DOCSLIB.ORG

Final Draft Translation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Final Draft Translation Final Draft translation (version of 21 May 2015) Statement of Reply in the case: Urgenda Foundation v. Kingdom of the Netherlands Regarding the failure of the Dutch State to take sufficient actions to prevent dangerous climate change More information about the case can be found at: www.urgenda.nl/en/climate-case For more information about this translation, please contact Dennis van Berkel at: [email protected] +31 6 4178 6101 Translation of Statement of Reply, Urgenda Foundation v. Kingdom of the Netherlands District Court of The Hague Session of 10 September 2014 Roll number HAZA C/09/00456689 STATEMENT OF REPLY AND AMENDMENT OF CLAIM in the case of: URGENDA FOUNDATION, registered in Amsterdam, and 886 other parties represented by Urgenda Foundation, together referred to as „Urgenda c.s.‟, plaintiffs, legally represented by: R.H.J. Cox and J.M. van den Berg against: THE KINGDOM OF THE NETHERLANDS (Ministry of Infrastructure and Environment), established in The Hague, defendant, legally represented by: G.J.H. Houtzagers 2 Translation of Statement of Reply, Urgenda Foundation v. Kingdom of the Netherlands Table of Contents PREAMBLE ......................................................................................................... 5 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 5 LETTERS OF ATTORNEY .................................................................................... 12 CHAPTER 1: THE STATE IS ALREADY MEETING ITS INTERNATIONAL LEGALLY BINDING REDUCTION OBLIGATIONS ............................................................. 12 1.1 Conclusion ............................................................................................ 16 CHAPTER 2: THE STATE IS ALREADY DOING MUCH AGAINST CLIMATE CHANGE ...... 17 2.1 Introduction .......................................................................................... 17 2.2 Mitigation versus adaptation ................................................................... 18 2.3 Dutch mitigation policy ........................................................................... 20 2.4 About international policy, the Energy Accord, and coal-fired power stations . 22 2.5 Energy Tax ........................................................................................... 29 2.6 Conclusion ............................................................................................ 32 CHAPTER 3: URGENDA C.S. REQUEST LEGAL PROTECTION ................................... 33 CHAPTER 4: URGENDA C.S. REQUEST LEGAL PROTECTION AGAINST (THREATENING CATASTROPHIC) DAMAGE ............................................................................ 34 4.1 Introduction .......................................................................................... 34 4.2 The two-degree limit .............................................................................. 36 4.3 What damage and consequences must we expect, specifically in the Netherlands? ......................................................................................... 37 4.4 Conclusion ............................................................................................ 52 CHAPTER 5: URGENDA C.S. DESIRE DAMAGE PREVENTION, NOT DAMAGE COMPENSATION .......................................................................................... 52 5.1 Preventive legal protection, not damage compensation after the fact ........... 52 5.2 The place in Dutch liability law of actions seeking court orders and injunctions ........................................................................................... 54 5.3 Liability law and climate change: damages claims are excluded ................... 57 5.4 Actions seeking court orders and injunctions as preventive instruments in liability law ............................................................................................ 60 5.5 The State defends against the orders sought by Urgenda c.s. with arguments that apply only to damages claims ........................................... 63 5.6 The State argues erroneously that legal protection can be requested only against pecuniary losses ......................................................................... 64 5.7 The criteria for an action seeking a court order based on tort law ................ 65 5.8 Conclusion and summary ........................................................................ 66 CHAPTER 6: TORT ACTION: IN GENERAL ............................................................ 