Comments to “Climate Change, Trade, and Investment Law. What Difference Would a Real Responsibility to Protect Make?”

Shinya Murase ()
Additional contact information
Shinya Murase: China Youth University of Political Studies

Chapter Chapter 21 in Emerging Issues in Sustainable Development, 2016, pp 399-402 from Springer

Abstract: Abstract It is not appropriate to employ the notion of responsibility to protect (R2P) in the context of climate change and in particular in relation to international trade/investment law. Rather than an intrusive notion of R2P, a more moderate concept of “mutually supportiveness” between the climate law and trade/investment law should be pursued.

Keywords: Climate change; Responsibility to protect; International trade/investment law; International law commission; International law association (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2016
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:eclchp:978-4-431-56426-3_21

Ordering information: This item can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/9784431564263

DOI: 10.1007/978-4-431-56426-3_21

Access Statistics for this chapter

More chapters in Economics, Law, and Institutions in Asia Pacific from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().