Browse all documents

Conference of the Parties (COP) Decisions: Scope and Limits

Report an error

Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

This fact sheet by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) outlines the legal limitations of Conference of the Parties (COP) decisions, contrasting them with treaties, protocols, and amendments. Using examples from the Basel and Kyoto frameworks, it warns that relying on future COP decisions to establish critical obligations for a future plastics treaty may lead to significant delays or failure due to ratification requirements and consensus-based voting.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • COP decisions have specific legal limits; they cannot be used to create or modify Party obligations, nor can they create an annex unless it concerns procedural, administrative, technical, or scientific issues. Actions that exceed these powers typically require a distinct process, such as a new agreement, protocol, or treaty amendment, which often requires a 2/3 or 3/4 majority and can take years or decades to enter into force through ratification.
  • Past environmental agreements demonstrate the difficulty of using COP decisions for substantive bans or additions. In the Basel context, a mandate to consider a ban was contested by Parties who argued the COP lacked authority, resulting in a ban adopted via amendment that took 24 years to enter into force. Similarly, Belarus's request to be added to a Kyoto Protocol annex required an amendment rather than a decision.
  • For the development of a future plastics treaty, CIEL identifies three critical challenges: consensus requirements that prevent adoption, long timelines for ratification of amendments, and the risk of proposals being abandoned due to lack of majority support. The document advises against adopting a general framework with the intent to add detailed obligations later, as this is 'rarely effective for global agreements,' and recommends establishing clear voting provisions to avoid default consensus.

Cite the original document

APA
Center for International Environmental Law (2024). Conference of the Parties (COP) Decisions: Scope and Limits. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Visual_Scope-and-Limits-of-COP-Decisions.pdf
Chicago
Center for International Environmental Law. Conference of the Parties (COP) Decisions: Scope and Limits. 2024. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Visual_Scope-and-Limits-of-COP-Decisions.pdf.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |author=Center for International Environmental Law |title=Conference of the Parties (COP) Decisions: Scope and Limits |date=2024 |url=https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Visual_Scope-and-Limits-of-COP-Decisions.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{centerforinternationalenvironmentallaw2024conference, author = {{Center for International Environmental Law}}, title = {{Conference of the Parties (COP) Decisions: Scope and Limits}}, institution = {Center for International Environmental Law}, year = {2024}, url = {https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Visual_Scope-and-Limits-of-COP-Decisions.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated