The Environment Lecture

Collective good

good available to all group members regardless of individual contribution

(something whether you helped make it happen you can use it and benefit from it)

• e.g., ozone layer; city parks

Collective action problem

individuals have no incentive to contribute to the provision or upkeep of collective goods

• incentives to “free ride” (I would rather sit back while u pay for it and I will benefit)

• e.g., cleaning up pollution (we like to happen but we want someone else to do it, we will benefit from it from other ppl dealing with this)

How to solve problem?

• In domestic politics: government (they build the roads, keep up, which provide us with public goods that we are taxed to get paid for)

• In international politics: (we don’t have a world govt to tax us and then provide, in International politics its diff)

Tragedy of the Commons

• The “commons” is a collective good

• Moral of the story: pursuing individual short-term self interest can hurt the collective in the long run

Sheep theory:

Shepherds grazing sheep on common land maximize their own herds, cumulatively destroying the pasture, resulting in lower long-term gains for everyone. 

India:

India uses its water tables, which have a certain replenishing rate; it’s going to run out, using the water table faster. In the long term its gonna lead to a depletion of water (short term and long term affect)

Sustainability

emphasizes importance of valuing future quality of earth’s air, water, and land (environmental politics)

Epistemic community

group of experts in a given field who can provide information and influence our ideas about a given topic

(not gov officials, scientists are an important epi community as they are doing the research that informs how we deal at the political level, doctors doing research and helping institutions to engage in actions)

Negative externality

costly (harmful) unintended consequences

(of some action, taking some action but it’s having a negative effect on something else, i build a cold plant to produce power yet the negative externality is the air pollution, as I didn't intend it to happen)

International Efforts

started without hard law, we did not have treaties, but these two laws, norms designed to guide state behavior, weren't legally binding

• Customary International Law

• Soft Law Principles - nonbinding norms of behavior

Customary International Law

• No significant harm principle

• Good neighbor principle

No significant harm principle

States can’t initiate policies that cause environmental harm to other states 

Good neighbor principle

Cooperation should be the norm when talking about environmental issues. Everything we do has an impact on the environment, which has an effect on everyone 

Soft Law Principles

nonbinding norms of behavior, guiding principles, but not as norms in the international system, a few states accepted

• Polluter Pays Principle

• Precautionary principle

• Preventive action principle

• Sustainable development

• Intergenerational equity
  

1972 - UN Conference on Human Environment (in Stockholm)

• Put environmental issues on international and some national agendas for first time =we got a domestic levels

Environmental issues at domestic level

— Environmental ministries established (gave legal frameworks to pursue legal intent , empowered activist)

—Development of “Green” parties =political parties that focus on environmental issues and the protection of it, ex in europe theres alot, came about after the conference

Environmental issues at international level

UN did not have issues before this time 

-New bodies formed & older IGOs take up environmental issues

-UN Environment Programme (UNEP) established= a platform where states can come and negotiate treaties, establish agreements, manage programs that were under the UN, managed specific programs 

-Over 3000 international treaties have been created regarding environmental issues, 3,00 alot of hard law since coming to govern environmental issues

-For full list: see “International Environmental Agreements Database”,

based at the University of Oregon

-1991 – Global Environmental Facility created =designed to help developing countries present environmental goals. It provides resources to those countries to present objectives, if there’s a program, then we would build a plant which would cost more, so the cost could be cost by this

-Funder of environmental projects in low- and middle-income

countries

Case 1: Ozone Depletion, protect us from rays, etc 

Caused by CFCs

-Recognized as problem in 1970s= the layer of ozone was being depleted and was creating holes in the layer, determining this was caused by CFCs and used in manufacture in airsoul sprays. 

-1985: Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer = treaty was a framework agreement, didn’t have specific numbers for requirements in reducing, we need to create these type of timetable 

-1987: Montreal Protocol – specific goal of reducing CFCs by 50% by 1998, protocol to the Vienna Convention which set goal for the reduction of CFCs.

