whether war is necessary and just. The debate over Iraq laid bare failings in these rules, requiring action. Yet the need to limit resort to war is as great as ever. Legal rules cannot prevent the use of force; nor can they prevent violations that states perceive to be in their fundamental interests. Rather, international law provides a framework against which states’ actions are assessed, and imposes a heavy burden of justification. International law requires more specific, testable claims than can be offered by the rhetoric of evil.

Acid rain and ozone layer depletion : international law and regulation

Although acid rain and ozone layer depletion are highly-publicized issues, they have not received the legal attention they warrant. This detailed analysis fills this gap. With a thorough scientific background and a review of technically feasible countermeasures, it addresses the applicable rules of international law, exposing the tension between the traditional concept of sovereignty and the need for international cooperation.

Promoting compliance in an evolving climate regime

Introduction Jutta Brunnee, Meinhard Doelle and Lavanya Rajamani Part I. Context: 1. The emerging post-Cancun climate regime Jennifer Morgan 2. Promoting compliance with MEAs Jutta Brunnee 3. Compliance regimes in multilateral environmental agreements Jane Bulmer Part II. The Kyoto Compliance System - Features and Experience: 4. Key features of the Kyoto protocols compliance system Rene Lefeber and Sebastian Oberthuer 5. Experience with the facilitative and enforcement branches of the Kyoto compliance system Meinhard Doelle 6. Experiences with Articles 5, 7 and 8 defining the monitoring, reporting and verification system under the Kyoto protocol Anke Herold Part III. Compliance and the Climate Change Regime - Issues, Options and Challenges: 7. The role of non-state actors in climate compliance Eric Dannenmaier 8. Facilitation of compliance Catherine Redgwell 9. Enforcing compliance in an evolving climate regime Michael Mehling 10. Financial mechanisms under the climate change regime Haroldo Machado-Filho 11. Post-2012 compliance and carbon markets Francesco Sindico 12. Compliance and the use of trade measures Jake Werksman 13. Comparability of efforts among developed country parties and the post-2012 compliance system M. J. Mace 14. From the Kyoto protocol compliance system to MRVs: what is at stake for the European Union? Sandrine Maljean-Dubois and Anne-Sophie Tabau 15. Compliance in transition countries Christina Voigt 16. The KPS and developing countries and compliance in the climate regime Lavanya Rajamani 17. The role of dispute settlement in the climate change regime Ruth Mackenzie 18. Depoliticizing compliance Geir Ulfstein Part IV. A Look Forward: 19. Conclusion Jutta Brunnee, Meinhard Doelle and Lavanya Rajamani.

Constructivism and International Law

Over the last decade or so a new dialogue has emerged between international relations (IR) theorists interested in the social creation of identity and who focus attention on the role of norms in international politics, and international law (IL) scholars for whom normative evolution is a stock-in-trade. These norm-interested IR thinkers have been labeled “constructivists.” Although we argue that constructivists have yet to fully exploit the mutual learning that is possible in the interaction of constructivist IR thinking and international legal theorizing, there is a promising openness to dialogue. Constructivism helps explain how IL can exist and influence behavior, and IL can help inform a richer understanding of the particular roles of different categories of norms in international society. Constructivist work has so far focused upon the building of social norms through interaction, and on the pathways through which they come to influence actors. Overall, too little effort has been expended upon tracing out the distinctions between social and legal norms, but there is nothing in constructivism that denigrates the distinction or resists such analysis, as some recent work has shown. In this chapter we canvass the reasons underlying the emergence of constructivist thought in IR, and trace out its major preoccupations (Part II). We then highlight key themes in constructivist engagement with IL (Part III), before detailing how international lawyers have deployed constructivist insights (Part IV). Next, we canvass central themes in the interdisciplinary dialogue between constructivism and international law (Part V). Finally, we evaluate the most salient insights and contributions of the literature to date, and identify gaps and productive directions for future work (Part VI).

The Nile Basin Regime: A Role for Law

This article explores the gradual transition of the Nile Basin regime from one that operated in a tense, highly competitive political and legal environment to one that is characterized by greater cooperation, coordination and stability. Through the lens of an interactional concept of international law, and drawing on the legal theory of Lon Fuller, the article examines the factors that have helped shape this evolution. It posits that, in the case of the Nile Basin regime, the influence of law in transforming the identities and interests of states is one of these factors.

History, mystery, and mastery

Three themes connect the comments offered by Dunoff, Koskenniemi, and Reus-Smit. Each is preoccupied, although in markedly different ways, by the way in which our interactional theory of international law may be shaped and misshaped by our place in time. Each is concerned to situate our explanation of international legal obligation along a continuum of internal and external critique and disciplinary and interdisciplinary methodologies. Furthermore, each wonders how to understand fully the role of masterly ‘practice’ in explaining the particularity of law.

Interactional legal theory, the international rule of law and global constitutionalism

In this contribution to a forthcoming handbook on global constitutionalism, we outline our interactional approach to international law. We then connect that approach to ‘circular,’ practice-oriented and interpretative understandings of the rule of law. We go on to show how those conceptions of the rule of law can help to support a limited ‘constitutionalism’ that is still at a nascent stage in international society. We argue that a constitutionalism that is expressed primarily through the rule of law is more open to diversity than might at first appear to be the case; indeed, we suggest that it is likely to be more open than forms of political constitutionalism that focus on constituent power.