Energy charter treaty's investor protection provisions: Potential to Foster solutions to global warming and promote sustainable development
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
The Energy Charter Treaty (ECT) is the only multi-lateral treaty that deals specifically with the energy sector. It must be carefully reviewed to see if it can play a role in addressing climate change. The importance of international investment in the energy sector in the developing countries has been a theme of the discussions on climate change for many years. The developing countries are rapidly becoming major sources of GHG emissions with China surpassing the United States in emissions in 2007. There is a consensus that enormous investments in the developing countries will be required to foster the development of clean sustainable energy to arrest the increase in GHG emissions and avoid the worst case climate change scenarios. The Kyoto Protocol which set binding GHG limits for the industrialized countries for the 2008-2012 period does not set binding emission reduction targets for the developing countries. The developing countries, most recently at the UN conference in Bali in December of 2007, have steadfastly refused to be bound by GHG emissions caps and have instead remained committed to the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities as defined in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. It behooves the developing countries to combat climate change by fostering foreign investment to mitigate GHG emissions in their countries. Consideration should be given to whether the developing countries should be urged to accede to the ECT, in its current or modified form, and whether such accession would contribute significantly to the attractiveness of investment in the developing countries and serve to reduce the cost of such investments making more investment possible.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Jeremy Galbreath (2011). To What Extent is Business Responding to Climate Change? Evidence From a Global Wine Producer. Journal of Business Ethics 104 (3):421-432.
E. Wesley & F. Peterson (1999). The Ethics of Burden-Sharing in the Global Greenhouse. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 11 (3):167-196.
Robyn Eckersley (2010). The Politics of Carbon Leakage and the Fairness of Border Measures. Ethics and International Affairs 24 (4):367-393.
Paul Baer, Tom Athanasiou, Sivan Kartha & Eric Kemp-Benedict (2009). Greenhouse Development Rights: A Proposal for a Fair Global Climate Treaty. Ethics, Place and Environment 12 (3):267-281.
David Wheeler, Moving Toward a Consensus on Climate Policy: The Essential Role of Global Public Disclosure.
Paul Bellaby, Rob Flynn & Miriam Ricci (2011). Substituting 'H2 for C' and Reducing Global Inequalities in Health. Journal of Global Ethics 7 (1):91 - 103.
Darrel Moellendorf (2009). Treaty Norms and Climate Change Mitigation. Ethics and International Affairs 23 (3):247-265.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads1 ( #779,909 of 1,907,521 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?