-1990: timetable accelerated =discovered that they need to accelerate 

-Developed countries agreed to phase out CFCs by 1995 & aid developing countries to do so by 2010

-Deadline MET by developed countries, and $2 billion provided to developing countries in the 1990s

-Success story, we did see an increase in the ozone layer

Case 2: Climate Change

-Caused by GHG emissions, specifically carbon dioxide, when we approach, there are three elements states are trying to deal with 

Three legs of the “climate stool”:

1. Mitigation - policies that reduce greenhouse gas emissions and enhance carbon

sinks, sinks are entities in the world like forests, that absorb the carbon dioxide

-Difficulties: high costs to industries, a lot to change their ways to do clean energy efforts, no one wants to impose those costs and make them less competitive in the global market

2. Adaptation - shifting resources into preparing for and remediating the effects of

climate change, this is proactive efforts saying we can do something for climate change, preparing for negative effects, negotiations are to get those resources to do it.

-Difficulties: hard to quantify; geographic particularities, how much do u need to engage in these adaptation projects, how much is needed, some states are worried about sea level rises, black rain fall, storms coming about these geo particulars make it hard.

3. Loss and damage - refers to dealing with the negative effects of climate change that have already been felt (i.e., after the fact), something bad happen i want resources to deal with that issue, developing  countries want developed states to help fix these problems

-Difficulties: “legal liability”?, developed countries do not want to be held legally accountable for the effects of all these damages 

-Municipalities of Puerto Rico v. Exxon Mobile have sued exxon mobile on damaged suffered from hurricane, as their actions led to the climate change, to lead to these natural disasters

Climate Change: Mitigation

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)=

• Entered into force 21 March 1994, framework but not set targets or requirements, we need to deal with this issue and negotiate agreements in the future 

• States agreed to establish a concentration of GHGs at level that would prevent anthropogenic interference with the climate system, we will limit out greenhouse gases to prevent climate change in the UNFCCC, but no specific targets so saying this but there are no numbers how much or by when 

• Recognized the necessity of returning to earlier levels of greenhouse gas emissions, but set no specific timetables or targets for doing so

• Two annexes listing states that should have future responsibilities to reduce greenhouse gases, Annex 1 includes developed countries and economies in transition, which say will take litigation commitments, Annex 2 is developing countries said not only will we help but provided resources for other countries to do so.

• Established The “Conference of the Parties”=is a group that includes all members of the UNFCCC and states that have joined in the international system, all countries come together every year to negotiate about climate change and it created a formal standing process

Kyoto Protocol

- agreed at COP 3 (1997)=legally binding treaty focused on litigation and did set requirements and time tables 

-focused on mitigation

-“Top down” approach: commitments by developed countries to reduce overall emissions by at least 5% below 1990 levels by 2010, we are giving you at the top requirements you need to follow, by 2010 different states need to have them reduced, some state took on more others took on less 

-Developing countries not included in emissions limitation

Requirement, all these time timetables were for the annex 1 countries the developed states and economies in transition

-Argument of developing countries: historic responsibility, this idea of developed states were responsible for the climate change we have

-US refused to ratify, was never legally bound by this treaty 

-Economic costs & competition losses (relative gains concerns!), china nad india fell in the department 

Kyoto Protocol; 3 “market mechanisms”

ways states can get created toward the targets without imposing cost on industries 

1. Emissions trading

2. Clean development mechanism

3. Joint implementation

1. Emissions trading

a state was admitted below its target can sell its extra part who is above its target, difference in how much better im doing can be sold to a state doing worse

2. Clean development mechanism

situation where developed countries with litigation can create a green project in a developing country and get credit for it being created, developing countries can benefit as they can have a wind farm, and developing countries sponsoring get admission credits towards their target.

3. Joint implementation

Annex country doing a green project in another annex 1 country, governed by concept of additionally which is developed countries can get credit but the country that had it produced cannot 

Sinks

absorb more carbon than it releases (e.g., forests), if u planted trees you can get credit throughout litigation targets

Post-Kyoto:

negotiations tense, agreements hard to reach – until Paris 2015 didn’t get anything legally-binding

Paris Agreement

– agreed at COP 21 (2015), had an aspiration goal 

-Aspirational goal to keep increase in global avg temp to

“well below” 2 °C and to try to keep it below 1.5 °C (nothing they done has even come close to saying we gonna meet that target but will try to do )

-Bottom-up approach:

-No binding mitigation requirements no specific number required to states in the agreement 

-States agreed to publish their own climate plans every 5 years, a country that has signed they will put forth a…

