See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312320726

International Climate Change Law

Thesis · June 2016

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.31167.71848

CITATIONS READS

0 179

1 author:

Jeffrey Craig
Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies
8 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

International Environmental Law on Climate Change View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Jeffrey Craig on 14 January 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Introduction to Project, Research, and General Information

Jeff Craig

Pre-word
In my final essay I will be assessing the matrices giving rise to the global environmental
climate change phenomenon we are witnessing today. Furthermore, I will be analyzing
the numerous successes, failures, and loopholes under the auspices of the current climate
change regime. With regards to this following statement: ‘Despite the proliferation of
international environmental agreements, large-scale and pernicious environmental
degradation has persisted,’ I will critically discuss the facts and results of climate
change, the effectiveness of the current climate change legal regime, and lastly, its
potential for improvement.

Part I: Preface and Introduction to the Climate Change Phenomena

a)   Climate change
Climate change has been variously characterized by leading legal and political
figures as the “biggest global-health threat of the 21st century,” “the greatest market
failure the world has seen,” the “biggest human rights issue of the 21st century,” the
“great moral challenge of our time,” “the new great threat to biodiversity,” “by far the
most important and fundamental issue affecting all of our lives,” “the worst problem
facing the world today,” and, ultimately, “the greatest challenge of our generation1.”
Climate change (also known as global warming) refers to the rise in average surface
temperatures on Earth2. The scientific community maintains that climate change is due
primarily to the human use of fossil fuels, which releases large quantities of carbon
dioxide and other greenhouse gases into the air3. These gases trap the heat within the
atmosphere, thereby initiating a range of adverse effects on ecosystems that include rising
sea levels, severe weather events, and droughts that render landscapes more susceptible to
wildfires. The news to date is bad, and is only getting worse. Thus, climate change has
come to be among the greatest concerns and challenges mankind faces with regards to
environmental protection.
b)   Brief overview of the data and statistics on the effects of Climate change
                                                                                                               
1  Carlarne,  Cinnemon.  Delinking  International  Environmental  Law  &  Climate  Change,  4  Mich.  J.  Envtl.  
&  Admin.  L.  1  (2014).  Page  2.
2  What is climate change? (n.d.). Retrieved June 08, 2016, from http://www.takepart.com/flashcards/what-
is-climate-change
3  Ibid.,  
 The IPCC’s Fifth Report is the most comprehensive report on climate change
compiled to date. It warns of the increasing scope and intensity of climate-related effects
on human and non-human life absent efforts both to mitigate and to prepare for climate
change4. Critically, it concludes, “human influence on the climate system is clear” and
that:
Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and since the 1950s, many of the observed
changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia. The atmosphere and ocean have
warmed, the amounts of snow and ice have diminished, sea level has risen, and the
concentrations of greenhouse gases have increased…Each of the last three decades has been
successively warmer at the Earth’s surface than any preceding decade since 18505.

Thus, it is apparent the earth is already warming; and unless we modify our behavior by
reducing emissions of greenhouse gases substantially, we will experience continued
global warming and irreversible changes that will negatively impact all components of
the climate system6. According to the IPCC, global surface temperature increases will be
between 3.7°C and 4.8°C in 2100 if no new action is taken7. The temperature increases
will be substantial and the effects on humans will be severe. So, knowing this, how has
international law reacted to climate change?
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

                                                                                                               
4  What is climate change? (n.d.). Retrieved June 08, 2016, from http://www.takepart.com/flashcards/what-
is-climate-change  
5  Cited  in  Carlarne,  7  
6  Carlarne,  7  
7  Cited  in  Carlarne,  8  
  
 