67 6.1 Introduction .......................................................................................... 67 6.2 Unlawfulness = in conflict with a legal duty ............................................... 68 6.3 The legal duty in casu ............................................................................ 69 3 Translation of Statement of Reply, Urgenda Foundation v. Kingdom of the Netherlands 6.4 Endangerment: the Cellar Hatch criteria ................................................... 70 6.5 Endangerment by cross-border emissions: the no-harm principle and the Potash Mines decision ............................................................................. 76 6.6 Article 2 of the UNFCCC .......................................................................... 78 6.7 An intermediate summary ....................................................................... 83 6.8 Partial causation and partial liability or pro-rata liability .............................. 84 6.9 Summary and conclusion ........................................................................ 90 CHAPTER 7: LIABILITY AND RESPONSIBILITY OF THE STATE ................................. 92 CHAPTER 8: HUMAN RIGHTS ............................................................................. 95 8.1 The consequences of climate change fall within the scope of articles 2 and 8 of the ECHR ........................................................................................... 96 8.2 The exceptions in article 8 paragraph 2 of the ECHR and fair balance .......... 104 8.3 The margin of appreciation .................................................................... 110 8.4 The consequences of the violation of articles 2 and 8 of the EHCR .............. 127 8.5 Conclusion with respect to human rights .................................................. 129 8.6 An additional remark concerning relying on the precautionary principle ....... 130 CHAPTER 9: STANDING ................................................................................... 136 CHAPTER 10: THE REDUCTION CLAIMED: AMOUNT AND PACING .......................... 142 10.1 Introduction ....................................................................................... 142 10.2 The necessity of a 25-40% reduction by 2020 ........................................ 144 10.3 The goal for 2020 cannot be replaced by a goal for 2030 ......................... 149 10.5 Adaptation is not a surrogate for mitigation. ........................................... 159 10.6 Conclusion concerning mitigation and adaptation .................................... 165 CHAPTER 11: THE CLAIMS OF URGENDA C.S. ..................................................... 165 11.1 Concerning the claims ......................................................................... 165 11.2 The (new) declaratory judgements being requested ................................ 165 11.3 The reduction order that is claimed ....................................................... 172 11.4 The claim to have a reduction plan submitted to the Parliament ................ 175 11.5 The new claim to order the State to adequately inform the Dutch public .... 176 11.6 The legal foundation of an order to inform and warn ............................... 177 11.7 The interest of Urgenda c.s. in the order to inform and warn that they claim ................................................................................................... 178 CHAPTER 12: TRIAS POLITICA .......................................................................... 184 PETITUM ........................................................................................................ 192 4 Translation of Statement of Reply, Urgenda Foundation v. Kingdom of the Netherlands PREAMBLE 1. Urgenda c.s. have attentively read the State‟s statement of defence. 2. Urgenda c.s. wish to begin by apologizing for the length of this statement of reply, which runs to an almost unseemly length of around 200 pages. A legal approach to the climate problem raises both legal and factual questions. Urgenda c.s. wish not only to attempt to discuss the (many) relevant questions and aspects, but in doing so to also give insight into their context and the larger picture. Furthermore, in their statement of defence, the State claims that Urgenda c.s. have provided insufficient support for many of their points. This may well be the case to some extent, but Urgenda c.s. have the impression that the State also at times has deliberately chosen not to be a good listener. Considering the great importance that this case has for Urgenda c.s., they wish to avoid any possibility that their claims might founder because they have provided an insufficient foundation for them. Urgenda c.s. have therefore felt the need to further develop and expand their argumentation, in both its constituent parts and its overall coherence. Urgenda c.s. hope that their plea has gained in strength and clarity as compensation for the evident loss of succinctness.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Exploring High-End Climate Change Scenarios for Flood Protection of the Netherlands
