{"id":8162,"date":"2023-10-13T11:37:40","date_gmt":"2023-10-13T06:07:40","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/ijpiel.com\/?p=8162"},"modified":"2023-10-13T11:37:40","modified_gmt":"2023-10-13T06:07:40","slug":"exploring-arbitrability-of-climate-disputes-in-india","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ijpiel.com\/index.php\/2023\/10\/13\/exploring-arbitrability-of-climate-disputes-in-india\/","title":{"rendered":"Exploring Arbitrability Of Climate Disputes In India"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Abstract<\/em><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\nExamining the challenges associated with legal claims and disputes resulting from a changing\nclimate and the initiatives to tackle the same, this blog discusses India's initiatives toward\nclimate action, renewable energy transition, and pledges made under the Paris Climate\nAgreement, while also touching upon the global context to highlight the shortcomings of states in\nachieving the Paris Climate Agreement goals. The blog also introduces the National Green\nTribunal as a manifestation of India's constitutional and international commitments to resolving\nenvironmental issues. While appreciating India's streamlined efforts in environmental and\nclimate litigation through the NGT and the jurisprudence that has emerged from the tribunal, the\nblog also highlights considerable obstacles of tribunal dispute resolution. As an alternative to\ntribunal dispute resolution, this blog illustrates arbitration as a preference for dispute resolution\nby using the example of arbitration in the energy sector, resulting from an increased regulation\nby states in energy transition, by drawing on the recourse to scientific and technical expertise,\nexpedited resolutions, public participation, and transparency, while underpinning the same on\nexisting literature of international arbitration, treaties, and rules to support the same.<\/em>\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Introduction<\/em><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\nOne of the greatest risks to mankind has been climate change and its damaging environmental\nconsequences. Unsurprisingly, human activities have been the main contributor to climate\nchange. Climate change causes a change in the composition of the global atmosphere that is\nlinked to human activity in addition to natural climate variability seen over comparable time\nperiods. Long-term fluctuations in temperature and weather patterns have adverse, irreversible\nimpacts on human health, the environment, food security, work, and other factors.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Tracking India's Climate Action Progress<\/em><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\nUnder the Paris Agreement, every signatory country must declare<\/a> their Nationally Determined\nContributions (NDCs). NDCs are long-term, self-determined pledges detailing what the\nparticipating countries will do to help meet the goal of maintaining a global temperature rise to\n1.5\u00b0C, adapting to climate impacts, and ensuring sufficient finance to support these efforts. They\nrepresent short to medium-term plans. They are required to be revisited and updated every five\nyears, with increasingly higher ambitions depending on each country's capacity and capabilities.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\nAs a signatory to the Paris Agreement, India has made great strides in solving the climate crisis.\nIndia is touted to have one of the world's most rapidly developing renewable energy sectors. It is\nreportedly faring<\/a> much better than other nations. In an address to the White House on June 22,\n2023, PM Modi stated, "You perhaps know that of the G20 countries, the promises they made in\nParis, of all the G20 countries, India is the only country that has fulfilled all the promises it\nmade at the G20,"<\/em> PTI quoted him as saying. "Not just that, in the area of solar energy in\nGlasgow, we have set ourselves a target to achieve 500 GW of renewable energy by 2030,"<\/em> he\nadded. However, as per the Climate Action Tracker, an independent\nscientific project that tracks the government climate action of over 40 countries and measures it\nagainst the globally agreed measures under the Paris Agreement, India still has a long way to go.\nAs per CAT's last update (November 2022)<\/a> , CAT has rated the\nIndian climate action as "highly insufficient."<\/em> Although it acknowledges India's significant\nprogress<\/a> in its renewable energy capacity installation, which currently ranks fourth in the world,\nIndia's "reliance on coal power continues to be a drag on ambition."<\/em> While India may have\ncemented its targets in the second NDC in 2020, more is needed to result in any tangible\nreduction of real-world emissions beyond current levels.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\nThe Climate Action Transparency Report in 2020<\/a> found that no G20 countries were on track to\nmeet their targets under the Paris Agreement. The report further indicated<\/a> a need for India,\namong other countries, to \u201censhrine their net zero targets into law.