Search Climate Insights Directory

This research paper examines the role of non-state actors in the implementation of the Paris Agreement, specifically focusing on their ability to hold parties accountable for their obligations through review processes regarding implementation, compliance, and effectiveness.

This report analyzes the compliance system of the Kyoto Protocol, describing it as more robust than typical multilateral environmental agreements due to its quasi-judicial enforcement mechanisms and specific penalties for developed nations that fail to meet emissions targets.

The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) proposes a hybrid liability rule for Article 17 emissions trading under the Kyoto Protocol to resolve disputes between seller and buyer liability. The proposal centers on a 'commitment period reserve' to ensure environmental integrity and market liquidity while preventing a 'domino effect' of non-compliance.

The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) provides comments on the Joint Working Group on Compliance (JWGC) Co-Chairs' "Elements" paper regarding the Kyoto Protocol's compliance system. CIEL advocates for a standing compliance body with distinct facilitative, enforcement, and eligibility branches, emphasizing transparency, civil society participation, and a dynamic Compliance Fund to replace "borrowing" as a remedy for non-compliance.

The report proposes the creation of a 'Compliance Fund' to allow Annex I Parties under the Kyoto Protocol to avoid non-compliance by paying fees for GHG mitigation credits when market options are unavailable. It advocates for this fund over 'borrowing' from future periods and suggests a 'Compliance Assessment' system, enforceable through domestic courts via a 'Recognition Agreement,' to penalize and remedy willful non-compliance.

A letter from Sasol Limited to the South African Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs requesting urgent clarification on the commencement date of Government Notice 893 (GN893), published on 22 November 2013, regarding activities resulting in atmospheric emissions.

This document consists of the applicants' (defendants') heads of argument filed in the High Court of South Africa (Western Cape Division) on 15 May 2019. The applicants, including environmental lawyers and a community activist, are seeking an order to compel Mineral Sands Resources (Pty) Ltd (MSR) to disclose documents relevant to a defamation lawsuit. MSR is suing the applicants overS for statements made during a University of Cape Town course on 25 January 2017, which alleged that MSR operated its Tormin Mine in breach of mining, environmental, and land use planning laws. The applicants argue that the requested documents are essential to prove the truth of their statements and to protect their constitutional rights to freedom of speech and academic freedom.

This research paper analyzes the allocation of responsibility for non-compliance within the Kyoto Protocol's four cooperative implementation (CI) mechanisms: joint fulfillment, joint implementation, the Clean Development Mechanism, and international emissions trading. The authors propose a 'traffic light' (green/yellow/red) hybrid responsibility model to balance market efficiency with environmental integrity, arguing that shifting risk to buyers during periods of implementation doubt creates stronger market incentives for sellers to comply.