Legal Implications for the BRICS Countries in the Carbon Trading System Through Carbon Exchanges: Perspective from the Precautionary Principle
https://doi.org/10.21684/2412-2343-2024-11-4-126-144
Abstract
The largest emitting countries in the world are predominantly developing countries, including the BRICS countries. The general principle of “climate justice” asserts that the largest emitting countries should take the lead in efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The legal implications for the implementation of climate change mitigation efforts play an active role in the implementation and establishment of the carbon exchange concept in the context of the carbon trading system. The urgency of listing on the carbon exchange is driven by the precautionary principle of global carbon accounting, which aims to avoid the risk of carbon leakage. The purpose of this research is to examine the obligation of emitting countries to make ambitious efforts towards reducing their greenhouse gas emissions while also upholding the basic principles of accountability and transparency. Offsetting the amount of carbon emitted by each country is largely calculated based on carbon credits purchased. In order to prevent double counting, carbon exchanges have the responsibility of recording the sale of carbon units with certificates issued under a “polluter pays” system.
About the Authors
D. Daryanti
Universitas Sebelas Maret
Indonesia
Indonesia
Daryanti Daryanti (Surakarta, Indonesia) – Doctoral Candidate, Faculty of Law, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, Indonesia; Researcher in Environmental Law and International Law
Kentingan Jl. Ir. Sutami No. 36, Jebres, Kec. Jebres, Kota Surakarta, Central Java, 57126, Indonesia
A. S. Sudarwanto
Universitas Sebelas Maret
Indonesia
Indonesia
Albertus Sentot Sudarwanto (Surakarta, Indonesia) – Chairman, Senate, Faculty of Law, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, Indonesia; Researcher in Environmental Law and Private Law
Kentingan Jl. Ir. Sutami No. 36, Jebres, Kec. Jebres, Kota Surakarta, Central Java, 57126, Indonesia
References
1. Begishev, I. (2023). Review of the Monograph “Law of the Digital Environment” (Tikhon Podshivalov et al. (eds.), 2022). BRICS Law Journal, 10(1), 186–194. https://doi.org/10.21684/2412-2343-2023-0-1-186-194
2. Boutillon, S. (2002). The Precautionary Principle: Development of an International Standard. Michigan Journal of International Law, 23(2), 429–470.
3. Cassegård, C., & Thörn, H. (2018). Climate Justice, Equity and Movement Mobilization. In H. Thörn, C. Cassegård, L. Soneryd & Å. Wettergren (Eds.), Climate Action in a Globalizing World: Comparative Perspectives on Environmental Movements in the Global North (pp. 32–56). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315618975-3
4. Chapungu, L., et al. (2022). BRICS and the Race to Net-Zero Emissions by 2050: Is COVID-19 a Barrier or an Opportunity? Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 8(4), 172. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc8040172
5. Cullenward, D., Grayson, B., & Freya, C. (2023). Carbon Offsets Are Incompatible with the Paris Agreement. One Earth, 6(9), 1085–1088. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2023.08.014
6. Department of the Environment. (2015). The Safeguard Mechanism: Carbon Offsets and Avoiding Double Counting of Emissions Reductions Using Carbon Offsets to Manage Emissions. https://www.dcceew.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/factsheet-safeguard-mechanism-avoiding-double-counting.pdf
7. Fite, M. D. (2018). The International Responsibilities of Developed Countries in Adaptation to and Mitigation of Climate Change: An Ethical Mandate. BRICS Law Journal, 5(2), 100–111. https://doi.org/10.21684/2412-2343-2018-5-2-100-111
8. Gill, G. N. (2019). Precautionary Principle, its Interpretation and Application by the Indian Judiciary: ‘When I Use a Word It Means Just What I Choose It to Mean-Neither More nor Less’ Humpty Dumpty. Environmental Law Review, 21(4), 292–308. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461452919890283
9. Gladun, E., & Ahsan, D. (2016) ‘BRICS Countries’ Political and Legal Participation in the Global Climate Change Agenda. BRICS Law Journal, 3(3), 8–42. https://doi.org/10.21684/2412-2343-2016-3-3-8-42
10. Kerr, B. P. (2022). Mitigating the Risk of Failure: Legal Accountability for International Carbon Markets. Utrecht Law Review, 18(2), 145–161. https://doi.org/10.36633/ulr.810
11. Kiprizli, G. (2022). Through the Lenses of Morality and Responsibility: BRICS, Climate Change and Sustainable Development. Uluslararasi Iliskiler, 19(75), 65–82. https://doi.org/10.33458/uidergisi.1164936
12. Kongboon, R., Gheewala, S. H., & Sampattagul, S. (2022). Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory Data Acquisition and Analytics for Low Carbon Cities. Journal of Cleaner Production, 343, Article 130711. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2022.130711
13. Machado, P. G., Hawkes, A., & de Oliveira Ribeiro, C. (2021). What Is the Future Potential of CCS in Brazil? An Expert Elicitation Study on the Role of CCS in the Country. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 112, Article 103503. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2021.103503
14. Narassimhan, E., Gallagher, K. S., Koester, S., & Rivera Alejo, J. (2018). Carbon Pricing in Practice: A Review of Existing Emissions Trading Systems. Climate Policy, 18(8), 967–991. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2018.1467827
15. Nielsen, T., Baumert, N., Kander, A., Jiborn, M., & Kulionis, V. (2021). The Risk of Carbon Leakage in Global Climate Agreements. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 21(2), 147–163. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-020-09507-2
16. Peel, J. (2004). Precaution – A Matter of Principle, Approach or Process? Melbourne Journal of International Law, 5(2), 483–501.
