Redressing Historical Responsibility for the Unjust Precarities of Climate Change in the Present

Mason-Case, Sarah; Dehm, Julia

doi:10.1017/9781108879064.014

Cited by 7 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…129 While the CEDAW Committee acknowledges the global unequal consequences of climate change and their relation to women's rights, there is little discussion of the responsibility of states for climate change. 130 There is only one instance where the CEDAW Committee singles out a state from the Global North, Australia, for providing limited humanitarian assistance to surrounding small islands. 131 It could go further and assess 'differing contributions to global degradation' and shine the spotlight on the 'historic and moral responsibility of States'.…”

Section: (Iii)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Feminist Frontiers in Climate Justice

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: (Iii)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Feminist Frontiers in Climate Justice

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These historical emissions have caused serious harms, appropriated atmospheric space and were constitutive in enabling the conditions for the contemporary, unjust, and unequal international legal order. 221 Because these historical emissions have ongoing ecological, political and social effects, they impose continuing demands for reparations. 222 Unsurprisingly, this question about the responsibility for historical GHG emission is one of the most fraught issues in international climate politics.…”

Section: Accountability For Loss and Damage From The Adverse Impacts ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond Climate Due Diligence: Fossil Fuels, ‘Red Lines’ and Reparations

Dehm

2023

Bus. and hum. rights j.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The scale and scope of the climate crisis and its drastically worsening impacts means that even as a ‘climate due diligence’ obligation is increasingly taking shape as a dimension of human rights due diligence, there is also growing evidence of the limitations of this emerging norm. This article provides four critiques of climate due diligence based on its insufficiency, its conceptual ambiguity, its operational limitations, and its structural limitations. It argues that these critiques could be addressed by regulatory reform that draw clear ‘red lines’ based on the need to prevent the development of any new fossil fuel and address the ‘corporate capture’ of regulatory institutions by the fossil fuel industry. Additionally, it calls for reparations to ensure effective access to a remedy for existing and potential future climate-related human rights impacts that business has caused or contributed to.

show abstract

“…110 Building on Burkett's work, Riley-Case and Dehm highlight the potential of climate reparations to offer very different, and potentially transformative outcomes that allow us to think outside the box of existing legal doctrines. 111 I would further argue that climate reparations are particularly seductive as a concept because they allow one to break free from the confines of reified legal processes and institutions. At the same time, they ground legal responses to climate change in the lived experiences of climate victims.…”

Section: Climate Reparations Appear Out Of Reachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Loss and Damage, Climate Victims, and International Climate Law: Looking Back, Looking Forward

Toussaint

2023

TEL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

After more than three decades of negotiations, the international response to climate change under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) appears to have come full circle. At COP27, parties to the UNFCCC agreed to establish a multilateral fund to address loss and damage from global temperature rise, an idea that was initially put forward by the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) in the early 1990s. Employing a historical critique, which draws upon archival and doctrinal research and interviews with key informants who participated in the early days of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee for a Framework Convention on Climate Change, this article examines the AOSIS proposal in its wider historical context, and provides reflections for the renewed endeavour to negotiate a multilateral fund on loss and damage, in particular with a view to achieving justice for climate victims.

show abstract

Redressing Historical Responsibility for the Unjust Precarities of Climate Change in the Present

Cited by 7 publications

References 0 publications

Feminist Frontiers in Climate Justice

Feminist Frontiers in Climate Justice

Beyond Climate Due Diligence: Fossil Fuels, ‘Red Lines’ and Reparations

Loss and Damage, Climate Victims, and International Climate Law: Looking Back, Looking Forward

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About