(called nationally-determined contributions (NDCs)), things will get ourself targets and time tablets 

Submission of plans is mandatory under paris agreement

But not legally bound to meet those targets, (you have to submit and put a good effort but if you don’t achieve it, there not negative consequences, you basically show you tried)

Paris Agreement (cont’d)

-Agreed developed countries should take lead= more active but no definitions included 

-Agreed to Green Climate Fund – $ to help developing countries,

with mitigation on green house gas, adding money has established it at paris

-2017: US announced it would withdraw from the agreement, it did 

-Rejoined in 2021 & put forth NDC, so it put forth as required by teh paris agreement 

-Announced withdrawal again in 2025 (effective Jan 2026)taken away by trump 

Adaptation

2001: agreed to establish Adaptation Fund (the fund to help countries with adaptation projects)

-Funded through clean development mechanism proceeds and voluntary contributions from governments, NGOs, individuals =taxes put on these projects,

-Made operational in 2007, where funds were coming from 

-Funds increasingly pledged over time, states have pledged to increase meeting those pledges not always happen 

Loss and Damage

We didn’t get agreement till 2022

2022: Agreed to establish a loss and damage fund

2023: Fund created

-Pledges of ~$700 million by developed states to help pay for projects to restore things damaged by climate change 

-Legal liability?: “compensation” v. “reparations” v. “resources”= developing called them compensation, activist called them reparations, developed called them resources 

-2023 UNGA resolution requesting ICJ advisory opinion = about the legal liability of states for climate change 

--Opinion delivered July 2025 – confirms legal responsibility, in that opinion, the ICJ confirmed the responsibility of states 

Realist’s Perspective & the Environment

 focus on environment as a national

security issue, relative gains concern, argue that there are relative gains concerns 

-Fear diminished competitive position that can result

from environmental regulations, my industries will be worse off if i i put regulations based on the environment 

-Competition over resources like oil & fresh water can lead to conflict. Getting resources like oil can lead to conflict between states 

-Climate change can exacerbate conflict, or internal conflict 

-Pentagon Quadrennial Defense Review of 2014

-Climate change = “threat multiplier” that will affect our security, and climate change will influence. Climate change is something such department worry about too  

Freshwater resources

1. Ethiopia’s Grand Renaissance Dam

• Ethiopia’s construction of dams on the Blue Nile River, Sudan, and Egypt are down the street to the blue nial and threatening access to their water.

began 2011 (completed 2023)

• Final filling completed 2024

• fully operational in 2025

• 1929 and 1959 treaties: Egypt and Sudan got most of Nile’s waters, Ethiopia got fewer rights even though it was upstream 

• Dam would change that historic allocation of freshwater what Egypt and suan used to get isnt the same anymore 

• They all see this as an existential conflict

• Concerns over conflict erupting,this owuld lead sudan to all possible option ot protect its ciitzens and Egypt has threatened to bomb the dam, ehtopia said its read to encounter enemy who is read to damage to project

• Egypt has threatened sabotage and bombing

Environmental Issues and Conflict:

Freshwater Resources

Freshwater Resources (2)

2. Mekong River another issue of freshwater 

-China has constructed multiple upstream dams & extracts sand

→problematic for countries downstream

-attempt at conflict resolution: Mekong River Commission and this is designed to oversee how things are done in the river both in terms of dams 

-China never joined the commission so limited in what is can do 

-Weak enforcement powers  realist argument

Liberal’s Perspective & the Environment

Environmental issues are transnational, looks at the cooperation that will come about because the environment is a transnational issue

-ripe for cooperation

-Point to the numerous environmental treaties

-Faith in international institutions’ potential to address environmental issues and ameliorate conflict over environmental issues 

-e.g., study of 1950-2002 conflicts over water resources, rivers given by formal agreements that oversaw what's being done were less likely to engage in conflict over disputes 

– Is the river governed by a formal agreement?

Constructivist’s Perspective & the Environment

point to the role of discourse, how we frame environmental issues when we talk about them, two ways…

-Threat perspective focused on threat to national security, international security, human security, what are the immediate impacts of states, international states and people in general. 

versus

-Ecosystem perspective: focus on rights and needs of most

vulnerable across space, time, and species, not only the security of developed countries but their security as well, not what's happening today but to us in the future, not to think about people but the whole world, all life