Position Statement on the Updated Policy Document on Climate Action for World Heritage: Climate Action Goal 3 – Climate Mitigation

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

Earthjustice argues that limiting climate mitigation to the property level is insufficient to protect world heritage. The statement recommends that the World Heritage Committee recognize state parties' national-level obligations to limit warming to 1.5°C, acknowledge extraterritorial obligations under Article 6(3) to prevent transboundary harm, and utilize the List of World Heritage in Danger to hold states accountable for climate-related threats.

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
  • The Updated Policy Document's Goal 3 (Mitigation) is critically limited because it focuses only on property-level mitigation rather than national-level mitigation, which contradicts the obligations of state parties under the World Heritage Convention to protect properties from threats that may exist beyond national borders.
  • State parties have a non-discretionary obligation under Article 6(3) of the Convention to avoid taking deliberate measures that could indirectly damage world heritage properties in other states; this includes taking actions inconsistent with a 1.5°C warming limit.
  • Climate mitigation obligations under the World Heritage Convention are independent of those under the UNFCCC and the Paris Agreement, meaning the World Heritage Committee can address national-level mitigation without deferring to the UNFCCC framework.
  • The List of World Heritage in Danger should be used to inscribe properties threatened by climate change, even if the cause is beyond the sole control of the concerned state party, and corrective measures should require the state to pursue a 1.5°C pathway.
  • Earthjustice recommends that the World Heritage Committee reject proposed amendments from Australia and the Russian Federation that would weaken the policy document's climate goals or the Committee's role in implementation.

Cite the original document

APA
Earthjustice (2023). Position Statement on the Updated Policy Document on Climate Action for World Heritage: Climate Action Goal 3 – Climate Mitigation. https://earthjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/position-policy-climate-action-world-heritage_earthjustice_march-2023.pdf
Chicago
Earthjustice. Position Statement on the Updated Policy Document on Climate Action for World Heritage: Climate Action Goal 3 – Climate Mitigation. 2023. https://earthjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/position-policy-climate-action-world-heritage_earthjustice_march-2023.pdf.
Wikipedia
{{cite press release |author=Earthjustice |title=Position Statement on the Updated Policy Document on Climate Action for World Heritage: Climate Action Goal 3 – Climate Mitigation |date=March 2023 |url=https://earthjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/position-policy-climate-action-world-heritage_earthjustice_march-2023.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@misc{earthjustice2023position, author = {{Earthjustice}}, title = {{Position Statement on the Updated Policy Document on Climate Action for World Heritage: Climate Action Goal 3 – Climate Mitigation}}, publisher = {Earthjustice}, year = {2023}, month = mar, url = {https://earthjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/position-policy-climate-action-world-heritage_earthjustice_march-2023.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated