Melbourne Climate Futures

Disappointing to see, in reports of Australia's submissions before the International Court of Justice in its landmark Advisory Opinion case, that the nation is adhering to the line that the UNFCCC and Paris Agreement are conclusive of states' obligations to address climate change. Australia joined other countries presenting to the court in taking a limited view of the customary law principle of prevention of transboundary harm, submitting that this principle does not extend to global pollution caused by greenhouse gas emissions. This stands in stark contrast to the position of Australia's Pacific neighbours, who are arguing for a more holistic understanding of the web of international obligations that require countries to reduce emissions and avoid harmful climate change. https://lnkd.in/gjGtAUcj It will be interesting to see how the ICJ approaches these arguments. In the Advisory Opinion decision earlier in the year of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, the Tribunal notably rejected the argument that states' climate obligations were limited to the Paris Agreement and found a separate source of requirements for action on greenhouse gas-caused marine pollution in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. More broadly the ICJ proceedings are providing a window into the legal interpretations countries place on their international obligations to address climate change. In other international processes, like the Conference of the Parties meetings like the recently concluded COP29, much of this discussion is in negotiating rooms and sometimes behind closed doors.

Baku’s COP29 Azerbaijan attracted tens of thousands of delegates from all over the world – political leaders, business magnates, consultants and lobbyists – most arriving by private jet. In the end, the 66,778 delegates – meeting in a country where oil and gas make up 90 per cent of exports – couldn’t even bring themselves to reiterate last year's timid call for a “transition away from fossil fuels”: in effect walking back that commitment under pressure from wealthy petrostates and an estimated 1,700 oil and gas lobbyists. The climate conference, writes Faculty of Science PhD candidate Rohan Byrne, again failed to deal with the real cause of climate change – fossil fuel extraction. How did we reach a point where the past three meetings have been hosted by petrostates – with the next to be held in Brazil, the epicentre of global deforestation and the biggest oil and gas producer in Latin America?

Oral hearings in the largest climate case in history got underway 3pm yesterday at the International Court of Justice in the Hague. For the very dedicated (and in this part of the world, sleep-deprived) you can watch the proceedings online or read the full verbatim transcript on the court's webpage. An alternative is the daily digest of the hearings being provided by World's Youth for Climate Justice (WYCJ) - you can sign up from the link below. https://lnkd.in/gxaJyGre Pacific states and communities were the driving force behind this litigation. We are now capturing Pacific litigation in our Australian and Pacific climate litigation database maintained at Melbourne Climate Futures.

Exposure to traffic-related emissions has been shown to significantly increase childhood asthma incidence and prevalence in Australia. Young children are most at risk to traffic-related air pollution outside of schools and childcare centres due to their proximity to idling vehicles. Traffic exhaust also contains powerful greenhouse gases and makes a large contribution to climate change. Without further interventions, the transport sector is projected to be Australia’s largest source of emissions by 2030. MCF and Climate CATCH Lab experts recommend the launch of a federal public awareness campaign aimed at changing vehicle idling behaviours. Read the paper: shorturl.at/uWjEo

Why is climate education so important for our future teachers? Associate Professor Kathryn Coleman and Dr Sarah Healy from our Faculty of Education explain how calls for climate change education in classrooms, dating back to the '90s, have largely gone unanswered—and why it’s time for change. Learn more about their work at SWISP Research Lab and Speculative Thinking Consultancy → unimelb.me/4i56Dxb

COP29 in Azerbaijan provided some progress on global climate action, particularly climate adaptation finance. However, many critics from developing and small island nations argue that it was not enough. Negotiations were contentious at this UN climate conference, and seemingly obscure to those of us following from abroad. In this webinar, University of Melbourne expert Jacqueline Peel, Janine Coye-Felson and Kathryn Coleman, who were on the ground for the negotiations in Baku, will provide their insights on what moved global climate policy forward, what held it back, and where that leaves our climate goals moving forward. Moderated by Kathryn Bowen.

As COP29 left many developing countries with a bitter taste in the mouth, hopes are turning to the International Court of Justice which will get underway with 2 weeks of oral hearings in its landmark Climate Change Advisory Opinion proceedings on Monday 2 December 2024 in the Hague. 98 states are due to present their submissions to the Court, along with a select number of international organisations. Small island Pacific nation, Vanuatu, will lead off in the submissions with bigger nations, including the US and China, following later in the proceedings. Each country, regardless of size, will have the same 30 min slot and a number are planning to include perspectives from affected communities and youth groups. It was, after all, the pioneering efforts of a group of Pacific Island law students - organised under the banner of Pacific Island Students Fighting Climate Change - that started the campaign for an Advisory Opinion that made it all the way to the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The ICJ hearings top off a momentous year for international climate litigation in 2024. In May this year, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea issued its watershed Advisory Opinion finding that greenhouse gas emissions constitute a form of marine pollution that must be addressed under the requirements of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. Just a month before, the European Court of Human Rights issued its decision in the contentious case of KlimaSeniorinnen v Switzerland (Swiss grandmothers case) finding violations of human rights as a result of the government's failure to take adequate climate action. The Inter-American Court of Human Rights also has an Advisory Opinion request relating to the 'climate emergency' before it, with hearings held in Barbados and Brazil earlier in the year - the Court is expected to be the next international court to publish a climate-related decision. Written submissions of states in the ICJ Advisory Opinion case have not been made public but are likely to feature arguments by some states that their obligations to prevent harmful climate change do not extend beyond the terms of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and Paris Agreement. The questions put to the ICJ also raise the issue of the 'legal consequences' of any failure by countries to meet the climate change obligations by which they are bound, which raises the thorny question - at the heart of bitter disputes at the recent COP29 Summit - about who should pay the costs of addressing climate change. Like the ITLOS Advisory Opinion, the ICJ Advisory Opinion, when it is issued sometime next year, will not be strictly 'legally binding' on states but this does not mean it is meaningless. It will provide an authoritative statement of the international law on countries' climate obligations which will include their obligations under treaties like the Paris Agreement, and may also extend to so-called 'customary law' that is binding on all countries.

Congratulations to MCF Director Professor Jacqueline Peel, who has been listed as Australia's leading international law researcher by The Australian's 2025 Research Magazine. Melbourne Law School has been listed as Australia – and the world's – top international law research institution. A number of University of Melbourne researchers have made the list, which you can explore at the link.

Climate leaders and advocates looked to this year’s climate conference in Baku, Azerbaijan – dubbed the ‘finance COP’ – to establish adequate funding to help developing and small island states address the current and future impacts of climate change. Emerging climate researchers from the University of Melbourne give us their read on the success (or otherwise) of the conference. Authored by Navam Niles, Jason Titifanue, Zoe N., and Rebekkah Markey-Towler.

Skiing, tobogganing, snowball fights... they're all so much fun! But what's going to happen to our snow and ice now that the Earth is experiencing global warming? Can we save our snow and ice from disappearing? Of course our Climate Kids can! Watch to find out how. This episode is brought to you by MCF and Protect Our Winters Australia. If you're an educator, head on over to our website to find show notes to guide your lesson plans: https://lnkd.in/gfxxfNRA Special thanks to our experts, Professor David Karoly, Dr Linden Ashcroft, Professor Ary Hoffmann, Dr Andrew King, and Dr John Cook. Climate Kids is created and hosted by Dr Lily O'Neill and co-hosted by Dr Linden Ashcroft. Illustrations by Dr Philippa Garrard and video direction, production, animation and editing by Greta Robenstone.