Assessing the Climate Change Regime: Past, Present, and Future

Part 2: Current International Legal Climate Change Regime

a)   United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was
adopted at the Rio Conference in 1992. Up to now, there are 197 Parties to the
Convention. It was adopted to serve as the primary framework for international
cooperation to combat climate change*8. However, the UNFCCC is not a fully formed
and detailed regulatory regime, but rather, a framework convention to establish a process
for reaching further agreement on policies and specific measures to deal with climate
change9. For the first time, it makes the concept of ‘common but differentiated
responsibility’ the explicit basis for the very different commitments of developed and
developing state parties. Overall, the objective of the Convention and of the other related
instruments is not to reverse greenhouse gas emissions, but to stabilize them ‘at a level
that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system’10.
In analyzing and assessing the specific aspirations or targets the UNFCCC
proposes, the Convention fails to specify the particular ‘levels’ emanating from the
dangerous anthropogenic emissions that interfere with the climate system. Article 2 of the
Convention reads:
The ultimate objective of this Convention and any related legal instruments that the Conference of the
Parties may adopt is to achieve, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Convention,
stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent
dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system. Such a level should be achieved within
a time frame sufficient to allow ecosystems to adapt naturally to climate change, to ensure that food
production is not threatened and to enable economic development to proceed in a sustainable manner11.

Firstly, as noted above, Article 2 is broad in its exact specification of levels of emission.

                                                                                                               
8  This  does  not  assume  a  lack  of  recognition  of  similar  conventions  such  as  the  Vienna  Convention  
vis-­‐‑à-­‐‑vis  the  Montreal  Protocol  &  separately,  the  Gothenburg  Protocol.
9  Birnie,  P.  W.,  &  Boyle,  A.  E.  (2009).  International  law  and  the  environment  (3rd  ed.).  Oxford  
University  Press.  Page  357  
10  Birnie  et  al.,  358  
11  United Nations., (1992). United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. New York: United
Nations, General Assembly. Article 2.
Secondly, the Article does not envisage that the objectives should be achieved
immediately, but merely that it should be ‘within a time frame sufficient to allow
ecosystems to adapt naturally to climate change, to ensure that food production is not
threatened, and to enable economic development to proceed in a sustainable matter’12.
The terminology used in Article 2 suggests the parties foresee to some extent that a
decent degree of climate change as inevitable, and that they are prepared to tolerate it
provided it happens slowly enough to allow natural adaptation13.
Article 3 sets out the principles the parties shall be ‘guided by’ in their efforts to
achieve the objective of Article 2. It asserts: “Parties should protect the climate system
for the benefit of present and future generations of humankind on the basis of equity, and
in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities and respective
capabilities14.” It also takes into account the “specific needs and special circumstances of
developing countries,” it enforces Parties to “take precautionary measures to anticipate,
prevent or minimize the causes of climate change and mitigate its adverse effects,” it
promotes sustainable development, and lastly, it asserts that “parties should cooperate to
promote a supportive and open international economic system that would lead to
sustainable economic growth and development in all Parties, particularly developing
country Parties, thus enabling them better to address the problems of climate change15.”
Article 3 takes a novel approach to environmental protection, but in the context of
a dynamic, new, and evolutionary regime, it has the important merit of providing the
parameters that parties are required to work towards in achieving the objective of the
Convention16. In particular, they are not faced with an empty framework base source
when entering subsequent protocol negotiations or when the Conference of Parties takes
decisions under the various articles17. Regarding the legal effect of Article 3’s provisions
given their role as guidance, the principles are not necessarily binding rules that must be
complied with; especially regarding their softer legal status with the word usage of

                                                                                                               
12  Birnie  et  al.,  358  
13  Cited  in  Birnie  et  al.,  358  
14  Article  3  to  the  United  Nations  Framework  Convention  on  Climate  Change,  Parts  1-­‐‑5.  
15  Article  3  to  the  United  Nations  Framework  Convention  on  Climate  Change,  Parts  1-­‐‑5.  
16  Birnie  et  al.,  359  
17  Ibid.,  
‘should’ throughout the Article18. However, the Article is not without legal effect.
Article 4 deals with the commitments undertaken by the parties; these
commitments are based on the principle of ‘common but differentiated responsibility’.
Particularly, Article 4, Section 2a states:
Each of these Parties shall adopt national policies and take corresponding measures on the
mitigation of climate change, by limiting its anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases and
protecting and enhancing its greenhouse gas sinks and reservoirs. These policies and measures
will demonstrate that developed countries are taking the lead in modifying longer-term trends in
anthropogenic emissions consistent with the objective of the Convention, recognizing that the
return by the end of the present decade to earlier levels of anthropogenic emissions of carbon
dioxide and other greenhouse gases not controlled by the Montreal Protocol would contribute to
such modification, and taking into account the differences in these Parties’ starting points and
approaches, economic structures and resource bases, the need to maintain strong and sustainable
economic growth, available technologies and other individual circumstances, as well as the need
for equitable and appropriate contributions by each of these Parties to the global effort regarding
that objective. These Parties may implement such
 policies and measures jointly with other Parties
and may assist other Parties in contributing
 to the achievement of the objective of the Convention
and, in particular, that of this subparagraph19;

