Managing flood and riverbank erosion on the banks of the Brahmaputra River in Assam. Flood and riverbank erosion measures help communities adapt to climate change impacts and boost economic and national interests (photo by Rakesh Sahai/ADB).
PART ONE
INTRODUCTION
I. Judiciaries Play a Role in Domestic Climate Action and Need Resources
The diplomats have done their job: the Paris Agreement points the world in the right direction, and with sophistication and clarity. It does not, however, ensure implementation, which necessarily remains the domain of politicians, businessmen, scientists, engineers, and civil society.1
These words reveal a fundamental truthāthe Paris Agreement is just the beginning of what needs to be done. How might we ensure that the agreement is implemented? Everyone must āmake climate change personalā in their life and contribute to global action.2 Only with collective action can humankind limit global warming to well below 2ĀŗC above preindustrial temperatures, ideally to a maximum of 1.5ĀŗC.3 Climate change results from emissions all around us, affecting citizens and ecosystems globally. Implementation must, therefore, occur where emissions and impacts arise.
Countries adopt policies and laws consistent with their global commitments to regulate domestic responses to climate change. As of 26 November 2020, there were 2,082 policies and laws globally.4 National legal and policy frameworks are vital for low emission and resilient green growth because they integrate international commitments into the national context and ensure domestic implementation.
Despite the global agreement and growth in climate laws, climate change impacts are mounting, and it is apparent that existing climate pledges are insufficient to meet agreed temperature goals.5
Faced with devastating impacts on their lives, citizens are suing for climate action. Climate action includes activities to (i) reduce atmospheric greenhouse gas emissions or concentrations (mitigation), (ii) adjust to the impacts of climate change (adaptation), and (iii) boost the capacity of people and ecosystems to recover from climate impacts (resilience). By 26 November 2020, there were more than 1,200 climate suits in the United States alone and at least 400 climate cases in other countries.6 Climate litigation is also growing in Asia and the Pacific, requiring judiciaries to interpret or apply their domestic climate change legal frameworks (see Report Two for a discussion about climate litigation in Asia and the Pacific).
The central role of judgesāinterpreting, upholding, and shaping lawsāmakes the judiciary integral to domestic climate action. Courts are āincreasingly complementing the actions of legislatorsā by deliberating over climate change court cases worldwide.7 Patricia EspinosaāExecutive Secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Changeārecently commented, āRelevant legislation, carefully used, supported and backed by an informed judiciary, will also be crucial for realising our shared aspirations for shaping a resilient, low-carbon and truly sustainable futureā (footnote 7).
This reportāClimate Change, Coming Soon to a Court Near You: National Climate Change Legal Frameworks in Asia and the Pacificāfocuses on national climate change legal and policy frameworks in 32 countries in Asia and the Pacific. It belongs to a series of reports on climate law and policy for judges in Asia and the Pacific. Due to the judgesā growing concern about climate change and the fact that more people are suing over it, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) prepared these papers to provide more resources about climate change law.
When determining the usefulness of this report to judges in Asia and the Pacific, ADB took into account the resource constraints that prevent many of its developing member countries from publishing their laws and policies online or translating documents into English. These challenges make the records of national climate laws and policies online incomplete. Consequently, judges, lawyers, interested parties, and international development partners are unable to access exhaustive information about various national climate change legal and policy frameworks in the region. Access to laws benefit everyone, and this report seeks to boost accessibility.
Legal and policy frameworks must also facilitate access to climate finance and other resources from international donors. Each country covered by this report has a national designated authority with the Green Climate Fund.8 Clear information about national legal and policy frameworks makes it easier for donors to assess sectoral responsibilities and national reporting standards. These factors are vital for the provision of green finance and other resources.
II. Report Structure and Scope
Report ThreeāNational Climate Change Legal Frameworks in Asia and the Pacificāreviews climate law and policy frameworks across 32 countries in South Asia, Southeast Asia, and the Pacific (Table 1). ADB collected some 880 laws and policies for this report.
Table 1: Regions and Countries Covered by the Report
South Asia | Southeast Asia and the Peopleās Republic of China | Pacific |
Afghanistan | Cambodia | Cook Islands |
Bangladesh | Indonesia | Federated States of Micronesia |
Bhutan | Lao Peopleās Democratic | Republic Fiji |
India | Malaysia | Kiribati |
Maldives | Myanmar | Marshall Islands |
Nepal | Peopleās Republic of China | Nauru |
Pakistan | Philippines | Palau |
Sri Lanka | Singapore | Papua New Guinea |
| Thailand | Samoa |
| Viet Nam | Solomon Islands |
| | Timor-Leste |
| | Tonga |
| | Tuvalu |
| | Vanuatu |
Source: Asian Development Bank.
Report Three contains seven parts, with the body of the report falling within
⢠Part Twoātrends in climate laws and policies in Asia and the Pacific,
⢠Part Threeāconstitutional rights survey, and
⢠Parts Four, Five, and Sixānational legal climate change frameworks summaries.
A. Part Two: Trends in Climate Laws and Policies in Asia and the Pacific
Part Two outlines some key trends relating to climate law and policies. For example, it is clear that (i) climate litigation is shaping domestic legal frameworks, (ii) legal adaptation frameworks across Asia and the Pacific can be strengthened, and (iii) most countries regulate climate change responses with policies and implementation via existing laws.
The clear preference for defining climate responses via policies, action plans, and existing laws has benefits. It allows countries to roll out policies quickly and update them a...