Climate Change, Regime Interaction, and the Principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibility: The Experience of the International Maritime Organization

Abstract

The complexity of climate change and its global nature as a problem affecting the international community necessitates a variety of measures deriving their authority from different international regimes. Acknowledging the global and complex nature of shipping activities, the Kyoto Protocol entrusted the reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from marine bunker fuels to the International Maritime Organization (IMO). 1 Since 1997, the IMO’s Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) has been actively engaged in discussions concerning the reduction of GHG emissions from ships and the elaboration of a legal framework for energy efficiency in the shipping industry as a means of tackling climate change. In what was heralded as a historic decision, the MEPC adopted mandatory measures to reduce GHG emissions from ships at its sixty-second session in 2011. These measures form the first legally binding, multilateral climate change-related agreement since the Kyoto Protocol. Despite some progress in the recent MEPC and the adoption of a resolution on the promotion of technical co-operation and the transfer of technology, progress in the IMO is slow. In this framework, the European Union (EU) is considering a variety of options such as the inclusion of ships emissions in its GHG reduction commitment, the elaboration of a monitoring, reporting, and verification system based on fuel consumption, and market-based mechanisms with the view to contributing to global efforts and the IMO process. The negotiation process at the IMO for the adoption of measures to reduce GHG emissions from ships has demonstrated a number of challenges and uncertainties stemming from regime interaction between the IMO regime and the principles and institutional framework of the UN Framework Convention on