Soft law, migration and climate change governance

Abstract

This article explores alternative ways that legal and normative frameworks can be used to uphold the rights of those who are displaced internally or across borders in the context of anthropogenic climate change. In particular, we argue that more efforts should be focused on developing soft law rather than trying to fit those displaced because of the effects of climate change into existing legal frameworks. The present hard law system governing the movement of people is not equipped to handle the complexities of population movements resulting from the effects of climate change, and an adequate transformation of these often static legal regimes is improbable. By contrast, soft law offers a number of advantages particularly well suited to the characteristics of those who move because of the effects of climate change and who currently fall into the gaps between protection frameworks. On the downside, soft law norms are not binding and the multiplicity of such initiatives may contribute to a fragmentation of protection systems, resources and attention. Therefore, the present article concludes by arguing for a two-track approach in which both soft and hard law contributes to the protection of those displaced in the context of climate change. On the one hand, in order to address some of the current protection gaps, existing, emergent and new soft law needs to be used and implemented more thoroughly. At the same time, ways forward also include encouraging the more effective and dynamic implementation of hard law, especially through regionalization, complementary protection and the deployment of some features of emerging climate change regimes.

Solutions discourse in disaster displacement: implications for policy and practice

“…While being aware of the diverse terms used to describe people moving owing to environmental hazards (see, for example, Ferris, 2015), throughout this paper, the term 'disaster displacement' is used in line with the definition applied by the Platform on Disaster Displacement, which refers to: situations where people are forced to leave their homes or places of habitual residence as a result of a disaster or in order to avoid the impact of an immediate and foreseeable natural hazard (Kaelin, 2020, p. 13).…”

Improvement Path for Cross-Border Governance Rules of Personal Data from an International Perspective

“…Currently, the EU, Australia, Germany, Russia, and China have established data localization legislation or policies, while countries such as Brazil, India, and Malaysia acknowledge and implement data localization laws. [12]…”

“…Published by Francis Academic Press, UK -93-determined by the contracting parties themselves, provided that these standards are based on the principle of good faith and are subject to objective review by expert panels. [12] RCEP restricts the right of other contracting parties to raise objections to such measures, which undoubtedly poses risks of abuse for the contracting parties.…”

Shifting responsibility and denying justice: New Zealand’s contentious approach to Pacific climate mobilities

“…The contested issue of causality poses a significant problem when it comes to the ability of international law to uphold the principle of 'common but differentiated responsibility'. Ferris and Bergmann (2017) argue that climate change acts as a threat multiplier rather than being the sole reason for people's mobilities. Consequently, this makes it very difficult to locate responsibility and liability, and even more difficult to create international consensus on a binding legal requirement for the protection of migrants (Ferris and Bergmann 2017).…”

“…Ferris and Bergmann (2017) argue that climate change acts as a threat multiplier rather than being the sole reason for people's mobilities. Consequently, this makes it very difficult to locate responsibility and liability, and even more difficult to create international consensus on a binding legal requirement for the protection of migrants (Ferris and Bergmann 2017).…”