Thus, the commitments undertaken by developed states in this Article are only
marginally more onerous by consisting principally of an obligation to adopt national
policies and measures on the mitigation of climate change by limiting emission of
greenhouse gases20. However, in deciding what these policies and measures should be, it
is freely up for individual Annex I parties to decide21. Furthermore, no uniformity of
approach is required, and economies in transition are additionally allowed a ‘certain
degree of flexibility’ in implementing their commitments under this article22.
As a result of the wording of these sub articles in Article 2, there creates a neither
strong nor clear commitment, in effect, the parties recognized that it would be necessary
to strengthen the Convention’s commitments in light of new scientific information and
further assessments of climate change. This led to the first Conference of the Parties to be
held at Berlin in 1995 to assess the results of the newest IPCC report at the time.
i.   Overall assessment of its role: effectiveness & weaknesses
At the time of its adoption in 1992 the UNFCCC was criticized for containing
‘only the vaguest of commitments regarding stabilization and no commitment at all on
                                                                                                               
18  Birnie  et  al.,  359  
19  Article  4  to  the  United  Nations  Framework  Convention  on  Climate  Change  
20  Birnie  et  al.,  360  
21  Birnie  et  al.,  360  
22  Ibid.,  
reductions23.’ Furthermore, it contained no provisions for international monitoring or
fact-finding. Nor did it acknowledge the responsibility of industrialized states to
compensate other states for the harm caused by greenhouse gas emissions beyond a
vague commitment to assist vulnerable developing country parties to meet the costs of
adaption24.
Despite the widespread criticism, a lot has changed since. In determining the
effectiveness of Conventions, the test of success lies not in the commitments made in the
Convention itself but in its subsequent evolution25. To notice, the UNFCCC did achieve
an equitable balance acceptable to a great majority of developed and developing states.
Moreover, the adoption of the Kyoto Protocol in 1997 demonstrated that agreement on
stronger emissions limits and earlier timetables was possible, despite the difficulty of
maintaining meaningful consensus26. Thus, the Convention set forth a basic framework of
legal effectiveness with regards to compliance towards its provisions, by establishing
general requirements for treaty outcomes, and by setting forth obligations of result. But,
in these cases, the notions of compliance with the treaty and the aims of its implicit
requirements and obligations are vague. As a result, the Convention has been subject to
many caveats. Despite the generality, I believe this Convention’s effectiveness most
relies on behavioral effectiveness where the role of the Convention’s articles is to modify
international behavior and steer it in the right direction towards achieving the regime’s
objective27. The only weakness with this aspect is that behavioral effectiveness is difficult
to measure, unlike legal effectiveness. Therefore, we may only compare what takes place
with what would have occurred in the absence of the treaty28. In this case, I believe the
UNFCCC is behaviorally effective and was the genesis in IEL that sought to combat
global climate change in a comprehensive manner.
b)   Kyoto Protocol
By 1995, countries began to launch negotiations in order to help strengthen the
                                                                                                               
