The doctrine of liability fixation of state responsibility in the convention on transboundary pollution damage

Abstract

Transboundary pollution is an international problem. There are currently no adequate mechanisms under international law to balance the relationship between state sovereignty and state responsibility for transboundary pollution harm. The doctrine of liability fixation is at the core of state responsibility and plays an important role in transboundary environmental harm. What type of responsility, fault liability or strict liability should be adopted in state responsibility for transboundary pollution harm? Scholars have different viewpoints on this key issue, and states may have fundamentally different positions and differ widely in terms of both policy and substantive issues. There is uncertainty and variability in the drafting of international conventions on transboundary pollution harm. This article focuses on the normal international legal rules regarding the principle of imputation, and it analyses the advantages and disadvantages of adopting the principles of strict liability and fault liability, their value and the relationship between state responsibility and civil subject liability. This article aims to explain why it is necessary to change the direction of the doctrine of liability fixation of state responsibility in the convention on transboundary pollution harm, and it considers a new direction to adapt to the complex interests and demands of various countries. From the perspective of furthering the prevention of pollution and determining compensation for harm and constructing liability regimes for transboundary pollution, this article proposes the doctrine of the liability fixation of state responsibility and analyses the relevant trends and possible available options.