State Responsibility for Climate Change Damage and the Evolving Regime of Human Rights
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Cite JOURNAL ARTICLE
Style
Format
State Responsibility for Climate Change Damage and the Evolving Regime of Human Rights
German Yearbook of International Law, Vol. 63 (2020), Iss. 1 : pp. 481–509
1 Citations (CrossRef)
Additional Information
Article Details
Pricing
Author Details
Agnes Chong, PhD, LLM, MSc, BA. University of Hong Kong.
Cited By
-
Children’s Environmental Rights Under International and EU Law
Children in Pursuit of Environmental Human Rights: Current Practice and Future Prospects
Ippolito, Francesca
2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-547-8_4 [Citations: 0]
Abstract
Individual States are required to reduce their emissions in order to meet the collective goal of keeping global warming to an increase of no more 2 °C but ideally strive to limit temperature rises to 1.5 °C. States have expressed ambitions for reducing greenhouse gas emissions although largely have yet to translate them into policies. Inadequate climate mitigation policies may fall foul of the obligation to reduce GHG emissions, which is a due diligence obligation. Making any successful determination would depend on the status of the jurisprudence on the formation of a customary obligation on the prevention of the risk of transboundary harm in climate change-related human rights. Progressive norms in human rights jurisprudence inform the content of the due diligence obligation and positive duties thereunder. The implication is that responsibility for inadequate climate mitigation policies, as supported by the recent jurisprudence on the failure of due diligence duties in context of environment-based human rights, may be invoked. It is noted that arguments have been advanced that the obligation to prevent climate change harm presents challenges in establishing the elements necessary for responsibility, particularly in respect to defining the internationally wrongful act and causation. However, developments in international human rights jurisprudence supports positive due diligence obligations in preventing climate risks, raising the theoretical possibilities of an international decision following Urgenda. This article observes the possibility of such a trend within States’ customary obligation to prevent transboundary harm with respect to States’ inadequate climate mitigation policies.
Table of Contents
| Section Title | Page | Action | Price |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agnes Chong\nState Responsibility for Climate Change Damage and the Evolving Regime of Human Rights | 481 | ||
| I. Introduction: Is There Responsibility for Inadequate Climate Mitigation Policies Under International Law? | 481 | ||
| A. State Responsibility | 482 | ||
| B. Climate Treaties | 486 | ||
| C. Human Rights Law | 489 | ||
| 1. Contribution of Human Rights Jurisprudence to Climate Law | 481 | ||
| 2. Inadequate Climate Mitigation Policies | 481 | ||
| 3. Elements of Responsibility | 481 | ||
| D. A Human Right to the Environment | 482 | ||
| II. Conclusion | 482 |