The common but differentiated responsibilities principle: Changes in continuity after the Durban conference of the parties

Review of European Community and International Environmental Law

Volumn 21, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 271-281

  Deleuil, Thomas ^a  

^a AIX MARSEILLE UNIVERSITY   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLIMATE CHANGE; CONFERENCE PROCEEDING; INTERNATIONAL LAW; NEGOTIATION PROCESS; SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT; UNITED NATIONS FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE;

DURBAN; KWAZULU-NATAL; SOUTH AFRICA;

EID: 84870186931     PISSN: 09628797     EISSN: 14679388     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9388.2012.00758.x     Document Type: Article

References (144)

1. See, e.g., F. Soltau, Fairness in International Climate Change Law and Policy (Cambridge University Press, 2009).
2. T. Honkonen, The Common but Differentiated Responsibility Principle in Multilateral Environmental Agreements: Regulatory and Policy Aspects (Kluwer Law International, 2009), at 2.
3. D. Shelton, 'Equity', in: D. Bodansky, J. Brunnée and E. Hey (eds), The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law (Oxford University Press, 2008), at 647.
4. Stockholm Declaration on the Human Environment, found in Report of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment (UN Doc., A/CONF.48/14/Rev.1, 16 June 1972), Action Taken by the Conference ('Stockholm Declaration').
5. L. Rajamani, Differential Treatment in International Environmental Law (Oxford University Press, 2006), at 8.
6. L. Boisson de Chazournes, 'Le Droit et l'Universalité de la Lutte contre les Changements Climatiques', 2 Journal Cahiers Droit, Sciences et Technologies: Droit et Climat (2009), 29, at 30 (my translation).
7. Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, found in Report of the UN Conference on Environment and Development (UN Doc. A/CONF.151/26/Rev.1 (Vol. I), 14 June 1992), Annex ('Rio Declaration').
8. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (New York, 9 May 1992; in force 21 March 1994) ('UNFCCC').
9. Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (Kyoto, 11 December 1997; in force 16 February 2005) ('Kyoto Protocol').
10. J. Lin, 'Environmental Law and Policy in China: Responding to Climate Change', in: G. Yu (ed.), The Development of the Chinese Legal System: Change and Challenges (Routledge, 2011), 295, at 296.
11. See L. Rajamani, n. 5 above, at 10.
12. UNFCCC, n. 8 above, preamble, paragraph 3.
13. E. Guerin and M. Wemaëre, Négociations Climat: Compte-rendu de la Conférence de Barcelone (2-6 Novembre 2009), IDDRI Idées pour le débat N°06/2009 (Institut du Développement Durable et des Relations Internationales, 2009), found at , at 10 (my translation).
14. Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA), Views on Lessons Learned from the Mitigation Workshops Held to Date and on Future Work on Mitigation of Climate Change (UN Doc. FCCC/SBST A/2005/MISC.12, 17 August 2005), at 19.
15. Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI), Review of the Financial Mechanism Referred to in Decision 6/CP.13 (UN Doc. FCCC/SBI/ 2008/MISC. 3, 19 May 2008), at 27.
16. Ad Hoc Working Group on Further Commitments for Annex I Parties under the Kyoto Protocol (AWG-KP), Views on the Legal Implications Arising from the Work of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Further Commitments for Annex I Parties under the Kyoto Protocol, Pursuant to Article 3, paragraph 9, of the Kyoto Protocol (UN Doc. FCCC/KP/AWG/2009/MISC.6/Add.2, 26 March 2009), at 3.
17. Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI), Views on Elements for the Terms of Reference for the Review and Assessment of the Effectiveness of the Implementation of Article 4, paragraphs 1(c) and 5, of the Convention (UN Doc. FCCC/SBI/2008/MISC.1, 17 March 2008), at 4.
18. Ibid;., at 10.
19. AWG-KP, Further Views and Proposals Relating to a Proposal for Amendments to the Kyoto Protocol pursuant to its Article 3, paragraph 9, and a Text on Other Issues Outlined in Document FCCC/KP/AWG/2008/8 (UN Doc FCCC/KP/AWG/2009/MISC.8, 6 May 2009), at 45.