17. Peng, H., Shen, N., Ying, H., & Wang, Q. (2021). Can Environmental Regulation Directly Promote Green Innovation Behavior? – Based on Situation of Industrial Agglomeration. Journal of Cleaner Production, 314, Article 128044. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128044
18. Prihatiningtyas, W., et al. (2023). Perspektif Keadilan dalam Kebijakan Perdagangan Karbon (Carbon Trading) di Indonesia Sebagai Upaya Mengatasi Perubahan Iklim. Refleksi Hukum: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, 7(2), 163–186. https://doi.org/10.24246/jrh.2023.v7.i2.p163-186
19. Rodrigue, M. (2023). The Precautionary Principle in Environmental Law. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 11(12), 548–567. https://doi.org/10.4236/JSS.2023.1112037
20. Sahu, M. K. (2016). Energy Revolution Under the Brics Nations. BRICS Law Journal, 3(1), 34–41. https://doi.org/10.21684/2412-2343-2016-3-1-34-41
21. Schneider, L., et al. (2019). Double Counting and the Paris Agreement Rulebook. Science, 366(6462), 180–183. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aay8750
22. Silbert, N. (2021). Making International Law, Making Carbon Markets. Alternative Law Journal, 46(4), 263–267. https://doi.org/10.1177/1037969X211029728
23. Steblyanskaya, A., et al. (2022). How Russia’s Trade with China Influences Carbon Dioxide Emissions in Russian Regions. BRICS Journal of Economics, 3(4), 271–298. https://doi.org/10.3897/BRICS-ECON.3.E91170
24. Sulistiawati, L. Y., & Buana, L. (2023). Legal Analysis on President Regulation on Carbon Pricing in Indonesia. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4337295
25. Sun, R. Sh., et al. (2022). Is the Paris Rulebook Sufficient for Effective Implementation of Paris Agreement? Advances in Climate Change Research, 13(4), 600–611. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accre.2022.05.003
26. Wang, W., et al. (2022). Auction Mechanism Design of the Chinese National Carbon Market for Carbon Neutralization. Chinese Journal of Population Resources and Environment, 20(2), 115–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjpre.2022.06.002
27. Wei, D., & Rafael, A. P. (2023). Influencing Companies’ Green Governance Through the System of Legal Liability for Environmental Infractions in China and Brazil: Lighting the Way Toward BRICS Cooperation. BRICS Law Journal, 10(2), 37–67. https://doi.org/10.21684/2412-2343-2023-10-2-37-67
28. Zha, D.-S., Feng, T.-T., & Kong, J.-J. (2022). Effects of Enterprise Carbon Trading Mechanism Design on Willingness to Participate – Evidence from China. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 10, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2022.986862
29. Zhang, F. et al. (2023). Carbon Trading in BRICS Countries: Challenges and Recommendations. Journal of Economics and Public Finance, 9(3), 127–139. https://doi.org/10.22158/jepf.v9n3p127
30. Zhang, Sh., et al. (2020). Do the Performance and Efficiency of China’s Carbon Emission Trading Market Change over Time? Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27(26), 33140–33160. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-09168-3
31. Zhou, B., Zhang, C., Song, H., & Wang, Q. (2019). How Does Emission Trading Reduce China’s Carbon Intensity? An Exploration Using a Decomposition and Difference-in-Differences Approach. Science of the Total Environment, 676, 514–523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.04.303
Review
For citations:
Daryanti D., Sudarwanto A.S. Legal Implications for the BRICS Countries in the Carbon Trading System Through Carbon Exchanges: Perspective from the Precautionary Principle. BRICS Law Journal. 2024;11(4):126-144. https://doi.org/10.21684/2412-2343-2024-11-4-126-144
Views:
457
Email this article 