Shifting traction: differential treatment and substantive and procedural regard in the international climate change regime

Free to read\ud \ud The Paris Agreement to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) signifies a shift in how the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR) manifests in the international climate change regime. Unlike the UNFCCC and its Kyoto Protocol, the Paris Agreement does not enshrine differentiated substantive mitigation obligations for developed and developing countries. However, an\ud increasingly proceduralized variant of the CBDR principle, which facilitates regard for developing countries’ interests with respect to treaty implementation, yet does not guarantee favourable substantive outcomes for these states, is evident in the emerging regime. The\ud experience of the International Maritime Organization’s (IMO) climate change regime provides a cautionary tale with respect to procedurally-oriented differentiation that is not reinforced by effective processes to ensure that developed states honour their finance and technology transfer commitments. Accordingly, this article posits that the increasingly salient avenues for procedural differentiation will need to be buttressed by robust accountability mechanisms, including consequences for deficient performance, to be effective