20. D. Bodansky, 'The Copenhagen Climate Change Conference: A Postmortem', 104:2 American Journal of International Law (2010), 230, at 231-232.
21. The Copenhagen Accord is attached to Decision 2/CP.15, Copenhagen Accord (UN Doc. FCCC/CP/2009/11/Add.1, 30 March 2010). It was only 'taken note of' by the COP and still does not have any formal legal status.
22. L. Rajamani, 'The Making and Unmaking of the Copenhagen Accord', 59:3 International and Comparative Law Quarterly (2011), 824, at 842.
23. L. Rajamani, 'The Cancún Climate Agreements: Reading the Text, Subtext and Tea Leaves', 60:2 International and Comparative Law Quarterly (2011), 499, at 519.
24. Decision 1/CP.16, The Cancún Agreements: Outcome of the Work of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention (UN Doc. FCCC/CP/2010/7/Add.1, 15 March 2011), Parts III and V.
25. See L. Rajamani, n. 23 above, at 512.
26. Decision 1/CP.17 Establishment of an Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action (UN Doc. FCCC/CP/2011/ 9/Add.1, 15 March 2012), paragraph 2.
27. Decision 2/CP.17, Outcome of the Work of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention (UN Doc. FCCC/CP/2011/9/Add.1, 15 March 2012).
28. Decision 1/CP.13, Bali Action Plan (UN Doc. FCCC/CP/2007/6/ Add.1, 14 March 2008).
29. See Decision 1/CP.1, Berlin Mandate (UN Doc. FCCC/CP/1995/7/ Add.1, 6 June 1995);
30. the Kyoto Protocol, n. 9 above;
31. Decision 1/CP.8, Delhi Ministerial Declaration on Climate Change and Sustainable Development (UN Doc. FCCC/CP/2002/7/Add.1, 28 March 2003);
32. Decision 1/CP.13, Bali Action Plan, n. 28 above;
33. Decision 2/CP.15, Copenhagen Accord, n. 21 above;
34. Decision 1/CP.16, The Cancún Agreements, n. 24 above.
35. Decision 2/CP.17, Outcome of the Work of the Ad Hoc Working Group, n. 27 above, at paragraphs 8, 10, 17, 18 and 28.
36. Decision 3/CP.17, Launching the Green Climate Fund (UN Doc. FCCC/CP/2011/9/Add.1, 15 March 2012), paragraph 4 and Annex.
37. UNFCCC, n. 8 above, preamble, paragraph 6.
38. Ibid;., Article 4.
39. Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI), Report on Inter- Sessional Activities: Work of the Consultative Group of Experts on National Communications from Parties not Included in Annex 1 to the Convention (UN Doc. FCCC/SBI/2001/INF.1, 28 June 2001), at 17.
40. Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA), Information on Experiences and Views on Needs for Technical and Institutional Capacity-Building and Cooperation (UN Doc. FCCC/ SBSTA/2009/MISC.2, 10 March 2009), at 22.
41. Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA), Views on Outstanding Methodological Issues Related to Policy Approaches and Positive Incentives to Reduce Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Developing Countries (UN Doc. FCCC/SBSTA/2008/MISC.4, 22 April 2008), at 24.
42. Statute of the International Court of Justice (San Francisco, 26 June 1945; in force 24 October 1945).
43. The advisory opinion given by the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) on the Case No. 17 on 1 February 2011 addresses the question of differential treatment within the Montego Bay Convention but does not refer to CBDR as such. See ITLOS 1 February 2011, Responsibilities and Obligations of States Sponsoring Persons and Entities with Respect to Activities in the Area (Request for Advisory Opinion submitted to the Seabed Disputes Chamber), paragraphs 151-162, found at . The WTO Panel quoted CBDR in the Shrimp/Turtle case, but only in reference to the Rio Declaration, which is not legally binding. United States - Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, Recourse to Article 21.5 by Malaysia, Report of the Panel, 15 June 2001, WT/DS58/RW, at 101.
44. E. Brown Weiss, 'The Rise and Fall of International Law?', 69:2 Fordham Law Review (2000), 345, at 350.
45. P. Birnie, A. Boyle and C. Redgwell, International Law and the Environment, 3rd edn (Oxford University Press, 2009), at 135.
