http://booksandjournals.brillonline.com/content/journals/10.1163/18786561-00501007
Does the ‘No-Harm’ Rule Have a Role in Preventing Transboundary Harm and Harm to the Global Atmospheric Commons from Geoengineering? Kerryn Brent1; Jeffrey McGee2 and Amy Maguire Source: Climate Law, Volume 5, Issue 1, pages 35 – 63 Publication Year : 2015 DOI: 10.1163/18786561-00501007 ISSN: 1878-6553 E-ISSN: 1878-6561 Subjects: International Law Keywords: compliance; transboundary harm; geoengineering; no-harm rule; legitimacy Solar Radiation Management (srm) geoengineering poses a significant risk of transboundary and global atmospheric harm. How might international law regulate the future use of srm? We explore how the ‘no-harm rule’ from customary international law might contribute to the international governance of future attempts at srm. The no-harm rule imposes a legal duty on states to prevent significant damage across borders and in the global commons. Existing geoengineering literature assumes that, as the international law system lacks a mandatory enforcement mechanism, the no-harm rule will play little or no role in the governance of srm. We challenge this assumption by focusing on the possibilities of compliance with the no-harm rule through bolstering its legitimacy and sense of legal obligation. We explain how Brunnée and Toope’s theory of ‘interactional international law’ might provide a useful lens for developing the no-harm rule in this way to independently respond to the risks posed by srm. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