    Scientific report ; WR 2009-05 Exploring high-end climate change scenarios for flood protection of the Netherlands Pier Vellinga, Caroline Katsman, Andreas Sterl, Jules Beersma, Wilco Hazeleger, John Church, Robert Kopp, Dick Kroon, Michael Oppenheimer, Hans-Peter Plag, Stefan Rahmstorf, Jason Lowe, Jeff Ridley, Hans von Storch, David Vaughan, Roderik van de Wal, Ralf Weisse, Jaap Kwadijk, Rita Lammersen and Natasha Marinova De Bilt, 2009 KNMI scientific report = wetenschappelijk rapport; WR 2009-05 De Bilt, 2009 PO Box 201 3730 AE De Bilt Wilhelminalaan 10 De Bilt The Netherlands http://www.knmi.nl Telephone +31(0)30-220 69 11 Telefax +31(0)30-221 04 07 © KNMI, De Bilt. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in retrieval systems, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior permission in writing from the publisher. zzzz Exploring high-end climate change scenarios for flood protection of the Netherlands International Scientific Assessment carried out at request of the Delta Committee The Netherlands, September 2008 Pier Vellinga, Caroline Katsman, Andreas Sterl, Jules Beersma, Wilco Hazeleger, John Church, Robert Kopp, Dick Kroon, Michael Oppenheimer, Hans-Peter Plag, Stefan Rahmstorf, Jason Lowe, Jeff Ridley, Hans von Storch, David Vaughan, Roderik van de Wal, Ralf Weisse, Jaap Kwadijk, Rita Lammersen, Natasha Marinova This scientific report is a joint publication by Wageningen University and Research Centre / Alterra and the
    [Show full text]
  • Summary for Policymakers Climate Change 2001
    SUMMARY FOR POLICYMAKERS CLIMATE CHANGE 2001: IMPACTS, ADAPTATION, AND VULNERABILITY A Report of Working Group II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change This summary, approved in detail at the Sixth Session of IPCC Working Group II (Geneva, Switzerland • 13-16 February 2001), represents the formally agreed statement of the IPCC concerning the sensitivity, adaptive capacity, and vulnerability of natural and human systems to climate change, and the potential consequences of climate change. Based on a draft prepared by: Q.K. Ahmad, Oleg Anisimov, Nigel Arnell, Sandra Brown, Ian Burton, Max Campos, Osvaldo Canziani, Timothy Carter, Stewart J. Cohen, Paul Desanker, William Easterling, B. Blair Fitzharris, Donald Forbes, Habiba Gitay, Andrew Githeko, Patrick Gonzalez, Duane Gubler, Sujata Gupta, Andrew Haines, Hideo Harasawa, Jarle Inge Holten, Bubu Pateh Jallow, Roger Jones, Zbigniew Kundzewicz, Murari Lal, Emilio Lebre La Rovere, Neil Leary, Rik Leemans, Chunzhen Liu, Chris Magadza, Martin Manning, Luis Jose Mata, James McCarthy, Roger McLean, Anthony McMichael, Kathleen Miller, Evan Mills, M. Monirul Qader Mirza, Daniel Murdiyarso, Leonard Nurse, Camille Parmesan, Martin Parry, Jonathan Patz, Michel Petit, Olga Pilifosova, Barrie Pittock, Jeff Price, Terry Root, Cynthia Rosenzweig, Jose Sarukhan, John Schellnhuber, Stephen Schneider, Robert Scholes, Michael Scott, Graham Sem, Barry Smit, Joel Smith, Brent Sohngen, Alla Tsyban, Jean-Pascal van Ypersele, Pier Vellinga, Richard War rick, Tom Wilbanks, Alistair Woo d w a r d, David Wratt, and many rev i e w e r s . CONTENTS 1. In t ro d u c t i o n 3 2. Emergent Findings 3 2. 1 . Recent Regional Climate Changes, particularly Temperature Increases, have Already Af fected Many Physical and Biological Systems 3 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Climate Institute Brochure
    CLIMATE INSTITUTE PROTECTING THE BALANCE BETWEEN CLIMATE AND LIFE ON EARTH Since its creation in 1986, the Climate Institute has been a leader in both catalyzing innovative and practical policy solutions towards climate stabilization, and educating the general public of the gravity of climate change impacts. Serving as a bridge between the scientific community and policy-makers, the Climate Institute has managed to develop flexible frameworks now being used as serious starting points for international negotiations. Working with an extensive network of experts and alliances in the US and internationally, the Institute has become a respected facilitator of dialogue to move the world toward more effective cooperation while cementing long-term