Search

Developing states in the Pacific region shoulder an unfair burden of the climate crisis. Exposed geographies and developing economies endanger states in this region by hampering their ability to adapt to threats that include rising seas and intensified weather events. In an unfair twist, many states in the Pacific region bear minimal responsibility for the drivers of the climate crisis given their historically low contributions to greenhouse gas emissions. Without the economic benefits of industrialisation, the region’s economies are ill-suited to weathering the financial stress of adaptation. Their situation is in stark contrast to the emissions-intensive economies of developed states that makes them primarily responsible for and well placed to manage the climate crisis. Cognizant of this disproportion, the principle of Common But Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities has been embedded into the international laws regulating climate change to redistribute inequalities between the global divide through differentiating legal obligations. In the context of adaptation, this means mandating the flow of finance from developed states to vulnerable states, such as those in the Pacific region, in a just manner that overcomes resource and wealth disparities. This paper examines whether CBDR-RC has shaped the legal framework of adaptation finance to promote distributive justice through correcting economic disparities. A doctrinal approach is applied to identify the key legal provisions regulating adaptation finance followed by consideration of the underpinning policies to highlight flaws in the distribution of adaptation finance. Human geographies and scientific scholarship are drawn on to illustrate diverging policy bases for the concept of vulnerability. The paper analyses how an ambiguous usage of vulnerability is embedded in law and the effect that this has on allowing the distribution of finance to preference physical vulnerability over the underlying economic, social, and institutional causes of vulnerability. The ambiguity in the definition of vulnerability is argued to undermine the ability of law to facilitate the just distribution of adaptation finance to those in the Pacific region that need it most.

Global warming poses serious risks to the environment, communities, and international peace and security. Significant concerns have been raised that, in the case of climate policy failures, the world may enter a Warming War, threatening the future viability of the planet and its life-sustaining ecosystems. While the regime of treaties and agreements governing climate change acknowledges the science and threats posed by global warming, it is not well positioned to constrain the securitization of climate change. A function of international law is to prevent armed conflict by resolving disputes through the judicial application of principles and norms governing relations between States. However, to date, it has been ineffective in addressing the impacts of climate change on armed conflict, because the treaties applicable to climate change fail to provide preventative, enforcement, and dispute resolution mechanisms. It is time for international law to establish judicial bodies with jurisdiction for conflict resolution and response capacities in the pre-phase to a Warming War. The challenge is to develop soft security measures to avoid climate conflict risks turning violent and becoming a hard security issue, attracting the use of force by the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). The establishment of an International Court for the Environment (ICE) is proposed as an entity that could enforce legally binding norms and resolve climate-induced disputes, opening an avenue for stakeholders to bring climate loss and damage cases to court. Aside from the reduction of greenhouse gases (GHG) to limit global warming, and the establishment of new legal regimes, alternative actions can be undertaken to protect the environment and communities, by mitigating climate-related risks. There is growing discourse surrounding climate change as a threat multiplier, exacerbating existing vulnerabilities. In the pre-phase to conflict, there is an urgent need to identify these vulnerabilities and their levels of influence on the compound effects of climate and conflict risks., Goettingen Journal of International Law ; Vol. 10, no. 1, page 307-343, Special Issue: Enhancing the Protection of the Environment in Relation to Armed Conflicts – the Draft Principles of the International Law Commission and Beyond