The Effectiveness of the Regulatory Regime for Black Carbon Mitigation in the Arctic

In addition to being a hazardous air pollutant, Black Carbon is the second-largest contributor to Arctic warming. Its mitigation is being addressed at the international regulatory level by the Arctic Council and the Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution (CLRTAP). Whilst the Convention...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Arctic Review on Law and Politics
Main Author: Daria Shapovalova
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Norwegian
Published: Cappelen Damm Akademisk NOASP 2016
Subjects:
geo
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.17585/arctic.v7.427
https://doaj.org/article/a86ae1635ae04ae1b5a5d9dc49351f1f
id fttriple:oai:gotriple.eu:oai:doaj.org/article:a86ae1635ae04ae1b5a5d9dc49351f1f
record_format openpolar
spelling fttriple:oai:gotriple.eu:oai:doaj.org/article:a86ae1635ae04ae1b5a5d9dc49351f1f 2023-05-15T14:22:40+02:00 The Effectiveness of the Regulatory Regime for Black Carbon Mitigation in the Arctic Daria Shapovalova 2016-11-01 https://doi.org/10.17585/arctic.v7.427 https://doaj.org/article/a86ae1635ae04ae1b5a5d9dc49351f1f en no eng nor Cappelen Damm Akademisk NOASP 2387-4562 doi:10.17585/arctic.v7.427 https://doaj.org/article/a86ae1635ae04ae1b5a5d9dc49351f1f undefined Arctic Review on Law and Politics, Vol 7, Iss 2, Pp 1-16 (2016) Black Carbon Arctic Council CLRTAP Air Pollution Climate Change droit geo Journal Article https://vocabularies.coar-repositories.org/resource_types/c_6501/ 2016 fttriple https://doi.org/10.17585/arctic.v7.427 2023-01-22T17:53:09Z In addition to being a hazardous air pollutant, Black Carbon is the second-largest contributor to Arctic warming. Its mitigation is being addressed at the international regulatory level by the Arctic Council and the Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution (CLRTAP). Whilst the Convention and its protocols are binding documents, the Black Carbon regulation under their framework appears to have ‘soft law’ characteristics. At the same time, the voluntary Black Carbon and Methane Framework, adopted by the Arctic Council, demonstrates positive compliance and follow-up dynamics compared to earlier norm-creating attempts. This paper argues that the nature of the norm (binding or non-binding) is not the decisive factor regarding effective implementation in the Arctic region. Current efforts to mitigate Black Carbon by means of a non-binding Arctic Council Black Carbon and Methane Framework represent an improvement in the Council's normative function and may have more effect on the behaviour of Arctic States than relevant provisions under the Gothenburg Protocol to the CLRTAP. To support this argument, the first section presents an overview of the Arctic Council as an actor in Arctic policy-making. It then provides an assessment of current efforts to combat Black Carbon carried out by the Arctic Council and the CLRTAP. Article in Journal/Newspaper Arctic Arctic Council Arctic Arctic review on law and politics black carbon Climate change Unknown Arctic Arctic Review on Law and Politics 7 2
institution Open Polar
collection Unknown
op_collection_id fttriple
language English
Norwegian
topic Black Carbon
Arctic Council
CLRTAP
Air Pollution
Climate Change
droit
geo
spellingShingle Black Carbon
Arctic Council
CLRTAP
Air Pollution
Climate Change
droit
geo
Daria Shapovalova
The Effectiveness of the Regulatory Regime for Black Carbon Mitigation in the Arctic
topic_facet Black Carbon
Arctic Council
CLRTAP
Air Pollution
Climate Change
droit
geo
description In addition to being a hazardous air pollutant, Black Carbon is the second-largest contributor to Arctic warming. Its mitigation is being addressed at the international regulatory level by the Arctic Council and the Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution (CLRTAP). Whilst the Convention and its protocols are binding documents, the Black Carbon regulation under their framework appears to have ‘soft law’ characteristics. At the same time, the voluntary Black Carbon and Methane Framework, adopted by the Arctic Council, demonstrates positive compliance and follow-up dynamics compared to earlier norm-creating attempts. This paper argues that the nature of the norm (binding or non-binding) is not the decisive factor regarding effective implementation in the Arctic region. Current efforts to mitigate Black Carbon by means of a non-binding Arctic Council Black Carbon and Methane Framework represent an improvement in the Council's normative function and may have more effect on the behaviour of Arctic States than relevant provisions under the Gothenburg Protocol to the CLRTAP. To support this argument, the first section presents an overview of the Arctic Council as an actor in Arctic policy-making. It then provides an assessment of current efforts to combat Black Carbon carried out by the Arctic Council and the CLRTAP.
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Daria Shapovalova
author_facet Daria Shapovalova
author_sort Daria Shapovalova
title The Effectiveness of the Regulatory Regime for Black Carbon Mitigation in the Arctic
title_short The Effectiveness of the Regulatory Regime for Black Carbon Mitigation in the Arctic
title_full The Effectiveness of the Regulatory Regime for Black Carbon Mitigation in the Arctic
title_fullStr The Effectiveness of the Regulatory Regime for Black Carbon Mitigation in the Arctic
title_full_unstemmed The Effectiveness of the Regulatory Regime for Black Carbon Mitigation in the Arctic
title_sort effectiveness of the regulatory regime for black carbon mitigation in the arctic
publisher Cappelen Damm Akademisk NOASP
publishDate 2016
url https://doi.org/10.17585/arctic.v7.427
https://doaj.org/article/a86ae1635ae04ae1b5a5d9dc49351f1f
geographic Arctic
geographic_facet Arctic
genre Arctic
Arctic Council
Arctic
Arctic review on law and politics
black carbon
Climate change
genre_facet Arctic
Arctic Council
Arctic
Arctic review on law and politics
black carbon
Climate change
op_source Arctic Review on Law and Politics, Vol 7, Iss 2, Pp 1-16 (2016)
op_relation 2387-4562
doi:10.17585/arctic.v7.427
https://doaj.org/article/a86ae1635ae04ae1b5a5d9dc49351f1f
op_rights undefined
op_doi https://doi.org/10.17585/arctic.v7.427
container_title Arctic Review on Law and Politics
container_volume 7
container_issue 2
_version_ 1766295195231453184