partnerships for global climate balance. Our achievements include: G Organizing the first broad-scale climate change G Launching the Environmental Leadership Program, conference in North America in 1987, the first an internship program that has trained and placed climate change symposium for UN missions in over 150 students in environmental projects 1988, and the first major climate conference in G Releasing in 2008, Sudden and Disruptive the Middle East in 1989 in Cairo, Egypt Climate Change: Exploring the Real Risks and G Co-authoring and editing much of the impact How We Can Avoid Them, a compilation of section of the Intergovernmental Panel on presentations by scientists and experts on Climate Change (IPCC) First Assessment Report innovative responses to climate change G Coordinating Climate Impacts
    [Show full text]
  • The Risk of Sea Level Rise
    THE RISK OF SEA LEVEL RISE:∗ A Delphic Monte Carlo Analysis in which Twenty Researchers Specify Subjective Probability Distributions for Model Coefficients within their Respective Areas of Expertise James G. Titus∗∗ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Vijay Narayanan Technical Resources International Abstract. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change requires nations to implement measures for adapting to rising sea level and other effects of changing climate. To decide upon an appropriate response, coastal planners and engineers must weigh the cost of these measures against the likely cost of failing to prepare, which depends on the probability of the sea rising a particular amount. This study estimates such a probability distribution, using models employed by previous assessments, as well as the subjective assessments of twenty climate and glaciology reviewers about the values of particular model coefficients. The reviewer assumptions imply a 50 percent chance that the average global temperature will rise 2°C degrees, as well as a 5 percent chance that temperatures will rise 4.7°C by 2100. The resulting impact of climate change on sea level has a 50 percent chance of exceeding 34 cm and a 1% chance of exceeding one meter by the year 2100, as well as a 3 percent chance of a 2 meter rise and a 1 percent chance of a 4 meter rise by the year 2200. The models and assumptions employed by this study suggest that greenhouse gases have contributed 0.5 mm/yr to sea level over the last century. Tidal gauges suggest that sea level is rising about 1.8 mm/yr worldwide, and 2.5-3.0 mm/yr along most of the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Reductio Ad Unum and Evolution of the Two-Degree Climate Target
    Int Environ Agreements DOI 10.1007/s10784-016-9336-7 ORIGINAL PAPER Governing by targets: reductio ad unum and evolution of the two-degree climate target 1 2 1 Piero Morseletto • Frank Biermann • Philipp Pattberg Accepted: 28 September 2016 Ó The Author(s) 2016. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com Abstract Targets are widely employed in environmental governance. In this paper, we investigate the construction of the 2 °C climate target, one of the best known targets in global environmental governance. Our paper examines this target through a historical reconstruction that identifies four different phases: framing, consolidation and diffusion, adoption, and dis- embeddedness. Our analysis shows that, initially, the target was science-driven and predomi- nantly EU-based; it then became progressively accepted at the international level, despite a lack of broader debate among governments on the policy implications and required measures for implementation. Once the 2 °C target was endorsed atthe level of the United Nations, the nature of the target changed from being policy-prescriptive to being largely symbolic. In this phase, the target became a disembedded object in global governance not linked to a shared agenda nor to coordinated and mutually binding mitigation efforts. The 2015 Paris Agreement marks the last stage in this development and may have further solidified the target as a disembedded object. In the final part of the paper, we suggest ways to overcome the current situation and to develop the 2 °C target into a fully fledged global environmental governance target. Keywords 2 °C target Á Global environmental governance Á Climate governance Á International relations and politics Á Governing by targets 1 Introduction Targets have become an increasingly important tool of environmental governance, from national environmental targets to targets within broader global goals such as the Sus- tainable Development Goals (Kanie and Biermann 2017; Bergh and Couturier 2013).
