.png)
In this article, the Authors explore the principle of “Common but Differentiated Responsibilities” (CBDRs) and its implications for the global fight against climate change, exploring its role in recent international negotiations (such as the 15th COP held in Copenhagen in 2009) and decisions, and offer us a complete and informed explanations of how this principle is shaping international environmental law regime. Historically speaking, the concept of “differential treatment” first appeared in the field of international trade in 1965. From that moment it has evolved, becoming a crucial notion in international environmental law. For example, according to Article 7 of the Rio Declaration, “States have common but differentiated responsibilities. The developed countries acknowledge the responsibility that they bear in the international pursuit of sustainable development in view of the pressures their societies place on the global environment and of the technologies and financial resources they command.” As it is clearly stressed, in “common but differentiated responsibilities.” “Common” meant that there is a universal responsibility to act for the benefit of “present and future generations.” It is clear that the concept is much more complex than we might think; it embodies both the notions of “common concern” and “common heritage of humankind,” two notions “as old as international environmental law itself.” “Differentiated” is the core of the notion. It recognized that developed countries were primarily responsible – because of their industrial development – for the environment’s current state and that they possess the technological and financial resources that will allow them to do so. As highlighted in the article, the international community has the duty to face global heat. It has to be noticed that negotiations during the 15th COP held in Copenhagen were particularly difficult because of “the continuing uncertainty about whether the United States [would] undertake serious action to curb its emissions [and] for another [because] Copenhagen negotiations have given serious attention to developing country emissions.” What it is worth emphasizing here is that, especially in recent years, developed countries have started to put the accent on ‘common’ responsibilities, asking emerging economies to take action to reduce their emissions. This different approach is highlighted in many climate decisions which tend to refer more and more often to contextual norms of differentiation based on general criteria such as national/special circumstances, priorities or needs rather than making direct references to the common but differentiated responsibility principle. As a conclusion, the Authors stress the fact that other expressions of differentiation are used in the climate regime and could take precedence in the future. In order to do so, the climate regime must keep a balance between commitments and assistance. Indeed, although adaptation to climate change and assistance are truly important issues, one has to realize that the fight against climate degradation cannot be fought without commitments from stronger polluters to reduce their emissions.
PDFPDFStay tuned for news on sustainable development, environment and climate change, international trade and human rights, Chinese issues and much more!
