Abstract

Climate litigation is increasingly a feature of international climate policy. However, loss and damage cases have mostly been unsuccessful due to tensions around uncertainty, attribution, and the relationship between climate change and extreme weather events. While there is consensus that Annex I Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) have contributed more to historical greenhouse gas emissions than non-Annex I Parties have, there is great reluctance on their part to take responsibility for loss and damage. Considering the shortcomings of climate litigation and the impasse in the UNFCCC, we propose an alternative, non-judicial approach to addressing loss and damage – restorative justice. Applying a four-stage framework, we draw on the experience of non-Annex I Parties in the Caribbean with Hurricanes Irma and Maria in 2017 to (1) argue that existing attribution models can help identify restorative justice cases; (2) scope a role for the Warsaw International Mechanism in process design and preparation; (3) make a case for truth and reconciliation conferences, and restitution, as part of the restorative dialogue; and (4) call for the integration of restorative justice norms into global climate governance as a pathway for progressing negotiations.

摘要

气候诉讼日益成为国际气候政策的一个特征。然而，由于围绕不确定性、归因以及气候变化与极端天气事件之间的关系的紧张关系，损失和损害案件大多不成功。虽然人们一致认为联合国气候变化框架公约（UNFCCC）附件一缔约方对历史温室气体排放的贡献大于非附件一缔约方，但他们非常不愿意承担损失和损害的责任. 考虑到气候诉讼的缺点和 UNFCCC 中的僵局，我们提出了一种替代的、非司法的方法来解决损失和损害——恢复性司法。应用四阶段框架，我们借鉴了加勒比非附件一缔约方在 2017 年飓风艾尔玛和玛丽亚的经验，以 (1) 认为现有的归因模型可以帮助确定恢复性司法案件；(2) 确定华沙国际机制在流程设计和准备方面的作用；(3) 作为恢复性对话的一部分，为真相与和解会议以及赔偿提出理由；(4) 呼吁将恢复性司法规范纳入全球气候治理，作为推进谈判的途径。