    [Show full text]
  • Climate Change
    International conference Deltas in Times of Climate Change Rotterdam, the Netherlands 29 September – 1 October 2010 Second announcement Building Delta Networks Deltas offer abundance. Their soils are rich and well-watered. They link rivers and inland waters to the oceans. They are the centre of economic and cultural activity, and home to more than half the world’s population. Yet climate change poses severe challenges for deltas. As land subsides, sea levels rise, and populations grow, deltas and their cities are becoming more vulnerable. Increased incidence of floods, salt water intrusion and heatwaves threaten the economic vitality and attractiveness of deltas worldwide. Dealing with subsidence and adapting to climate change have become imperative. The need to address these challenges calls for cooperation of deltas worldwide. A long time ago, the Rhine and Meuse rivers formed a low lying and fertile area, later called the Netherlands. A vulnerable delta slowly became one of the best protected and richest areas in the world through large scale and innovative measures. Rotterdam, located on the cross point of sea and rivers, grew into an important port city. The first city in the Netherlands with a strategy for coping with climate change, Rotterdam is the perfect city to host the first conference on deltas and climate change. At this conference, researchers will exchange the latest scientific insights on topics such as flood risk management, salt water intrusion and governance. In addition, sessions will be organised by and for policy makers, senior political officials, the business community and practitioners. Panels of leading figures from the political and business communities will discuss subjects such as international cooperation and financing mechanisms for adaptation.
    [Show full text]
  • For the Delta
    Rotterdam image courtesy of Marc Heeman The DeltaCompetition is an international competition for students to come up with scientifically underpinned, innovative and sustainable solutions for the inhabitants of vulnerable delta areas. Organised in 2006 and 2008 by Royal Haskoning the DeltaCompetition attracted a range of innovative solution for delta areas. This year Royal Haskoning partnered with Delta Alliance Innovative Solutions and the city of Rotterdam to challenge students worldwide to come up with solutions for urbanized deltas subjected to complex challenges of climate change. for the Delta It is often the vast fertile deltas, such as those of the Rhine, Mekong and Mississippi, which are densely populated regions with the Delta Solutions for Innovative highly developed economies. The people who live there are becoming increasingly aware of the urgency of taking appropriate measures to counteract the disastrous effects of climate change and the associated rise in sea levels. This book presents the Innovative ideas for deltas cities to respond to ten best entries in the DeltaCompetition 2010. Each and every one of them is an innovative report that contains the promise of climate change challenges in the complex urban sustainable solutions to the challenges that changing climatic conditions are confronting us with. environment The DeltaCompetition 2010 Published by Royal Haskoning, P.O. Box 151, 6500 AD Nijmegen, Barbarossastraat 35, 6522 DK Nijmegen, DeltaCompetition 2010 The Netherlands Innovative Solutions for the Delta Innovative
    [Show full text]
  • Knowledge for Climate
    Knowledge for Climate 2008 - 2014 Appendix 1 Knowledge for Climate 2008 - 2014 Knowledge for Climate E: [email protected] W: www.knowledgeforclimate.nl 2 Research programme Knowledge for Climate Content Preface Supervisory Board 4 Preface Executive Board 6 Chapter 1 - Run-up, mission and conditions 8 Chapter 2 - Organisation, strategies and instruments 14 Chapter 3 - Hotspots: Developing regional adaptation strategies 24 Chapter 4 - Research themes 36 Chapter 5 - Value creation 54 Chapter 6 - Taking stock: Conclusions, reflections and lessons learned 64 Review & response Review by the scientific and societal review panels 74 Response on the review by the Executive Board 80 Appendix Appendix 1 - Organisation of Knowledge for Climate programme 86 Appendix 2 - Key financial data 88 Appendix 3 - Knowledge for Climate projects (per tranche) 94 Appendix 4 - Knowledge for Climate Midterm Assessment 2012 104 Appendix 5 - Activities of the Knowledge Transfer unit 2008-2014 108 Appendix 6 - The hotspots in the Knowledge for Climate programme 112 Appendix 7 - Steering committees consortia 118 Appendix 8 - Who is who 120 Appendix 3 Preface Supervisory Board This is the final report of the national Knowledge for Climate (KfC) research programme. The programme was set up in 2007 to explore the consequences of climate change for the Netherlands and how they should be managed. To that end, an independent foun- dation was established with the objective of “promoting evidence-based and practi- ce-driven knowledge about climate in the public interest, including making that know- ledge available to the public…” (Section 2 of the deed establishing the foundation). The foundation has achieved that objective, together with stakeholders, by organising and funding research and encouraging the processes of knowledge dissemination and application.
