logo

Which Is Not An International Environmental Agreement

logo

94Our second important recommendation is that it is reasonable to use carefully defined trade restrictions, such as tax adjustments. B at the borders, as part of an IEA. These restrictions will help undermine a politically attractive argument for staying out of a deal: the fear that carbon leakage will dilute most of the agreement`s global gains while undermining the competitiveness of participants in carbon-intensive sectors. The adoption of rules will also reduce the ability of stakeholders to demand protection once a country has acceded to the agreement. Finally, multilateral rules will mitigate the problem of carbon leakage to the extent that – currently difficult to determine – carbon leakage can become a real problem. The draft defines agreements as the environment if their primary objective is to manage or prevent human impacts on natural resources; plant and animal species (also in agriculture, as agriculture changes at the same time); the atmosphere; oceans; rivers; lakes; terrestrial habitats; and other elements of the natural world providing ecosystem services (Daily 1997). The “main purpose” of the agreement has been operationalized by searching for terms that correspond to this conception in contract titles, preambles or articles specifically designating the objectives of the agreement [search terms described in various tables below]. This excludes agreements on human health; conflict; cultural preservation; trade; the use of oceans, lakes and rivers; Space, nuclear radiation, transport, weather, labour and similar problems, unless these agreements address environmental issues as their main concerns. The definition also excludes agreements whose effects are on the environment, if this was not a primary objective. A broader definition, which includes agreements based on their impact on the environment, such as the one adopted by Burhenne (1974-2002), covers agreements on trade, regional economic integration, worker protection and arms control. This expansive definition can have considerable value, but it (a) deviates considerably from everyday language, and (b) has the analytical disadvantage of requiring that agreement effects be identified before they can be classified as an environment and, when used literally and consistently, prevents an analysis of why some environmental agreements fail (because those that do not have environmental impacts, would be defined as not being environmentally friendly). .

Ähnliche Artikel zum Thema:

    Keine Treffer
logo

Keine Kommentare zugelassen.

logo
logo
© 2009 pin-shot.de Der Tischfußball Blog all rights reserved | Designed by elegantthemes | Impressum | Datenschutzerklärung | Partner | webeinträge