Non-State Actors In International Governance And Law: A Challenge Or A Blessing

Globalization has changed the way global society addresses common and global problems

Inclusive Development and Climate Change::The Geopolitics of Fossil Fuel Risks in Developing Countries

This conceptual paper brings together two previously disparate strands of scholarship on climate change and development together with emerging studies of stranded assets. It addresses the question: What are the lessons learnt from this literature for the way developing countries should ‘develop’ in a post-Paris Agreement world? The paper argues that instead of a blind neo-colonial process of rapidly replicating the development paths of already industrialized countries – especially in the context of the fossil fuel sector – developing countries must adopt their own unique development strategies that are more inclusive and transformative. The foregone economic gains from not investing in fossil fuels maybe compensated by the reduced risks of stranded assets and climate change impacts in the future – as well as the reduced risks of climate change impacts on, for example, the agricultural sector – which may facilitate their own unique paths toward inclusive development

Planning for Exclusion: The Politics of Urban Disaster Governance

Many disaster risk reduction (DRR) initiatives, including land use planning, tend to ignore existing long-term inequalities in urban space. Furthermore, scholars working on urban disaster governance do not adequately consider how day-to-day DRR governing practices can (re)produce these. Hence, following a recent interest in the political dimensions of disaster governance, this article explores under what conditions the implementation of DRR land uses (re)produce spatial injustice on the ground. We develop a theoretical framework combining politics, disaster risk, and space, and apply it to a case study in Santiago, Chile. There, after a landslide disaster in the city’s foothills in 1993, a multi-level planning arrangement implemented a buffer zone along the bank of a ravine to protect this area from future disasters. This buffer zone, however, transformed a long-term established neighbourhood, splitting it into a formal and an informal area remaining to this day. Using qualitative data and spatial analysis, we describe the emergence, practices, and effects of this land use. While this spatial intervention has proactively protected the area, it has produced further urban exclusion and spatial deterioration, and reproduced disaster risks for the informal households within the buffer zone. We explain this as resulting from a governance arrangement that emerged from a depoliticised environment, enforcing rules unevenly, and lacking capacities and unclear responsibilities, all of which could render DRR initiatives to be both spatially unjust and ineffective. We conclude that sustainable and inclusive cities require paying more attention to the implementation practices of DRR initiatives and their relation to long-term inequities

Actores No Gubernamentales En La Gobernacion Y Derecho Internacional: Un Desafio O Una Bendicion

La globalizaci6n ha cambiado el modo que la sociedad discute los problemas comunes y globales

Achieving the 1.5 °C Objective: Just Implementation Through a Right to (Sustainable) Development Approach

Achieving the 1.5 °C objective of the Paris Agreement on Climate Change in a just manner requires equitably sharing the responsibilities and rights that relate to this objective. This paper examines how international law concerning the Right to Promote (Sustainable) Development can contribute to determining what would be a “just” approach to achieving the 1.5 °C objective. This entails building on both the Right to Development (RtD) and the Right to Promote Sustainable Development (RtPSD). The RtD is a central notion within international human rights law and the RtPSD has been adopted under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Based on a literature review and legal analysis, we argue that, although the two Rights are prima facie different, in the context of the unanimously adopted Agenda 2030, including the SDGs, they partly complement and partly merge with each other. Together they provide a framework for assessing how a just transition towards a low greenhouse gas development process could be achieved and what this means for phasing out fossil fuels especially in the context of prospective oil producing countries

Sharing the Burden of Adaptation Financing: An Assessment of the Contributions of Countries

Climate change may cause most harm to countries that contribute least to greenhouse gas emissions. This paper identifies deontology, solidarity and consequentialism as the principles that can serve as a basis for a fair international burden sharing scheme of adaptation costs. We translate these principles into criteria that can be applied in assigning contributions of individual countries, namely historical responsibility, equality and capacity to pay. Specific political and scientific choices are discussed, highlighting implications for international burden-sharing. Combining historical responsibility and capacity to pay seems a promising starting point for international negotiations on the design of burden-sharing schemes. From the numerical assessment, it is clear that UNFCCC Annex I countries carry the greatest burden under most scenarios, but contributions differ substantially subject to the choice of an indicator for capacity to pay. The total financial contribution by the Annex I countries could be in the range of $55-68 billion annually.Adaptation Financing, Burden-Sharing, Historical Responsibility

Drought management: a multi-level governance approach in rural China

Drought has always been a serious problem in many parts of the world, and climate change may further exacerbate this problem. Much literature is available on providing information on drought instruments in rural China covering establishing national drought relief (Zhang et al., 2005) and water scarcity management systems (Qu et al., 2010), promoting water saving and agricultural technology (Huang et al., 2009; Blanke, et al., 2007), analyzing Water Users Association (WUA) (Wang et al., 2010), initiating water pricing measures (Yang et al., 2003; Zhong and Mol, 2010), popularizing agricultural subsidies (Du et al., 2011), and experimenting with policy-oriented microfinance and agricultural insurance (Du, 2003; Zeng and Mu, 2010). But very few has addressed the issues on multi-level governance in this area in general, and in China in particular. This paper focuses on the question: How can an examination of institutional and non-institutional causes of drought and the performance of existing instruments at multiple levels of governance help us to develop more appropriate policy instruments for drought management in China