    [Show full text]
  • Curriculum Vitae Prof Dr Harro Van Asselt,January
    CURRICULUM VITAE PROF DR HARRO VAN ASSELT, JANUARY 2020 Professor of Climate Law and Policy University of Eastern Finland Law School P.O.Box 111 FI-80101 Joensuu Finland E-mail: [email protected] Twitter: @harrovanasselt Associate Stockholm Environment Institute Florence House, 29 Grove Street Oxford OX2 7JT United Kingdom Research Fellow Utrecht University Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development Princetonlaan 8a 3584 CB Utrecht The Netherlands EDUCATIONAL EXPERIENCE PhD (cum laude), Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the Netherlands 10/2013 • Title: The Fragmentation of Global Climate Governance: Consequences and Management of Regime Interactions • Supervisors: Professor Frank Biermann and Professor Joyeeta Gupta • Examiners: Professor Ellen Hey; Professor Sebastian Oberthür; Professor Nico Schrijver; Professor Pier Vellinga; Professor Wouter Werner MA in Law, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the Netherlands, Faculty of Law 08/2002 (specialisation in International Law) • University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa, Faculty of Law (academic 01–08/2001 exchange) Curriculum Vitae Harro van Asselt PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE University of Eastern Finland Law School, Joensuu, Finland 01/2016–present • Professor of Climate Law and Policy • Co-Director, Master’s Degree Programme in Environmental Policy and Law Utrecht University, Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development, Utrecht, 01/2020–present The Netherlands • Senior Fellow Stockholm Environment Institute, Stockholm, Sweden/Oxford, UK • Associate 10/2018–present • Senior Research
    [Show full text]
  • Rotterdam Deltas in Times of Climate Change
    INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE DELTAS IN TIMES OF CLIMATE CHANGE 29 SEPTEMBER TO 2 OCTOBER 2010 ROTTERDAM THE NETHERLANDS FIRST ANNOUNCEMENT CALL FOR PAPERS Deltas offer abundance. They link rivers and inland waters to the oceans. Their soils are rich and well-watered. They are the focus of economic and cultural activity. They are home to more than half the world’s population. However, as sea levels rise, land subsides and populations grow, deltas and their cities are becoming more vulnerable. Increased incidence of floods, heatwaves and salt water intrusion threaten the economic vitality and attractiveness of deltas worldwide. Dealing with subsidence and adapting to climate change have become an imperative. The need to address these challenges calls for cooperation of deltas worldwide. Two official Dutch research programmes on climate change and spatial planning (Climate changes Spatial Planning and Knowledge for Climate), the City of Rotterdam and the C40 (a group of the world’s largest cities committed to tackling climate change) invite scientists, politicians, policy-makers and practitioners to share their knowledge and experience in a major international conference on climate adaptation. The conference pursues three main goals: 1. exchanging up-to-date top science on climate change and delta planning 2. strengthening international cooperation between deltas and delta cities 3. exploring and strengthening the links between science, policy and practitioners Themes to be discussed include: climate change and spatial planning, subsidence, flood risk management, salt water intrusion and fresh water supply, brackish agriculture, urban heat island effects, governance and innovative policy instruments for planning and decision-making. The overall focus is on planning and investments in times of climate change.