46. S. Biniaz, 'Common but Differentiated Responsibility', 96 ASIL Proceedings (2002), 358, at 361.
47. ICJ 27 June 1986, Case Concerning Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America), [1986] ICJ Rep. 14, at 108-109.
48. See L. Rajamani, n. 5 above, at 159.
49. Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI), Procedures and Mechanisms relating to Compliance under the Kyoto Protocol (UN Doc. FCCC/SB/1999/MISC.12, 22 September 1999), at 15.
50. See the submission by Peru, on behalf of Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama and Peru, in Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI), Issues Relating to Reducing Emissions from Deforestation in Developing Countries and Recommendations on Any Further Process (FCCC/SBSTA/2006/MISC.5, 11 April 2006), at 111.
51. SBI, n. 44 above, at 4.
52. See T. Honkonen, n. 2 above, at 303-304.
53. See also U. Beyerlin, 'Policies, Principles and Rules', in: D. Bodansky, J. Brunnée and E. Hey, n. 3 above, at 442.
54. P.-M. Dupuy and Yann Kerbrat, Droit International Public, 10th edn (Dalloz, 2010), at 376.
55. Ibid;.
56. A. Boyle and C. Chinkin, The Making of International Law (Oxford University Press, 2007), at 224.
57. PCIJ 17 August 1923, Wimbledon Case (Ser. A., No. 1, 1923);
58. ICJ 28 May 1951, Reservations to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Advisory Opinion, [1951] ICJ Rep. 1951, 3, at 21.
59. Ibid;.
60. see also PCIJ 7 June 1932, Case of the Free Zones of Upper Savoy and the District of Gex (Ser. A/B., No. 46), at 167.
61. Arbitral Tribunal 24 May 2005, Arbitration regarding the Iron Rhine ('Ijzeren Rijn') Railway (2005), at paragraph 59.
62. In Decision 1/CP.16, one reference to differentiation is not expressed through CBDRRC but through 'common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities, and specific national and regional development priorities, objectives and circumstances'. Decision 1/CP, 16 n. 24 above, paragraph 14.
63. Ibid;.
64. Decision 2/CP.17, n. 30 above, Part II.E, preamble, paragraph 1.
65. Ibid;., Part II.E, preamble, paragraph 2.
66. Ibid;., paragraph 160.
67. Decision 3/CP.17, n. 31 above, paragraph 4.
68. P. Sands, Principles of International Environmental Law, 2nd edn (Cambridge University Press, 2003), at 289.
69. See especially L. Boisson de Chazournes and S. Maljean- Dubois, Principes du Droit International de l'Environnement, Journal JurisClasseur Environnement et Développement Durable (2010).
70. Decision 7/CP.4, Work Programme on Mechanisms of the Kyoto Protocol (UN Doc. FCCC/CP/1998/16/Add.1, 25 January 1999), preamble paragraph 1;
71. Decision 1/CP.6, Implementation of the Buenos Aires Plan of Action (UN Doc. FCCC/CP/2000/5/Add.2, 4 April 2001), preamble, paragraph 1;
72. Decision 5/CP.7, Implementation of Article 4, paragraphs 8 and 9, of the Convention (UN Doc. FCCC/CP/2001/13/ Add.1, 21 January 2002), preamble, paragraph 7;
73. Decision 26/CP.7, Amendment to the List in Annex II to the Convention (UN Doc. FCCC/CP/2001/13/Add.4, 21 January 2002), preamble, paragraph 7;