23  Birnie  et  al.,  370  
24  Birnie  et  al.,  371  
25  Ibid.,  
26  Birnie  et  al.,  371  
27  Bodansky, D. (2010). The art and craft of international environmental law. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press. Page 253.  
28  Bodansky,  D.  (2010).  Page  255  
global response to climate change. Specifically, these meetings are referred to as the
United Nations Climate Change conferences. These Conferences serve as the formal
meetings of the UNFCCC Parties (Conferences of the Parties/COP) to assess the progress
in dealing with climate change. During COP1, held at Berlin in 1995, the Parties accepted
that the various commitments under the UNFCCC were inadequate, thus providing a
strong mandate for negotiating new and more rigorous obligations, to which would
eventually become the Kyoto Protocol29. Therefore, the Kyoto Protocol was adopted in
Kyoto, Japan, on December 11th, 1997 and entered into force on February 16th, 200530.
Currently, there are 192 Parties to the Kyoto Protocol but only 84 signatories31.
The key feature of the Kyoto Protocol is that it established for the first time,
quantitative restrictions on emissions from industrialized economies32. Furthermore, it
commits Parties to its standards by setting internationally binding emission reduction
targets. While the Protocol gives states freedom in how they implement their
commitments, it does not give them similar flexibility in defining the form and nature of
their commitments, as in the initial framework Convention. Instead, it prescribes a single
type of commitment (fixed emissions targets, which countries must achieve regardless of
changing economic or other circumstances), the scope of those targets (economy-wide),
the gases covered (a basket of six greenhouse gases), and the international offsets that can
count towards meeting those targets (certified emission reductions created through the
collective decision-making procedures of the Clean Development Mechanism)33.
Moreover, rather than being determined by each country unilaterally, the initial Kyoto
targets were defined through a process of international negotiations, and are subject to
detailed international accounting rules to determine whether a country has complied34.
This symbolized a move back towards a more flexible bottom-up approach. The
states willing to accept the initial Kyoto targets (for 2008–2012) represented only about a
                                                                                                               
29  Birnie  et  al.,  360  
30  Kyoto Protocol. (n.d.). Retrieved June 08, 2016, from http://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/items/2830.php
31  Kyoto Protocol. (n.d.). Retrieved June 08, 2016, from http://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/items/2830.php.
The  Protocol’s  first  commitment  period  started  in  2008  and  ended  in  2012.  The  second  commitment  
period  began  on  January  1st  2013  and  will  end  in  2020
32  Birnie  et  al.,  361  
33  Bodansky,  D.,  O'Connor,  S.  D.,  &  Diringer,  E.  (2014,  May).  EVOLUTION  OF  THE  INTERNATIONAL  
CLIMATE  EFFORT.  Retrieved  June  7,  2016.  Page  2.  
34  Ibid.,  
quarter of global emissions; the smaller subset of countries taking second-round targets
(through 2020) account for only 14 percent35. Thus, participation was low. Specifically
regarding emissions, the quantified emission limitation and reduction commitments
contained in Article 3(1) of the Protocol seek to ensure that overall emissions from
Annex B states are reduced to at least 5 percent below 1990 levels within the period 2008
to 201236. This article sets out different limits for each party, in deference to their
particular circumstances, including ability to reduce emissions, access to clean
technology, use of energy and so on. Nonetheless, all parties listed in Annex I of the
Convention must show ‘demonstrable progress in meeting their Kyoto Protocol
commitments by 200537. In addition, and oddly enough, developing states are not
included in Annex B. As a result, emissions limits do not apply to them and they are not
required to do any more than to meet their existing commitments under Article 4(1) of
the UNFCCC38.
i.   Assessment of its role: effectiveness & weaknesses
In recognizing that developed countries are principally responsible for the current
high levels of GHG emissions in the atmosphere, the Protocol places a heavier burden on
these nations under the principle of ‘common but differentiated responsibilities.’
Nonetheless, countries must meet their targets primarily through national measures.
However, the Protocol also offers additional means to meet their targets by way of three
market-based mechanisms: the Clean Development Mechanism, Joint Implementation,
and Emissions Trading39. The Kyoto Protocol was seen as an important first step towards
a truly global emission reduction regime that would stabilize GHG emissions and serve
as the architecture for future international agreements on climate change.
However, despite strong initial support from the international community, the
Protocol ultimately failed to induce significant emission reductions on a global scale40.
And while the relative failure of the Kyoto Protocol is often attributed to a variety of
                                                                                                               
