As Negotiations Stumble, the Rationale for a Global Environmental Pact Grows

As Negotiations Stumble, the Rationale for a Global Environmental Pact Grows
A replica of planet Earth set ablaze during a worldwide protest demanding action on climate change, in Milan, Italy, Sept. 27, 2019 (ANSA photo by Nicola Marfisi via AP images).

Despite unfolding ecological catastrophes around the world, negotiations on a potentially groundbreaking Global Pact for the Environment have faltered. Its many champions had hoped for a binding multilateral treaty that would place all international environmental law within a coherent legal framework, as well as establish access to a healthy environment as a fundamental human right. In the end, U.N. member states meeting in Nairobi in May could only agree on a watered-down goal: a “political declaration” to be prepared by 2022, to coincide with the 50th anniversary of the historic 1972 Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment. Beyond establishing the United Nations Environmental Program, the Stockholm Conference marked the first time that ecological issues had been placed at the top of the global agenda.

Last week in New York, on the margins of the opening of the U.N. General Assembly, I participated in an after-action review of what went wrong in Nairobi—and where the world must go from here. The hosts were Columbia University’s Earth Institute and the Club des Juristes, a network of international legal scholars that supports a Global Pact for the Environment. The discussion drove home two points. First, the setback in Nairobi was disappointing but not fatal, as momentum for an agreement will inevitably build as the world’s environmental crisis deepens. Second, while a “declaration” may seem a thin reed upon which to construct a healthier relationship with the planet, history suggests that even nonbinding declarations can catalyze the development of international legal norms.

The outcome in Nairobi was surprising and disappointing, given the high hopes around the launch of multilateral negotiations. In May 2018, the General Assembly endorsed a resolution instructing U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres to compile a report on the gaps in current international environmental law and how they might be filled. Multilateral support was overwhelming, with only five U.N. member states opposed: Russia, Syria, Turkey, the Philippines and the United States.

Keep reading for free!

Get instant access to the rest of this article by submitting your email address below. You'll also get access to three articles of your choice each month and our free newsletter:

Or, Subscribe now to get full access.

Already a subscriber? Log in here .

What you’ll get with an All-Access subscription to World Politics Review:

A WPR subscription is like no other resource — it’s like having a personal curator and expert analyst of global affairs news. Subscribe now, and you’ll get:

  • Immediate and instant access to the full searchable library of tens of thousands of articles.
  • Daily articles with original analysis, written by leading topic experts, delivered to you every weekday.
  • Regular in-depth articles with deep dives into important issues and countries.
  • The Daily Review email, with our take on the day’s most important news, the latest WPR analysis, what’s on our radar, and more.
  • The Weekly Review email, with quick summaries of the week’s most important coverage, and what’s to come.
  • Completely ad-free reading.

And all of this is available to you when you subscribe today.

More World Politics Review