74. Decision 1/CP.8, n. 29 above, preamble, paragraph 8(d).
75. SBI, n. 15 above, at 22.
76. See Decision 6/CP.8, Additional Guidance to an Operating Entity of the Financial Mechanism (UN Doc. FCCC/CP/2002/7/Add.1, 28 March 2003), preamble, paragraph 1;
77. Decision 11/CP.8, New Delhi Work Programme on Article 6 of the Convention (UN Doc. FCCC/CP/2002/ 7/Add.1, 28 March 2003), preamble, paragraph 1;
78. Decision 4/CP.9, Additional Guidance to an Operating Entity of the Financial Mechanism (UN Doc. FCCC/CP/2003/6/Add.1, 22 April 2004), preamble, paragraph 1;
79. Decision 1/CP.11, Dialogue on Long-term Cooperative Action to Address Climate Change by Enhancing Implementation of the Convention (UN Doc. FCCC/CP/2005/5/Add.1, 30 March 2006), preamble, paragraph 1;
80. Decision 5/CP.11, Additional Guidance to an Operating Entity of the Financial Mechanism (UN Doc. FCCC/CP/2005/5/Add.1, 30 March 2006), preamble, paragraph 1;
81. Decision 9/CP.11, Research Needs Relating to the Convention (UN Doc. FCCC/CP/2005/5/Add.1, 30 March 2006), preamble, paragraph 2;
82. Decision 2/CP.13, Reducing Emissions from Deforestation in Developing Countries: Approaches to Stimulate Action (UN Doc. FCCC/CP/ 2007/6/Add.1, 14 March 2008), preamble, paragraph 1;
83. Decision 7/CP.13, Additional Guidance to the Global Environment Facility (UN Doc. FCCC/CP/2007/6/Add.1, 14 March 2008), preamble, paragraph 1;
84. Decision 9/CP.13, Amended New Delhi Work Programme on Article 6 of the Convention (UN Doc. FCCC/CP/2007/6/Add.1, 14 March 2008), preamble, paragraph 1;
85. Decision 4/CP.14, Additional Guidance to the Global Environment Facility (UN Doc. FCCC/CP/2008/7/Add.1, 18 March 2009), preamble, paragraph 1;
86. Decision 1/CP.16, n. 24 above, preamble, paragraph 4; Part E preamble, paragraph 1; and paragraph 89.
87. Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (Vienna, 23 May 1969; in force 27 January 1980).
88. See P. Birnie, A. Boyle and C. Redgwell, n. 40, at 28.
89. The principle of prevention is derived from Principle 11 of the Rio Declaration, n. 7 above. It involves the implementation of rules and actions to anticipate risks of environmental degradation, taking into account the latest technical progress. As opposed to the precautionary principle, prevention only concerns proven risks.
90. See J. Verhoeven, 'Principe de Précaution, Droit International et Relations Internationales', 3 Annuaire Français des Relations Internationales (2002), 250, at 252. The ICJ referred to prevention in the 1997 Gabčikovo-Nagymaros case.
91. See ICJ 25 September 1997, Gabčikovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary v. Slovakia), [1997] ICJ Rep. 7, at 77.
92. Arbitral Tribunal 24 May 2005, Arbitration Regarding the Iron Rhine Railway, n. 63 above.
93. In addition to P. Birnie, A. Boyle and C. Redgwell, n. 40 above, and L. Rajamani, n. 5 above
94. see P. Cullet, 'Differential Treatment in International Law: Towards a New Paradigm of Inter-state Relations', 10:3 European Journal of International Law (1999), 549, at 579;
95. C.D. Stone, 'Common but Differentiated Responsibilities in International Law', 98:2 American Journal of International Law (2004), 276, at 281.
96. See especially the Decision 2/CP.17, n. 27 above.
97. Decision 1/CP.17, n. 26 above.
98. Ibid;., paragraph 2.
99. Ibid;., paragraphs 2 and 4.
100. L. Rajamani, 'The Durban Platform for Enhanced Action and the Future of the Climate Regime', 61:2 International and Comparative Law Quarterly (2012), 501, at 508.
101. Ibid;.
102. Ibid;.
103. Convention on Biological Diversity (Rio de Janeiro, 5 June 1992; in force 29 December 1993), Article 6.
104. United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (Paris, 17 June 1994; in force 26 December 1996), Article 3d.
105. Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer (Vienna, 22 March 1985; in force 22 September 1988).
106. Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (Montreal, 16 September 1987; in force 1 January 1989).