\u201d<\/em>\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Climate Disputes<\/em><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\nThere is no universally accepted definition of disputes related to climate change. Even though\ninternational institutions and instruments have attempted to define climate change, its causes, and\nthe risks that come with it, an attempt still needs to be made to define climate change\ndisputes. To propose a resolution for climate change-related disputes, the International Chamber\nof Commerce (ICC) on Arbitration and ADR Task Force published a report in November 2019<\/a> .\nThe report attempted to discuss the scope and ambit of climate change disputes. As per the\nreport, climate change disputes include \u201cany dispute arising out of in relation to the effect of\nclimate change and climate change policy, the United Nations Framework Convention on\nClimate Change ("UNFCCC"), and the Paris Agreement.\u201d<\/em>\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\nThe International Chamber of Commerce's report<\/a> on resolving climate change-related disputes\nthrough ADR outlines three categories of disputes \u201c(i) contracts relating to the\nimplementation of energy or other systems transition, mitigation or adaptation in line with the\nParis Agreement commitments (for the avoidance of doubt, the Paris Agreement is between state\nparties and the commitments thereunder apply to state parties and not to non-state parties unless\nthey have been incorporated into domestic regulation); (ii) Contracts without any specific\nclimate-related purpose or subject-matter but where a dispute involves or gives rise to a climate\nor related environmental issue; and (iii) submission or other specific agreements entered into to\nresolve existing climate change or related environmental disputes, potentially involving\nimpacted groups or populations.\u201d<\/em>\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\nClimate change mitigation is now a global concern, and during the past year, climate change-\nrelated disputes have emerged as a significant trend in local and international dispute resolution.\nAt the domestic level, litigants frequently seek redressal in national courts that entails either\nmitigation (e.g., reducing greenhouse gas emissions) or adaptation (e.g., reducing the adverse\nconsequences of climate change on the ecosystems, communities, or infrastructure). On a global\nscale, international conventions and treaties on climate change advocate the use of alternative\ndispute resolution (ADR) processes and place a significant focus on arbitration to resolve climate\nchange conflicts.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

International Law on Climate Disputes<\/em><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\nAt the international level, significant actions were taken to address climate change. In 1972, the\nUnited Nations Conference on Human Environment<\/a> was the first world conference to identify the need to manage environmental and\nclimate issues. It created the United Nations Environment Programme<\/a>, among other resolutions. The Stockholm Declaration<\/a>,\ncontaining 26 principles, placed environmental issues at the forefront of all international\nconcerns and marked the start of a dialogue between industrialized and developing countries on\nthe link between economic growth, all kinds of pollution, and the well-being of the people. Indira\nGandhi, who was the only foreign head of government out of the 113 countries present and\nparticipating, in her speech highlighted<\/a> the deep connection between environmental conservation\nand poverty reduction.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\nThe 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development<\/a> provided a starting point in advancing the path to environmental\njustice. It comprises of 27 Principles that serve as a roadmap for nations seeking sustainable\ndevelopment. The Declaration, signed by more than 170 nations, aims to achieve sustainability\ngoals by pushing countries to form new global partnerships involving their governments,\ncitizens, and all major sectors of society. The UNFCCC 1992 establishes the essential principles\nand legal framework for international cooperation on climate change. Its objective is to maintain\nstable levels of atmospheric greenhouse gases (GHGs) to avoid harmful anthropogenic\ninterference with the climate system. The Kyoto Protocol<\/a> was subsequently\nadopted in December 1997 to increase the UNFCCC 1992's effectiveness. Kyoto focuses on\nlowering the greenhouse gas emissions of developed countries that are parties to the Convention.\nIt requires parties to "implement and\/or further elaborate policies and measures in accordance\nwith its national circumstances."<\/em> The 2015 Paris Agreement<\/a> has furthered\nthe objective of combatting climate change by requiring state parties to undertake and\ncommunicate ambitious efforts to strengthen the global response to the threat of climate change.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