    [Show full text]
  • Adapting to Rising Sea Levels Peloso 00 Fm-Flip 2 9/27/17 9:53 AM Page Ii Peloso 00 Fm-Flip 2 9/27/17 9:53 AM Page Iii
    peloso 00 fm-flip 2 9/27/17 9:53 AM Page i Adapting to Rising Sea Levels peloso 00 fm-flip 2 9/27/17 9:53 AM Page ii peloso 00 fm-flip 2 9/27/17 9:53 AM Page iii Adapting to Rising Sea Levels Legal Challenges and Opportunities Margaret E. Peloso Carolina Academic Press Durham, North Carolina peloso 00 fm-flip 2 9/27/17 9:53 AM Page iv Copyright © 2018 Margaret E. Peloso All Rights Reserved Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Peloso, Margaret, author. Title: Adapting to rising sea levels : legal challenges and opportunities / Margaret Peloso. Description: Durham, North Carolina : Carolina Academic Press, LLC, 2017. | Based on author's thesis (doctoral - Duke University, 2010). | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2016051956 | ISBN 9781611636185 (alk. paper) Subjects: LCSH: Climatic changes--Law and legislation--United States. | Sea level--Government policy--United States. Classification: LCC KF3783 .P45 2017 | DDC 346.7304/6917--dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2016051956 eISBN 978-1-5310-0683-9 Carolina Academic Press, LLC 700 Kent Street Durham, North Carolina 27701 Telephone (919) 489-7486 Fax (919) 493-5668 www.cap-press.com Printed in the United States of America peloso 00 fm-flip 2 9/27/17 9:53 AM Page v To Mom and Dad v peloso 00 fm-flip 2 9/27/17 9:53 AM Page vi peloso 00 fm-flip 2 9/27/17 9:53 AM Page vii Contents A Note about the Figures xi Acknowledgments xiii Chapter 1 • Introduction to Sea Level Rise 3 How Do We Know That Sea Level Is Rising? 4 What Causes Sea
    [Show full text]
  • World Bank Document
    Public Disclosure Authorized AS=~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Public Disclosure Authorized -~~< V41957 ~~~~~~~~~~19 65~~~~~~~- Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized 5 l' . t _.~~~~~~~~~ - r- v-> '-5 The global environmentis: b.d R n 9 9N g S wk tW .............. A. Id . .+ < d , aV jq.-*W-- f % - ~~~ ~F ,. THE PURPOS,EOF THE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT FACILITY The Global Environment Facility was established to forge international cooperation and finance actions to address four critical threats to the global environment: biodiversity loss, climate change, degradation of inter- national waters, and ozone depletion. Related work to stem the pervasive problem of land degradation is also eligible for GEF funding. Launched in 1991 as an experimental facility, GEF was restructured after the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro to sei-ve the environmental interests of people in all parts of the world. In 1994, 34 nations pledged $2 billion tc protect the global environment and promote sustainable development. In 1998, 36 nations agreed to cornmit $2.75 billion more to support this mission. In April 1998, more than a thousand leaders from governments, international institutions, and non-gov- ernmental organizations met in New Delhi for the first Assembly of states participating in the GEF.The Assembly adopted The New Delhi Statement (excerpted here), highlighting GEF's unique role and calling upon it to "accelerate its operations." Recognizingthat the GEFis the multilateralfundinig mechanism dedicatedto promotin7gglobal environmentalprotection witliin a fraireworkof sustainabledevelopment by providingnew and additionalgrant and concessionalfunding, Recognizinigalso that its beneficiariesare all people of the globe, and that the need for the GEFis evengreater as we enter the new milleninium... Stressingthat the GEFis a unique anldsuccessfiul example of internationalcooperation that offerslesson7s for otherendeavors..
    [Show full text]