107. See inter alia, Decision IV/4, Further Amendment of the Protocol (UN Doc. UNEP/OzL.Pro.4/15, 25 November 1992), paragraph 68;
108. Report of the Seventh Meeting of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (UN Doc. UNEP/ OzL.Pro.7/12, 27 December 1995), paragraph 4;
109. Report of the Eighth Meeting of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (UN Doc. UNEP/OzL.Pro.8/12, 19 December 1996), paragraph 37;
110. Report of the Eighth Meeting of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (UN Doc. UNEP/OzL.Pro.9/12, 25 September 1997), paragraph 5;
111. Decision XVI/7, Trade in Products and Commodities Treated with Methyl Bromide (UN Doc. UNEP/OzL.Pro.16/17, 16 December 2004), preamble, paragraph 3;
112. Report of the Eighteenth Meeting of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (UN Doc. UNEP/OzL.Pro.18/10, 16 November 2006), paragraphs 163, 165 and 167;
113. Report of the Nineteenth Meeting of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (UN Doc. UNEP/OzL.Pro.19/7, 21 September 2007), paragraphs 45 and 84;
114. Decision XIX/31, Declaration of Montreal (UN Doc. UNEP/OzL.Pro.19/7, 21 Sept. 2007), Annex.
115. Decision 2/CP.17, n. 27 above.
116. Decision 1/CP.16, n. 24 above, paragraph 44.
117. Ibid;., paragraphs 63-64.
118. Ibid;.
119. This division is in line with the 2007 Bali Action Plan. Decision 1/CP.13, n. 28 above, paragraph 1(b)(i) and (ii).
120. Decision 2/CP.17, n. 27 above, Part II.B, preamble, paragraph 5.
121. UNFCCC, n. 8 above, Article 4.7.
122. Decision 1/CP.17, n. 26 above, paragraph 58(b).
123. Decision 2/CP.17, n. 27 above, Part II.B, preamble, paragraphs 6 and 87.
124. Ibid;., Part IV.
125. Ibid;., Part V.
126. Ibid;., Part VI.
127. Ibid;., Part II.B, preamble.
128. Ibid;., Part II.B, paragraph 41(a).
129. Ibid;., Part II.B, paragraph 57.
130. UNFCCC, n. 8 above, Article 2.
131. Stockholm Declaration, n. 4 above, Principle 1; Rio Declaration, n. 7 above, Principle 3.
132. AWG-KP, Information and Data Related to Paragraph 17 (a) (i) and (ii) of Document FCCC/KP/AWG/2006/4 and to the Scale of Emission Reductions by Annex I Parties, and Views on the Organization of an In-session Workshop on These Issues (UN Doc. FCCC/KP/AWG/ 2008/MISC.4/Add.1, 28 November 2008), at 6.
133. AWG-KP, Consideration of the Scale of Emission Reductions to be Achieved by Annex I Parties in Aggregate, of the Contribution of Annex I Parties Individually or Jointly, Consistent with Article 4 of the Kyoto Protocol, to the Scale of Emission Reductions to be Achieved by Annex I Parties in Aggregate, and of Other Relevant Issues Arising from the Implementation of the Work Programme of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Further Commitments for Annex I Parties under the Kyoto Protocol as Contained in Document FCCC/KP/AWG/ 2008/8, Paragraph 49(c) (UN Doc. FCCC/KP/AWG/2009/MISC.1, 12 March 2009), at 17.
134. See L. Rajamani, n. 23 above, at 512.
135. V. Heyvaert, 'Levelling Down, Levelling Up and Governing Across: Three Responses to Hybridization in International Law', 20:3 European Journal of International Law (2009), at 647.
136. See L. Rajamani, n. 23 above, at 512.
137. See the overview of contributions to fast-start finance (total pledged and total committed), found at:
138. S. Maljean-Dubois and M. Wemaëre, Les Enjeux des Négociations du Futur Régime International du Climat (2012), found at: , at 27.
139. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Global Environment Outlook 5: Environment for the Future We Want (UNEP, 2012), found at: , at 39.
140. See also L. Rajamani, n. 74 above, at 502.
141. UNFCCC, n. 8 above, Article 2.
142. P. Cullet, Differential Treatment in International Environmental Law (Ashgate, 2003), at 15.
143. Unfortunately, the quotation remains uncertain. These words could be those of William of Tyre, Baldwin's tutor and historian of crusades. See, e.g., P. Aube, Baudouin IV de Jérusalem: Le Roi Lépreux (Perrin, 2001);
144. R. Grousset, Histoire des Croisades et du Royaume Franc de Jérusalem (Perrin, 1999).