India's Legal Position on Climate Change<\/em><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\nSoon after the Stockholm Declaration, The National Council for Environmental Policy and\nPlanning was set up in 1972, which evolved into the Ministry of Environment & Forests (MOeF)\nin 1985. India enacted the Wildlife Act of 1972, the Water Act of 1974, the Air Act of 1981, etc.\nThe 42nd Amendment to the Indian Constitution introduced various provisions to establish and\nsafeguard India's commitment to environmental conservation. Introduction of Article 48A<\/a> as part\nof Directive principles of State Policy imposed a duty on the Indian state "to protect and improve\nthe environment and to safeguard the forests and wildlife of the country."<\/em> The following is an\nillustrative list of legislations enacted to combat the rising challenge that is climate change and\nenvironmental conservation:\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n1. The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974,<\/a><\/em> was for the prevention and\ncontrol of water pollution and the maintaining or restoring of the wholesomeness of water\nin the country.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n2. The Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980,<\/a><\/em> for conservation of forests and all ancillary matters.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n3. The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981,<\/a><\/em> for the prevention, control and\nabatement of air pollution.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n4. The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986,<\/em> for the protection and improvement of the\nenvironment\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n5. The Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991,<\/em> provides public liability insurance to provide\nimmediate relief to the persons affected by accidents while handling any hazardous\nsubstance and for any such connected matters.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n6. The Energy Conservation Act, 2001,<\/a><\/em> provides for the efficient use of energy and its\nconservation. It specifies energy consumption standards and process norms, amongst\nmany other energy conservation objectives. It established the Bureau of Energy\nEfficiency.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n7. The Biological Diversity Act, 2002,<\/em> provides for the conservation of biological diversity,\nsustainable use of its components, and fair and equitable sharing of the benefits of using\nbiological resources, knowledge, and such connected matters. This complied with the\nUnited Nations Convention on Biological Diversity at Rio de Janeiro in 1992 (Rio\nConvention 1992).\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\nIndia participated in the Rio Convention in 1992, which called upon states to develop national\nlaws regarding liability and compensation for the victims of pollution and other environmental\ndamages. As a result, in 1995, the National Environmental Tribunal (NET) was set up<\/a> to provide\ndispute resolution and compensation in cases of either personal injury or damages to property or\nenvironment arising out of accidents on the principle of no-fault. The Act read very specifically\ntowards compensation to be paid in cases of no-fault liability and was very myopic in its scope,\nwhich limited the redressal options available domestically in other cases of environmental\ndisputes. In 1977, India introduced The National Environment Appellate Authority Act (NEAA)\nto hear appeals concerning restricting areas in which any industries or class of industries,\noperations, or processes are carried out. The members of the NET and the NEAA were a mixture\nof judicial and technical members with prior experience and expertise in matters of\nenvironmental conservation, management, planning, and development.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Establishment of the National Green Tribunal (NGT)<\/em><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\nIn furtherance of India's commitment to environmental justice and reaffirming the principles as\nratified by India in the Rio Declaration 1992, the National Green Tribunal (NGT) was\nestablished in 2010 under the National Green Tribunal Act 2010 (NGT Act). The NGT Act also\nrepealed<\/a> the National Environmental Tribunal Act of 1995 and the National Environment\nAppellate Authority Act of 1997. The establishment was a result<\/a> of a large number of\nenvironmental cases pending in the higher courts of the country and the involvement of\nmultidisciplinary issues along with the views of the Supreme Court in various landmark cases in\nthe environmental jurisprudence and on the recommendation of the Law Commission for setting\nenvironmental courts with both original and appellate jurisdiction.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\nEstablishing a specialized statutory body, i.e., the NGT, was guided by the principles of Article\n323B and Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. The NGT is not bound by the Code of Civil\nProcedure, 1908, or the Indian Evidence Act 1872 but functions on the principles of natural\njustice. The foundational principles of the NGT are sustainable development, precautionary\nprinciple, and polluter pay principle. India is the third such country in the world<\/a> to establish a\nnational forum for redressal of environmental issues and disputes.