{"title":"在规范环境中解读《巴黎协定","authors":"Lavanya Rajamani","doi":"10.1093/clp/cuae011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"International and regional courts are increasingly being asked to determine the rights and responsibilities of states in relation to climate harm. The context for such requests is that the 2015 Paris Agreement, comprising primarily procedural obligations and obligations of conduct, and premised on national determination, appears by itself radically insufficient to resolve the existential climate crisis the planet is facing. This article explores if this is indeed the case and argues that the 2015 Paris Agreement must be interpreted in its ‘normative environment’. The ‘normative environment’ includes the customary international law principle of harm prevention, other treaties, including human rights ones, and a set of principles of varying legal status but considerable operational relevance and guidance. This article examines specific obligations from the 2015 Paris Agreement and seeks to concretize and strengthen them based on this interpretative approach. While such strengthened obligations might yet be insufficient to decisively resolve the climate crisis, these nevertheless reflect a richer account of international legal resolve relating to climate change—one that is premised on an understanding of international law as a seamless web of inter-locking obligations rather than of treaties functioning as atomistic reflections of state consent in that area.","PeriodicalId":45282,"journal":{"name":"Current Legal Problems","volume":"29 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Interpreting the Paris Agreement in its Normative Environment\",\"authors\":\"Lavanya Rajamani\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/clp/cuae011\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"International and regional courts are increasingly being asked to determine the rights and responsibilities of states in relation to climate harm. The context for such requests is that the 2015 Paris Agreement, comprising primarily procedural obligations and obligations of conduct, and premised on national determination, appears by itself radically insufficient to resolve the existential climate crisis the planet is facing. This article explores if this is indeed the case and argues that the 2015 Paris Agreement must be interpreted in its ‘normative environment’. The ‘normative environment’ includes the customary international law principle of harm prevention, other treaties, including human rights ones, and a set of principles of varying legal status but considerable operational relevance and guidance. This article examines specific obligations from the 2015 Paris Agreement and seeks to concretize and strengthen them based on this interpretative approach. While such strengthened obligations might yet be insufficient to decisively resolve the climate crisis, these nevertheless reflect a richer account of international legal resolve relating to climate change—one that is premised on an understanding of international law as a seamless web of inter-locking obligations rather than of treaties functioning as atomistic reflections of state consent in that area.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45282,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Legal Problems\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Legal Problems\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/clp/cuae011\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Legal Problems","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/clp/cuae011","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
Interpreting the Paris Agreement in its Normative Environment
International and regional courts are increasingly being asked to determine the rights and responsibilities of states in relation to climate harm. The context for such requests is that the 2015 Paris Agreement, comprising primarily procedural obligations and obligations of conduct, and premised on national determination, appears by itself radically insufficient to resolve the existential climate crisis the planet is facing. This article explores if this is indeed the case and argues that the 2015 Paris Agreement must be interpreted in its ‘normative environment’. The ‘normative environment’ includes the customary international law principle of harm prevention, other treaties, including human rights ones, and a set of principles of varying legal status but considerable operational relevance and guidance. This article examines specific obligations from the 2015 Paris Agreement and seeks to concretize and strengthen them based on this interpretative approach. While such strengthened obligations might yet be insufficient to decisively resolve the climate crisis, these nevertheless reflect a richer account of international legal resolve relating to climate change—one that is premised on an understanding of international law as a seamless web of inter-locking obligations rather than of treaties functioning as atomistic reflections of state consent in that area.
期刊介绍:
The lectures are public, delivered on a weekly basis and chaired by members of the judiciary. CLP features scholarly articles that offer a critical analysis of important current legal issues. It covers all areas of legal scholarship and features a wide range of methodological approaches to law.