ľ¹Ï¸£ÀûÓ°ÊÓ

There is a clear divergence of ambition between different states in relation to the mitigation of dangerous climate change. With collective action insufficient, more ambitious states may seek to extend their regulatory reach from activities within their territories, to those beyond it. A recent example is the EU’s carbon border adjustment mechanism, which ‘puts a price on carbon’ emitted during the production of certain energy intensive imports. Such measures raise tensions with the principle of sovereign equality and give rise to questions of state jurisdiction under public international law. Natalie Dobson, Assistant Professor at the Utrecht ľ¹Ï¸£ÀûÓ°ÊÓ School of Law and researcher of the Utrecht Centre for Water, Oceans and Sustainability Law (UCWOSL), wrote a book on this topic: ‘’.

About Extraterritoriality and Climate Change Jurisdiction

This book unpacks the applicable law and proposes an approach which integrates the various overlapping regimes.

Focusing on the European Union as its primary case study, this book explores the competence of states – and the EU - to regulate conduct and circumstances beyond their territory. It argues that where a measure’s application is dependent on conduct or circumstances abroad, it has an ‘extraterritorial element’, that needs a jurisdictional basis. In the case of climate protection, however, the construction of this jurisdictional basis remains quite unclear. This book therefore unpacks the applicable law and proposes an approach which integrates the various overlapping regimes. In doing so, it considers the law of the world trade organization, the law of the sea, international civil aviation law and importantly the customary international law of state jurisdiction. Taken together these rules form the parameters of so-called ‘climate change jurisdiction’.

While states may well be able to demonstrate a jurisdictional basis, the analysis should not stop here. Of equal importance is the question of how states should design their measures to sufficiently respect other states. This book proposes a ‘considerate design’ approach, to help policymakers in crafting ‘considerate’ climate protection measures. Firstly, this entails the negative condition that a measure leave as much room as possible for territorial states to regulate activities differently, or indeed, not at all. Secondly, measures should be designed in an equitable manner, in line with the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities. These are essential conditions to compensate for the pressure exerted by ‘extraterritorial’ measures and come closer to the realization of both formal and material equality.