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\nThe NGT deals<\/a> with the adjudication and disposal of civil cases relating to environmental\nprotection and conservation of forests and other natural resources, including enforcement of any\nlegal rights relating to the environment. The NGT adjudicates upon matters arising out of the\nfollowing legislations under Schedule I:\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n1. The Water (Prevention and Control) of Pollution Act, 1974 \n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n2. The Water (Prevention and Control) of Pollution Cess Act, 1977 (Repealed) \n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n3. The Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n4. The Air (Prevention and Control) of Pollution Act, 1981\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n5. The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n6. The Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n7. The Biological Diversity Act, 2002<\/a>\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\nAny party aggrieved by the decision of the Tribunal appeal may prefer an appeal before the\nSupreme Court.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\nThe NGT comprises a full-time chairperson, judicial members, and expert members. The\nminimum number of judicial and expert members prescribed is ten in each category, and the\nmaximum is twenty in each category. Another important provision included in the law is that the\nchairperson if found necessary, may invite any person or more persons having specialized\nknowledge and experience in a particular case before the Tribunal to assist the same in that case.\nThe judicial members are either retired Supreme Court judges or retired Chief Justice of a High\nCourt. The qualifications of expert members have been detailed in Section 5(2) of the NGT Act,\n2010. There are five benches of the NGT divided across regional zones, with the Principal Bench\nsituated in New Delhi.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Challenges of Dispute Resolution under the National Green Tribunal (NGT)<\/em><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n1. Administrative Challenges:<\/strong> A major challenge that continues to plague most of the\nquasi-judicial bodies in the Indian legal system, such as Tribunals, is the inability of the\nadministration to appoint enough members to reach the statutorily sanctioned strength\nand, as such, reach a quorum for adjudication of disputes. Despite there being five\nregional benches across the country, the heavy judicial workload is being dealt with by\none or two benches only, thereby severely burdening the ability of the Tribunal bench to\neffectively and efficaciously decide the cases before it. This causes pendency to pile up\nand the judicial process to slow down.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n2. Limited Technical Expertise:<\/strong> The expert members usually have expertise in a particular\nfield rather than the environment as a whole. For example, an expert who has been\nworking on forests for many years would not be able to<\/a> give a decision or resolve the\nissues related to industrial pollution. As a result, many of the Tribunal's judgments need\nto be more specific and of diluted relevance.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n3. Confusion of Payment of Compensation:<\/strong> The Act remains silent about the payment of\ncompensation in that it does not lay down guidelines for determining the financial\nburden. Ideally, this should be ideated in the legislation and should not be left to the\nmember's discretion.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n4. Spread of litigation in the High Courts:<\/strong> Despite a clear determination of the\njurisdictional hierarchy, parties continue to approach their respective High Courts under\nArticle 226 of the Constitution<\/a>. This only adds to\nthe multiplicity of litigation and slows the judicial process.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n5. Limited Jurisdiction:<\/strong> The NGT does not broadly cover disputes of all nature and\nenvironment related. The Wildlife (Protection) Act of 1972<\/a> and the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition\nof Forest Rights) Act of 2006<\/a> are not included within the purview\nof the Act.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n6. Limited Access to Justice:<\/strong> The NGT is only set up only in five zones in the country, and that restricts the common man's access to judicial remedy.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\nWhile there is no doubt about the pioneering attempt of the NGT to tackle environmental issues,\na lot remains to be explored and achieved. Redressal of environmental and climate disputes\nthrough alternative dispute resolution mechanisms is currently uncharted territory in most\ndomestic jurisdictions, including India.