The Responsibility to Protect in Environmental Emergencies

Evans, Gareth; Luck, Edward C.; Malone, Linda A.

doi:10.1017/s027250370003353x

Cited by 10 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Knight (2005) notes that Kofi Annan's High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change recast preventive action as an expression of R2P and framed environmental degradation as one trigger for instability. Others have cautioned against stretching the meaning of R2P, fearing that doing so would risk undermining the fragile consensus around it or reduce it to an aspirational, nonoperational concept (Evans 2009;Harrington 2012).…”

Section: Addressing Climate Refugeesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Climate Change and the UN Security Council: Bully Pulpit or Bull in a China Shop?

Conca¹,

Thwaites²,

Lee³

2017

Global Environmental Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although claims about climate/conflict links remain contested, concerns that climate change will affect peace and security have gained traction in academic, activist, and policy circles. One set of pressures for responsive action has centered on the UN Security Council, which has held several often-contentious debates on the topic. Whether the Council should address climate change is a highly politicized question, tied to controversies about the Council’s mandate, membership reform, and the appropriate division of labor in the UN system. Lost in this political debate has been a more fundamental question—what exactly could the Council do? We examine six specific proposals for Council action culled from the academic and policy literature and the public positions of member states. These include incorporating climate risks into peacekeeping operations, developing an early-warning system, managing the threat to small-island states, engaging in preventive diplomacy, addressing climate refugees, and embracing a climate-related analogy to the norm of a responsibility to protect. For each proposal, our analysis—which is based on interviews conducted at the UN, archival research, and case histories of past instances of adapting the Council’s focus to new challenges—examines what it would mean and require for the Council to act. We also identify a series of measures that constitute a “pragmatic transformative” agenda. These steps recognize the poor fit between the climate challenge and the Council as it is currently constituted, but also the potential to use climate as part of a larger transformation toward the better Council the world needs.

show abstract

Section: Addressing Climate Refugeesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Climate Change and the UN Security Council: Bully Pulpit or Bull in a China Shop?

Conca¹,

Thwaites²,

Lee³

2017

Global Environmental Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The state activism in the case of PMD echoes what Cohen and Deng (1998) conceptualize Bsovereignty as responsibility^-the state's acceptance of its responsibility to protect IDPs within its jurisdiction. The concept is akin to R2P in the affirmation of the state's duties, but the sovereignty as responsibility approach provides a basis that this study builds upon, especially its positive and constructive view of the state's role in social protection since the R2P doctrine has been burdened by the fear of, or demand for, military intervention and the infringement of state sovereignty, by its opponents and its friends, respectively (Evans et al 2001;Evans 2009;Cohen 2008;Özerdem 2010;Wong 2009). 5 Their tenet is neither accusatory nor punitive toward sovereign states, even reluctant or failed ones; it encourages and nurtures the state's willing and proactive engagement with the displaced, and international involvement in offering assistance is seen as secondary.…”

Section: Surrogate Guardianmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Skeptics globally liken the idea to humanitarian intervention and warn of a threat to state sovereignty. R2P supporters, seeking its broader application to calamities other than mass atrocities, urge more multilateral engagement(Evans et al 2001;Evans 2009;Cohen 2008;Özerdem 2010; Wong 2009). 6 Regarding the states' responses to the R2P initiative, Cohen observes that Bstates are more willing to accept expert principles if they are not asked to assume new obligations but rather to understand better how to apply their existing obligations in new situations^(Cohen 2013, p. 13).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Surrogate Guardian: Responsibility to Protect Migrants in Disasters and Responses by the Japanese State

Endoh

2016

Int. Migration & Integration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper addresses the urgent and understudied issue of how to protect migrants stranded by disasters in their countries of destination, focusing on the roles of institutions and state actors in migrant-receiving nations. It explains how migrant displacement can be understood in terms of international norms concerning internal displacement. Then, it argues that the migrant-receiver state bears the primary responsibility for protecting displaced migrants who fit the category of Binternally displaced persons (IDPs)^and assisting their short-and longer-term recoveries. A case study of Japan illustrates how these concepts are adopted in a real situation. Overall, this disaster-prone nation has been fulfilling its protection duties toward the vulnerable migrant population by building inclusive and equitable protection mechanisms. But, such activism is more salient at lower levels than at the upper level of the state. Highlighting the legal, normative, and institutional gaps of migrant protection from disasters at international and national levels, this paper elucidates the merits of considering at-risk migrants as IDPs and their host state as the primary guardian, so as to build a more adaptive and resilient disaster mitigation framework in culturally diverse environments. KeywordsInternally displaced persons (IDPs) . Migrants . Disaster protection . Japan In the post-Cold War period, open borders have induced colossal migration of workers. In 2013 alone, around 232 million migrants, many from developing economies, crossed borders to work in wealthier economies, especially metropolitan areas. Meanwhile, megalopolises, in Asia and elsewhere, cluster along coastlines, where they are more susceptible to natural disasters, such as typhoons, earthquakes, tsunamis, and floods (Asian Development Bank and Asian Development Bank Institute 2013; Hugo 2014).

