Abstract
AbstractIn 2016, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and International Maritime Organization (IMO) made important strides towards the regulation of emissions from international aviation and maritime transport. This was partially catalysed by the ‘ultimatum strategy’ of the European Union (EU), where the Union persistently threatened to take unilateral steps in the absence of multilateral action. As this article analyses, it appears that the Union is reluctant to relinquish its unilateral approach and align fully with both the ICAO Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme and the IMO Global Data Collection Scheme. This raises questions under public international law as to the relationships between these competing measures. Amidst rising political pressures, this article considers the extent to which the unfolding multilateral policies of the ICAO and IMO may limit the regulatory competence of the EU. While the EU is an independent legal entity, it has been conferred far-reaching competences by its Member States who are themselves members of these other international organisations. Given the lack of clarity on clear hierarchical rules, an important role remains for the customary law of state jurisdiction in governing regulatory competence more generally. The final part of this article engages with recent discussions on the existence of an obligation to exercise jurisdictional self-restraint. It reflects on the tensions arising between respect for states’ regulatory autonomy and the prevention of ‘dangerous’ anthropogenic climate change.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference60 articles.
1. Ahmed T, Butler I (2006) The European Union and human rights: an international law perspective. EJIL 17:771–801
2. Bartels L (2002) Article XX of GATT and the problem of extraterritorial jurisdiction—the case of trade measures for the protection of human rights. JWT 36:353–378
3. Bäuerle T (2012) Integrating shipping into the EU Emissions Trading Scheme? In: Koch HJ, König D, Sanden J (eds) Climate change and environmental hazards related to shipping: an international legal framework. Brill, Leiden, pp 109–119
4. Bodansky D (2000) What’s so bad about unilateral action to protect the environment? EJIL 11(2):339–347
5. Boisson de Chazournes L (2000) Unilateralism and environmental protection: issues of perception and reality of issues. EJIL 11:315–338
Cited by
9 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献