Physical Address
Kampala, Uganda
This article was co-authored with Izabelle Kansiime Lwamafa.
The principle of Common But Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities (CBDR-RC), enshrined in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and reaffirmed in the Paris Agreement, remains a key tenet in the climate change framework. At its core, it acknowledges that while all nations share a common responsibility to address climate change, their contributions to the problem and their capacities to respond vary significantly. This principle has been especially crucial in shaping the climate justice discourse, as it recognizes the historical and structural inequities between developed and developing nations. However, as the global climate crisis deepens, the CBDR-RC principle has faced increasing scrutiny. This article reviews the CBDR-RC principle through the lens of Third World Approaches to Climate Change and Sustainability (TWACCS), critiquing its implementation under the UNFCCC and the Paris Agreement, and exploring its implications for the Global South.
The CBDR-RC Principle: Origins and Intent
The CBDR-RC principle originated from the understanding that developed nations, having industrialized earlier and contributed disproportionately to historical greenhouse gas emissions, hold greater responsibility for tackling climate change. Conversely, developing nations, which have contributed less to the crisis but are often more vulnerable to its effects, need support to achieve sustainable development and climate resilience. This principle is grounded in the broader framework of international environmental law, which stresses equity and fairness in addressing global challenges.
The UNFCCC explicitly incorporates the CBDR-RC principle in its Article 3 and places an obligation on the developed country parties to take a lead in combating climate change and the adverse thereof. In subsequent provisions, the UNFCCC outlines specific obligations which include providing financial and technological support to developing nations. The Paris Agreement reaffirms the CBDR-RC principle but shifts towards a more flexible approach, allowing countries to set their own nationally determined contributions (NDCs) based on their respective capabilities and circumstances.
The CBDR-RC Principle in Practice: A Critique
The CBDR-RC provided the best avenue for apportioning accountability for the climate crisis. However, the shift to a voluntary/flexible approach under the Paris Agreement was a significant setback to the purpose and intent of the principle.
This claw-back in the Paris Agreement diminished enforceable accountability mechanisms and made lukewarm efforts to the climate change mitigation efforts permissible. It may thus be argued that the failure of several developed countries to meet their emission reduction targets or provide adequate financial and technological support to developing nations is attributable to this shift.
This failure to honor commitments reflects a broader pattern of political rhetoric without concrete action. The preamble of the UNFCCC acknowledges that “the largest share of historical and current global emissions of greenhouse gases has originated in developed countries,” yet this recognition has not translated into meaningful accountability. The TWACCS framework argues that without enforceable mechanisms to hold developed nations accountable, the CBDR-RC principle risks becoming a hollow promise, further perpetuating the inequities it sought to address.
It is imperative to highlight that the UNFCCC and the Parise Agreement recognize the special circumstances and needs of developing countries, but this recognition has not been adequately operationalized. The CBDR-RC principle must be reinterpreted to prioritize the development needs of the Global South, ensuring that climate action is aligned with the broader goals of equity and justice. This re-prioritization must include enforceable accountability mechanisms on the part of the developed countries, for their various technological and financial commitments.
Conclusion
The CBDR-RC principle remains a vital framework for addressing the inequities in the global climate regime, but its implementation must be strengthened to reflect the realities of the Global South. From a TWACCS perspective, this requires a renewed commitment to accountability, differentiation, and development justice. Developed nations must be held accountable for their historical and current contributions to the climate crisis. This includes meeting their emission reduction targets, fulfilling financial commitments, and providing technological support to developing nations. The CBDR-RC principle must be reinforced with enforceable mechanisms that ensure compliance and transparency.
The Paris Agreement’s flexible approach must not come at the expense of differentiation.
Disclaimer: “The views and opinions expressed on the site are personal and do not represent the official position of Stanbic Uganda and Khulani Capital.”