show abstract

“…63 Μεταξύ του 19ου αιώνα και της σύστασης της Κοινωνίας των Εθνών, μετά τον Α′ Παγκόσμιο Πόλεμο, δεν υπήρχαν κανόνες που να διέπουν την παροχή διεθνούς βοήθειας. 64 παρέχουν βοήθεια, όποτε κρινόταν αναγκαίο. 65 Σε επίπεδο συμβατικού δικαίου ιστορικά, οι προσπάθειες για την αντιμετώπιση φυσικών καταστροφών ξεκίνησαν ήδη από τα τέλη του 19ου αιώνα, με το Κίνημα του Ερυθρού Σταυρού να «προσκαλεί» τα κράτη να εφαρμόσουν τη Σύμβαση της Γενεύης για την προστασία των θυμάτων του πολέμου και τα θύματα των φυσικών καταστροφών.…”

Section: α η αρχή της παροχής ανθρωπιστικής βοήθειας ως υπόβαθροunclassified

Η Παροχή Ανθρωπιστικής Βοήθειας Στην Περίπτωση Φυσικών Καταστροφών Στο Διεθνές Δίκαιο

Φανάκη¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Αντικείμενο της παρούσας έρευνας αποτελεί αφενός ο προσδιορισμός και οι καταβολές του καθεστώτος του Διεθνούς Δικαίου Αντιμετώπισης Καταστροφών (ΔΔΑΚ), και αφετέρου η ισχύς και εφαρμογή του. Σε αυτούς τους δύο άξονες εμβαθύνει η διατριβή, αναπτύσσοντας δύο παράλληλες προβληματικές. Συστατικά μέρη του ΔΔΑΚ αναγνωρίζονται τόσο η παροχή βοήθειας, η οποία αποτέλεσε και εφαλτήριο του ΔΔΑΚ και αναπτύσσεται στο πρώτο μέρος της διατριβής, όσο και η έννοια της «καταστροφής», το πεδίο ratione materiae, δηλαδή σε ποιες περιπτώσεις εφαρμόζεται το ΔΔΑΚ, η οποία ερευνάται στο δεύτερο μέρος. Διευκρινίζεται ότι η παρούσα εργασία εξετάζει αποκλειστικά τις περιπτώσεις των φυσικών καταστροφών, όχι των ανθρωπογενών ή των πυρηνικών, υιοθετώντας ως ορισμό εργασίας για την έννοια της «καταστροφής» το άρθρo 3 της Επιτροπής Διεθνούς Δικαίου (ΕΔΔ) των Ηνωμένων Εθνών (Η.Ε.) του «Σχεδίου Άρθρων για την Προστασία Ατόμων σε Περιπτώσεις Καταστροφών». Κύρια συμπεράσματα της έρευνας αποτελούν τόσο η μη ανάδειξη νομικής υποχρέωσης κράτους να προσφέρει βοήθεια μετά από φυσική καταστροφή, αλλά, κατά κύριο λόγο, ούτε και να την αποδεχθεί, όσο και ο διαχωρισμός του «δικαιώματος επέμβασης» από την παροχή βοήθειας στις φυσικές καταστροφές που ξεκαθαρίζεται στο Διεθνές Δίκαιο Αντιμετώπισης Καταστροφών, από μια μεταστροφή της εφαρμογής της «ευθύνης προστασίας» σε μια τάση σύγκλισης και εφαρμογής μιας «υποχρέωσης συνεργασίας». Η αρχή της εθνικής κυριαρχίας παραμένει αδιαπραγμάτευτη στις περιπτώσεις των φυσικών καταστροφών.

show abstract

The Responsibility to Protect in Environmental Emergencies

Cited by 10 publications

References 0 publications

Climate Change and the UN Security Council: Bully Pulpit or Bull in a China Shop?

Climate Change and the UN Security Council: Bully Pulpit or Bull in a China Shop?

Surrogate Guardian: Responsibility to Protect Migrants in Disasters and Responses by the Japanese State

Η Παροχή Ανθρωπιστικής Βοήθειας Στην Περίπτωση Φυσικών Καταστροφών Στο Διεθνές Δίκαιο

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About