Debate: Can Sustainable Tourism include Flying?

Can Sustainable tourism include flying? was the question addressed by the debate at the University of Central Lancashire (University of Central Lancashire), UK on March 30th 2012. There was an unexpected degree of consensus among the speakers that tourism had severe environmental impacts, mainly from flying and that many countries currently benefitting from tourism development were likely to suffer from climate change. They also agreed that corporate tourism often diverted funds from destination areas into their own profits. Those arguing for flying stressed the balance of environmental, social and economic benefits, while those arguing against prioritised the environmental damage of increasing aviation. The pro-fliers were optimistic about technological advances in aircraft and fuels but the others doubted their potential to reduce emissions from current or increased levels of aviation. Both sides admitted behavioural change was difficult, but saw hope in recent trends

Flying green from a carbon neutral airport : the case of Brussels

The aviation sector is one of the fastest growing emitters of greenhouse gases worldwide. In addition, airports have important local environmental impacts, mainly in the form of noise pollution and deterioration in air quality. Although noise nuisance in the vicinity of airports is recognized as an important problem of the urban environment which is often addressed by regulation, other environmental problems associated with aviation are less widely acknowledged. In the climate debate, the importance of which is rising, aviation has remained under the radar for decades. In the present paper, we use the case of Brussels Airport (Belgium) to demonstrate that the local perception of air travel-related environmental problems may be heavily influenced by the communication strategy of the airport company in question. Basing our analysis on publicly available data, communication initiatives, media reports, and policy documents, we find that (1) the noise impact of aviation is recognized and mainly described in an institutionalized format, (2) the impact of aviation on local air quality is ignored, and (3) the communication on climate impact shows little correspondence or concern with the actual effects. These findings are relevant for other airports and sectors, since the type of environmental communication produced by airport companies can also be observed elsewhere

The Trade and Climate Change Joint Agenda. CEPS Working Document No. 295/June 2008

Climate change, international trade, investment and technology transfer are all issues that have intersected in diverse institutional contexts and at several levels of governmental activity to form a new joint agenda. The purpose of this paper is to advance understanding of this joint agenda by identifying the specific issues that have emerged, the policies that have been adopted, especially in the EU and US, and the options that are available for further policy-making

The EU should not shy away from setting CO2-related targets for transport. CEPS Policy Brief No. 229/January 2011

Transport is the only sector in the EU in which greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise. Unless this trend can be reversed, the EU will have little chance of reaching its objectives in the context of global obligations on industrialised countries to reduce emissions between 80% and 95% by 2050 compared to 1990. Many different solutions exist, including, for example, new technology such as electrification of road transport, modal shift, optimising existing technologies and policy measures and more radical measures such as binding GHG emissions targets. While there is some merit to all of these approaches, this Policy Brief argues that current EU policy thinking is not (yet) bold enough to credibly tackle the GHG emissions challenge from transport. It argues that: • The EU must take GHG emissions from the transport sector more seriously. • Sound transport pricing is important but it has limitations for the transition to a low-carbon transport system. • EU-level infrastructure policy is grossly inadequate, mainly but not only in view of the transformation of the EU transport system. • There is too much (blind) faith in technology solutions, thereby avoiding hard questions on how to curb transport growth. • Finally, well-designed technology deployment targets are a good way to start the transition to a low-carbon transport system

Meet & fly : sustainable transport academics and the elephant in the room

A

New Labour, new environment? An analysis of the labour government's policy on climate change and biodiversity loss

No description supplie

How do radical climate movements negotiate their environmental and their social agendas? A study of debates within the Camp for Climate Action (UK)

This is a case study of the Camp for Climate Action, which has held several high-profile protest events in the UK since its inception in 2006. It analyses the Camp as a contested space where different emphases on environmental and social priorities have to be negotiated by its activists. The article considers areas of contestation where concerns over climate change meet questions of social justice. These are structured around tangible issues of campaigning, such as opposition to new coal-fired power stations or to the third runway at Heathrow airport, some of which have put the Camp at odds with labour movement and class struggle activists. While some demand a drastic shift away from current levels of consumption, others question the discriminatory effects of self-imposed austerity politics. On a more abstract level, the article considers debates on the need for government solutions to the environmental crisis and their possible impacts on social equality. The article is structured around movement-internal debates and makes use of interviews, extensive fieldwork notes and continuous participant observation over the course of four years

Towards a New International Law of the Atmosphere?

Inclusion of the topic ‘protection of the atmosphere’ in the current work programme of the UN International Law Commission (ILC) reflects the long overdue recognition of the fact that the scope of contemporary international law for the Earth’s atmosphere extends far beyond the traditional discipline of ‘air law’ as a synonym for airspace and air navigation law. Instead, the atmospheric commons are regulated by a ‘regime complex’ comprising a multitude of economic uses including global communications, pollutant emissions and diffusion, in different geographical sectors and vertical zones, in the face of different categories of risks, and addressed by a wide range of different transnational institutions. Following several earlier attempts at identifying crosscutting legal rules and principles in this field (by, inter alia, the International Law Association, the UN Environment Programme, and the Institut de Droit International), the ILC has now embarked on a new codification/restatement project led by Special Rapporteur Shinya Murase – albeit hamstrung by a highly restrictive ‘understanding’ imposed by the Commission in 2013. This article assesses the prospects and limitations of the initial ILC reports and debates in 2014 and 2015, and potential avenues for progress in the years to come