Scholarlink

This chapter investigates how Global South states articulate their positions on climate change within the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) advisory proceedings. Analyzing written and oral submissions from 18 Global South states, this section employs categorical content analysis to explore their engagement with six key categories: Jurisdiction, Common But Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities (CBDR-RC), Duties of Cooperation and Assistance, Obligation to Prevent Marine Pollution, Human Rights, and Remedies. The findings reveal diverse narrative strategies. While most Global South states endorsed ITLOS’s advisory jurisdiction, a few, notably Brazil, China, and India, presented robust counterarguments. The CBDR-RC principle emerged as a central theme, with many states emphasizing its role in interpreting UNCLOS obligations, particularly concerning financial and technological support. Similarly, the duty of cooperation and assistance was frequently invoked, often citing international case law to underscore its legally binding nature. The analysis also delves into states’ interpretations of the obligation to prevent marine pollution, highlighting the nuanced connection they draw between climate change impacts and existing UNCLOS duties. By examining these narratives embedded in legal arguments, the chapter illuminates how Global South states leverage international legal proceedings to shape legal discourse and advance equitable solutions to the global climate crisis.

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Global South Narratives Before the ITLOS Advisory Proceedings on Climate Change

  • 章节

  • 发表日期：

    2025年

查看全文
  • Paula Wojcikiewicz Almeida,
  • Vitor Furtado de Melo,
  • Lucas Vollers,
  • Valentine Tissot Pinheiro

摘要

This chapter investigates how Global South states articulate their positions on climate change within the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) advisory proceedings. Analyzing written and oral submissions from 18 Global South states, this section employs categorical content analysis to explore their engagement with six key categories: Jurisdiction, Common But Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities (CBDR-RC), Duties of Cooperation and Assistance, Obligation to Prevent Marine Pollution, Human Rights, and Remedies. The findings reveal diverse narrative strategies. While most Global South states endorsed ITLOS’s advisory jurisdiction, a few, notably Brazil, China, and India, presented robust counterarguments. The CBDR-RC principle emerged as a central theme, with many states emphasizing its role in interpreting UNCLOS obligations, particularly concerning financial and technological support. Similarly, the duty of cooperation and assistance was frequently invoked, often citing international case law to underscore its legally binding nature. The analysis also delves into states’ interpretations of the obligation to prevent marine pollution, highlighting the nuanced connection they draw between climate change impacts and existing UNCLOS duties. By examining these narratives embedded in legal arguments, the chapter illuminates how Global South states leverage international legal proceedings to shape legal discourse and advance equitable solutions to the global climate crisis.