Michael Mehling, Sebastian Mielke

Carbon & Climate Law Review, Volume 6 (2012), Issue 4, Page 365 - 372

Brazil has become an increasingly important participant in the discussion about climate change, combining an active role in climate diplomacy with credible domestic policy efforts. Market-based instruments have featured prominently in its domestic policy landscape, with carbon markets envisioned both at the federal and regional level. Aside from successful participation in the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and some progress in the creation of voluntary offset markets, however, the pathway towards a domestic carbon market has so far been fraught by delays and ongoing uncertainty. Still, Brazil can build on proven institutional structures, quantified emissions limitation targets, and new rules on the collection of emissions data and sectoral mitigation plans to establish robust market-based instruments. A carbon market can help leverage its vast mitigation potential to abate greenhouse gas emissions at sufficient scale while limiting the cost of compliance for domestic entities. Given its unique emissions profile, however, Brazil should not focus on becoming a net seller of carbon credits or allowances to foreign entities, but should instead harness the opportunity to create an ambitious, welldesigned market and thereby become a leader on climate change mitigation in Latin America.

Michael Mehling

Carbon & Climate Law Review, Volume 6 (2012), Issue 4, Page 277 - 290

While several established carbon markets are experiencing a crisis of confidence, a remarkable transition towards carbon trading is currently underway in the developing world. Given the multiple benefits ascribed to market-based instruments for greenhouse gas abatement, the rise of carbon markets in important emerging economies should come as no surprise: no other policy option promises certainty of environmental outcome while lowering the cost of its achievement, and developing countries with rapidly growing economies are no less sensitive to the impacts of carbon constraints than their developed counterparts. But it would be premature to assume a carbon market renaissance: as the experience in industrialized countries has shown, quantity rationing with tradable emission units places considerable demands on the implementing jurisdiction, requiring technical capacity and political will in order to succeed. Although the rise of carbon trading in developing countries affirms the continued relevance of this policy instrument, it also highlights the importance of policy learning and clarity about objectives if earlier missteps are to be avoided. Providing the introductory background for a special issue of the Carbon & Climate Law Review (CCLR) on carbon markets in the developing world, this article canvasses recent developments and central trends in carbon trading, suggesting tentative priorities for developing countries engaged in the pursuit of domestic markets.

Michael Mehling

Carbon & Climate Law Review, Volume 5 (2011), Issue 4, Page 415 - 416

Questions of law and regulation have featured in the discussion of climate change ever since policy makers declared it a challenge requiring a societal response. Both nationally and internationally, however, the conversation has usually been dominated by concerns about the likely impacts of climate change, the availability of technological solutions and their economic cost, and questions of fairness and responsibility; legal norms and principles have generally been left to the domain of lawyers and their arcane forms of rule-based discourse.

Nhan Nguyen, Minh Ha-Duong, Sandra Greiner, Michael Mehling

Carbon & Climate Law Review, Volume 4 (2010), Issue 1, Page 10

lean Development Mechanism (CDM) allows developed countries to cofinance projects realized in developing countries in exchange for certificates of greenhouse gas emission reductions. Identifying a future for this mechanism has become an urgent matter for international climate negotiations, given that the first commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol expires at the end of 2012. Also, the CDM remains the only established instrument allowing an active role for the developing world in mitigation activities. In recent years, this mechanism has

Harro van Asselt, Michael Mehling

Carbon & Climate Law Review, Volume 4 (2010), Issue 3, Page 215 - 218

Does the European Union still matter when it comes to mitigating global climate change? While this question may appear overly dramatized, observers of the international climate change debate have started to wonder whether the EU is still able to influence the course of negotiations on a post-2012 climate regime. Contrary to a wide misperception, the EU did have a seat at the table when the Copenhagen Accord was being drafted in December 2009. Yet the final agreement is seen primarily as a deal brokered between the United States and China. On crucial issues, the Accord does not reflect the official negotiating stance of the EU. Among many other elements, it does not provide an indication of how – let alone when – to arrive at a legally binding agreement, nor does it set out specific levels of greenhouse gas emissions that major emitters should achieve in coming years.

Michael Mehling

Carbon & Climate Law Review, Volume 3 (2009), Issue 4, Page 3

uting roughly 3.3 % of global emissions, shipping is a significant and rapidly growing source of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.1 In the absence of ambitious new mitigation policies, recent emissions scenarios suggest that emissions from marine vessels may grow by a factor of 2 or 3 over current levels by 2050 because of sustained growth in maritime shipping.2 But shipping is also one of the most energy-efficient means of transportation, currently facilitating over 80% of world trade; as international trade flows continue to expand, moving

Camilla Bausch, Michael Mehling, Leonardo Massai, Andrea Hudson Campbell

Carbon & Climate Law Review, Volume 2 (2008), Issue 1, Page 11

logic – Institute for International and European Environmental Policy, Berlin/Washington, D.C. More than any previous year, 2007 saw momentum build for concerted international action on climate change. With a lively public debate and several highprofile events, global warming enjoyed unprecedented media attention and also a prominent place on the political agenda as the year came to an end. Against this backdrop, more than 10,000 participants convened in Bali, Indonesia, from 3 to 15 December 2007 for the 13th Conference of Parties to

Camilla Bausch, Michael Mehling

Carbon & Climate Law Review, Volume 1 (2007), Issue 1, Page 13

dynamic subject matter in a growing array of societal responses to environmental degradation. During this process, it has been literally promoted to a symbolic status, reflecting the many challenges humanity will face in reconciling continued development with the need to distribute environmental and economic burdens equitably across regions as well as generations. Environmental issues have rarely attracted as much attention as climate change does nowadays, with a series of influential documentaries1, reports2 and public events3 projecting

Michael Mehling, Leonardo Massai

Carbon & Climate Law Review, Volume 1 (2007), Issue 1, Page 8

ervers of past and current negotiations on international climate policy are likely to agree that the European Union1 has been a consistent advocate of stringent mitigation commitments, often calling for more ambitious climate efforts against strong resistance in several industrialised and developing countries. Going by its own statements, Europe has increasingly assumed the role of a climate leader, and is consciously fostering this perception both towards its Member States and in its relations with third states.2 Such leadership can manifest i

Francesco Sindico, Leonardo Massai, Michael Mehling

Carbon & Climate Law Review, Volume 1 (2007), Issue 2, Page 8

, Guildford In past months, climate change has been debated at the United Nations (UN) headquarters on several occasions. The first occasion was at the Security Council, where a ministerial-level open debate on the relationship between energy, security and climate change was held in April.1 Following that debate, climate change was then brought up before the General Assembly from 31 July to 2 August in the Informal Thematic Debate on Climate Change as a Global Challenge.2 Broad and important issues, such as the linkage between climate and