寻找可持续的未来:尼日利亚和肯尼亚气候变化制度的比较评估

IF 2 3区 社会学 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Pontian Okoli, Etisang Abraham
{"title":"寻找可持续的未来:尼日利亚和肯尼亚气候变化制度的比较评估","authors":"Pontian Okoli, Etisang Abraham","doi":"10.1111/reel.12545","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Climate change has caused significant hardship in sub‐Saharan Africa. As a result, Kenya and Nigeria now have statutes that focus on climate change mitigation and adaptation. Both countries are also parties to the Paris Agreement. The Kenyan Climate Change Act (2016) and the Nigerian Climate Change Act (2021) are similar in terms of their design and overarching aims. Meanwhile, certain pivotal statutory provisions in both statutes are inconsistent with their overarching aims of enhancing appropriate responses to climate change. There is considerable scope for access to justice to be enhanced in the Kenyan and Nigerian statutes. Further, despite their similarities, the divergent approaches of the statutes undermine regional coherence. Such coherence is critical to effectively addressing climate change because both regional powers face similar vulnerabilities with respect to climate change and socio‐economic challenges. This article, therefore, undertakes a comparative analysis of the Kenyan and Nigerian legal regimes in two key respects, namely, (1) institutional structures and how they impact corruption and (2) accessing justice in the context of climate litigation. The Nigerian regime is behind that of Kenya in both regards. The article concludes by examining how the Aarhus Convention and the International Access to Justice Convention can help to fill any statutory gaps concerning access to justice.","PeriodicalId":51681,"journal":{"name":"Review of European Comparative & International Environmental Law","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"In search of a sustainable future: A comparative assessment of climate change regimes in Nigeria and Kenya\",\"authors\":\"Pontian Okoli, Etisang Abraham\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/reel.12545\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Climate change has caused significant hardship in sub‐Saharan Africa. As a result, Kenya and Nigeria now have statutes that focus on climate change mitigation and adaptation. Both countries are also parties to the Paris Agreement. The Kenyan Climate Change Act (2016) and the Nigerian Climate Change Act (2021) are similar in terms of their design and overarching aims. Meanwhile, certain pivotal statutory provisions in both statutes are inconsistent with their overarching aims of enhancing appropriate responses to climate change. There is considerable scope for access to justice to be enhanced in the Kenyan and Nigerian statutes. Further, despite their similarities, the divergent approaches of the statutes undermine regional coherence. Such coherence is critical to effectively addressing climate change because both regional powers face similar vulnerabilities with respect to climate change and socio‐economic challenges. This article, therefore, undertakes a comparative analysis of the Kenyan and Nigerian legal regimes in two key respects, namely, (1) institutional structures and how they impact corruption and (2) accessing justice in the context of climate litigation. The Nigerian regime is behind that of Kenya in both regards. The article concludes by examining how the Aarhus Convention and the International Access to Justice Convention can help to fill any statutory gaps concerning access to justice.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51681,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Review of European Comparative & International Environmental Law\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Review of European Comparative & International Environmental Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/reel.12545\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of European Comparative & International Environmental Law","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/reel.12545","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

气候变化给撒哈拉以南非洲造成了巨大困难。因此,肯尼亚和尼日利亚现在制定了以减缓和适应气候变化为重点的法规。这两个国家也是《巴黎协定》的缔约国。肯尼亚《气候变化法》(2016 年)和尼日利亚《气候变化法》(2021 年)在设计和总体目标方面相似。同时,这两部法律中的某些关键性条款与加强气候变化适当应对措施的总体目标不一致。在肯尼亚和尼日利亚的法规中,司法救助还有很大的提升空间。此外,尽管这两项法规有相似之处,但其不同的方法破坏了地区一致性。这种一致性对于有效应对气候变化至关重要,因为这两个地区大国在气候变化和社会经济挑战方面面临着相似的脆弱性。因此,本文从两个关键方面对肯尼亚和尼日利亚的法律制度进行了比较分析,即:(1)制度结构及其对腐败的影响;(2)气候诉讼背景下的司法救助。尼日利亚的制度在这两方面都落后于肯尼亚。文章最后探讨了《奥胡斯公约》和《国际诉诸司法公约》如何帮助填补诉诸司法方面的法律空白。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
In search of a sustainable future: A comparative assessment of climate change regimes in Nigeria and Kenya
Climate change has caused significant hardship in sub‐Saharan Africa. As a result, Kenya and Nigeria now have statutes that focus on climate change mitigation and adaptation. Both countries are also parties to the Paris Agreement. The Kenyan Climate Change Act (2016) and the Nigerian Climate Change Act (2021) are similar in terms of their design and overarching aims. Meanwhile, certain pivotal statutory provisions in both statutes are inconsistent with their overarching aims of enhancing appropriate responses to climate change. There is considerable scope for access to justice to be enhanced in the Kenyan and Nigerian statutes. Further, despite their similarities, the divergent approaches of the statutes undermine regional coherence. Such coherence is critical to effectively addressing climate change because both regional powers face similar vulnerabilities with respect to climate change and socio‐economic challenges. This article, therefore, undertakes a comparative analysis of the Kenyan and Nigerian legal regimes in two key respects, namely, (1) institutional structures and how they impact corruption and (2) accessing justice in the context of climate litigation. The Nigerian regime is behind that of Kenya in both regards. The article concludes by examining how the Aarhus Convention and the International Access to Justice Convention can help to fill any statutory gaps concerning access to justice.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
8.70%
发文量
48
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信