35  Ibid.,  
36  Cited  in  Birnie  et  al.,  361  
37  Birnie  et  al.,  361  
38  Ibid.,  
39  Birnie  et  al.,  361  
40  Grunbaum, L. (2015, December 1). From Kyoto to Paris: How Bottom-Up Regulation Could Revitalize
the UNFCCC. Stanford Environmental Law Journal.  
factors, one of the Protocol’s most significant flaws was its failure to promote
comprehensive participation by all UNFCCC parties. Lastly, the emissions reductions
required by the subsequent Kyoto periods (2012-2020) have yet to enter into force due to
insufficient ratification by member Parties. So, while it is true that the Kyoto Protocol
encouraged all parties (including developing countries) to adopt emission reduction
targets, the agreement ultimately failed to obtain emission reduction commitments from
the some of the world’s largest greenhouse gas emitters, which include the United States,
China, Brazil, India, and South Africa.
As a result, the Kyoto Protocol has failed to provide for a truly comprehensive
and effective solution to climate change41. The failure of its legal effectiveness was due
to its lack of widespread participation of states complying to the obligations the rules
established, and in the actual conduct or lack of conduct/compliance regarding those
subject to these obligations. In essence, almost two decades after the emergence of global
warming as a significant political issue, global emissions of greenhouse gases continue to
grow at a rate of roughly 1.9 percent per year, and the entry into force of the Kyoto
Protocol has done little to slow this trend42.
c)   Paris Agreement
The 2015 Paris Agreement (PA), adopted in Paris on December 12th, 2015, marks
the latest step in the evolution of the UN climate change regime and builds on the work
undertaken under the UNFCC43. The Paris Agreement’s central aim is to strengthen the
global response to climate change by keeping a global temperature rise this century well
below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, and to pursue efforts to limit
temperature increase even further to 1.5 degrees Celsius44. Although it does not require a
certain amount or range of emission cuts in a certain amount of time, the PA is still a
significant addition in the effort to combat global climate change. It is a legally binding
treaty. However, it needs to be ratified by a sufficient number of parties before it can
enter into force. It will be opened for signature on April 22nd, 2016 in New York, and
                                                                                                               
41  Grunbaum (2005)  
42  Cited in Bodansky (2010), 260  
43  Background on the UNFCCC: The international response to climate change. (n.d.). Retrieved June 08,
2016, from http://unfccc.int/essential_background/items/6031.php
44  Background on the UNFCCC: The international response to climate change. (n.d.). Retrieved June 08,
2016, from http://unfccc.int/essential_background/items/6031.php  
enter into force if at least 55 Parties representing at least 55 percent of global emissions
have ratified45.
The Paris Agreement sheds new light in differentiating between developing and
developed countries, it breaks new ground by supplementing the principle of ‘common
but differentiated responsibilities’ by its core obligations for all parties and by its range of
techniques used to express differentiation between parties46. Specifically, it does this by
focusing on individual climate mitigation plans. In five-year cycles, all parties have to
prepare ‘nationally determined contributions’ (NDCs) (Article 4 & 20), report on
implementation, account for their contributions, and regularly enhance their national
plans. Lastly, developing countries continue to receive support for their actions and
reporting.
The NDC approach is regarded as positive co-option instead of imposing general
obligations on all parties47. This assumes that by not prescribing specific measures or
emission reductions, it will make it easier and more attractive for countries to join the
Agreement and to develop ambitious NDCs. Even more so, it assumes that the
transparent nature of this system will pressure States to do their fair share and implement
their own NDCs48. The fact that almost all parties to the UNFCCC, developed and
developing, have showed their commitment by submitting ‘intended nationally
determined contributions’ prior to the Paris summit can be regarded as a success in this
respect49. However, as a whole, the INDCs so far still fall short of the ambition required
globally to effectively combat climate change.
i.   Assessment of its role: effectiveness & future outlook
Despite various shortcomings in its legal status, the Paris Agreement is framed in

                                                                                                               
45  European Commission, COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN
PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL. (2016, February 3). The Road from Paris: Assessing the
implications of the Paris Agreement and accompanying the proposal for a Council decision on the signing,
on behalf of the European Union, of the Paris agreement adopted under the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change [Press release].  
46  Bodle, R., Donat, L., & Duwe, M. (2016, January 28). The Paris Agreement: Analysis, Assessment and
Outlook [Background paper for the workshop “Beyond COP21: what does Paris mean for future climate
policy?”]. Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conserva- tion, Building and Nuclear Safety,
Berlin. Page 2.
47  Bodle  et  al.,  29  
48  Ibid.,  
49  Bodle  et  al.,  22  
a way that presents a clear political narrative of what parties are expected to do towards
combatting climate change50. The procedural approach is a means for setting out a simple
but clear structure for the global effort. The number, and quality of the INDCs submitted
so far is a sign that parties are willing to follow this approach51. But, it remains to be seen
whether the PA’s provisions will trigger sufficient momentum over time, whether parties
will implement them, and how effective they actually turn out to be. Thus,
implementation is key to the long-term success of the PA outcome.
I believe that order to uphold the progress made in combatting global climate
change, the political momentum captured in Paris needs to be maintained52. Secondly, the
capacity has to be created for the continued implementation of NDCs. The ‘intended’
contributions (INDCs) submitted before and in Paris showed an almost universal
engagement by all countries, despite their content not being sufficient for staying below 2
degrees Celsius53. 
 Thirdly, the PA’s procedural approach means that further
development and codification of the provision’s details are required. The negotiations in
future COP meetings need to determine the remaining technical details, in particular
regarding the NDC’s features and the Agreement’s transparency. These details have to
provide a counterweight to the flexibility parties have in defining and implementing their
actions in fighting climate change54.
Part 3: Potential for Progress, Improvement, and Amendment
Thus, it seems that with the signature of the Paris Agreement a larger worldwide
consensus on combatting climate change was achieved. Specifically, with the backing of
the world’s most powerful states, (finally including the US) furthermore, by involving
states bound together with a sense of community and cooperation seeking to prevent
catastrophic climate change. With the creation of a more secure financial mechanism,
developing countries can have access to more clean solutions to industrialization, also, by
featuring a climate change regime with both a top-down approach and a flexible bottom-
up approach, it provides all states with the flexibility to willfully try out the new system
                                                                                                               
50  Bodle  et  al.,  29  
51  Ibid.,  
52  Bodle  et  al.,  29  
53  Bodle  et  al.,  29  
54  Ibid.,  
at their own capacity. In the end, determining the successes of the climate change regime
is a complex and difficult task; nonetheless, I believe the regime has come a long way
since its design in 1992. Concerning the increased participation of the global community,
the annual meetings held to discuss the issue, to the proliferation of the scientific
community in assessing climate change and in the cooperation of signing the Paris treaty,
are all evidence of support that highlight the regime’s development through time as a
more strengthened and recognized institution in combatting climate change. At last, the
results and effectiveness will depend on the implementation of the climate regime’s
provisions by the international community.
   
 Works  Cited  

Background on the UNFCCC: The international response to climate change. (n.d.).

Retrieved June 08, 2016, from http://unfccc.int/essential_background/items/6031.php

Birnie, P. W., & Boyle, A. E. (2009). International law and the environment (3rd ed.).
Oxford University Press. 


Bodansky, D. (2010). The art and craft of international environmental law. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press.

Bodansky, D., O'Connor, S. D., & Diringer, E. (2014, May). EVOLUTION OF THE
INTERNATIONAL CLIMATE EFFORT. Retrieved June 7, 2016, from
http://www.c2es.org/docUploads/evolution-of-the-international-climate-effort.pdf

Bodle, R., Donat, L., & Duwe, M. (2016, January 28). The Paris Agreement: Analysis,
Assessment and Outlook [Background paper for the workshop “Beyond COP21:
what does Paris mean for future climate policy?”]. Federal Ministry for the
Environment, Nature Conserva- tion, Building and Nuclear Safety, Berlin.

Cinnamon, Carlarne, Delinking International Environmental Law & Climate Change, 4

Mich. J. Envtl. & Admin. L. 1 (2014). Available at:
h5p://repository.law.umich.edu/mjeal/vol4/iss1/1

Grunbaum, L. (2015, December 1). From Kyoto to Paris: How Bottom-Up Regulation
Could Revitalize the UNFCCC. Stanford Environmental Law Journal. Retrieved from
https://journals.law.stanford.edu/stanford-environmental-law-journal-elj/blog/kyoto-
paris-how-bottom-regulation-could-revitalize-unfccc.

European Commission, COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL. (2016, February 3). The Road
from Paris: Assessing the implications of the Paris Agreement and accompanying the
proposal for a Council decision on the signing, on behalf of the European Union, of
the Paris agreement adopted under the United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change [Press release]. Europa.edu. Retrieved June 8, 2016, from
https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/rep/1/2016/EN/1-2016-110-EN-F1-1.PDF

Kyoto Protocol. (n.d.). Retrieved June 08, 2016, from

http://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/items/2830.php

United Nations., (1992). United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

New York: United Nations, General Assembly.

What is climate change? (n.d.). Retrieved June 08, 2016, from

http://www.takepart.com/flashcards/what-is-climate-change

View publication stats