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Development of Arbitration to resolve Climate Change Disputes<\/em><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\nFollowing the adoption of international treaties, disputes over environmental issues, including\nclimate change, began to surface. For many years, challenges and claims were brought through\npublic litigation proceedings, mostly constitutional and public law claims, against states and\npolitical decision-makers for failing to implement the policies and measures outlined by these\ntreaties. There was a need to resolve climate change disputes at an international level instead of\njust a national level because the challenges around climate change cut across international\nborders. This is where arbitration played a role in the legal framework combatting climate\nchange. In accordance with Article 14 of the UNFCCC<\/a>, arbitration\nmay be chosen as the appropriate forum in the event of a dispute involving the interpretation or\nimplementation of the Convention.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\nIn 2014, the report issued by the International Bar Association Task Force on Climate Change\nJustice and Human Rights (IBA Report)<\/a> recommended that when\nsetting out the arbitration rules under Article 14, the Permanent Court of Arbitration\nshould be adopted as the UNFCCC's preferred arbitral\nbody. Interstate disputes, investor-state disputes, and contract-based disputes are a few disputes\nthat PCA has been handling concerning the energy sector. These disputes concern general\nenvironmental issues.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\nThe Kishengana Arbitration in 2010<\/a> was an inter-state\narbitration initiated by Pakistan against India at PCA in accordance with the 1960 Indus Water\nTreaty<\/a>. The issue concerned the downstream environmental effects\nof the construction of a hydroelectric plant in the Kashmir region on the Indus River in Pakistan.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\nThe Arbitral Tribunal permitted India to continue building with the condition that India will\nprovide a minimum water flow in the Indus River. It also stressed the States' responsibilities\nunder international law to \u201cmanage natural resources in a sustainable manner\u201c<\/em> and to refrain from causing trans-boundary harm.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\nInter-state arbitration has become a more and more feasible ADR mechanism. Although there\nhave been an increasing number of international investment and commercial arbitrations\ninvolving environmental law claims more generally, relatively few arbitrations have focused\nexclusively on climate change-related problems to date. The main reason is the lack of the\nspecialized procedures, rules, and expertise required in international arbitration institutions to\nresolve such disputes efficiently.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Arbitration in the Energy Sector<\/em><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\nThe oil and gas industry has been dealing with climate change and sustainable development\ndisputes within the energy sector. The range of climate change disputes, however, has been\nexpanding; claims have been filed against several energy-related businesses (particularly those\ninvolved in renewable energy projects), According to a recent survey by \nQueen Mary University, London and Pinsent Masons<\/a> disputes resulting from "increased regulation (including energy transition\nmeasures adopted by States)"<\/em> are likely to increase as a result of climate change. Over the last\nfew years, regulatory changes are likely to be introduced in the investment environment, leading\nto disputes. Recent examples include a number of claims made against Spain under the Energy\nCharter Treaty<\/a> as a result of the\ncountry's regulatory reforms in the field of renewable energy.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\nThe energy sector is responsible for the most international arbitration cases out of all the sectors\naffecting climate change. Among its many notable features, arbitration provides:\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n1. Confidentiality
\n2. Technical expertise (choice of arbitrators)
\n3. More flexibility than litigation
\n4. Enforceability of awards in different countries\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\nAdditionally, arbitration is an oft-used method of dispute resolution on the international level\nbetween states and private parties such as corporations, non-profit organisations, and climate\npolicy think tanks. Utilising ADR tools for domestic disputes is in its nascent stages. Amongst\nthe developing economies, India currently has one of the most robust systems for Alternative\nDispute Resolution mechanisms. More and more entities and individuals opt for ADR options\nbefore approaching the traditional courts. In fact, the newly passed Mediation Bill 2023 in India,\nmakes pre-litigation mediation mandatory for selective disputes and makes it time-bound to 180\ndays. It has listed disputes that are not fit for mediation and as such, , any agreements resulting\nfrom successful mediations shall be binding and enforceable like court judgments. The\nMediation bill, therefore, is exemplary of the scope of ADR in technically specific disputes such\nas climate change disputes.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\nBesides, the United Nations Convention on Law of the Seas (UNCLOS), The Vienna\nConvention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer, the Montreal Protocol 1992, the Convention\non Biodiversity, 2002 among many others also include provisions for arbitration of disputes.<\/a>\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\nArbitration, therefore, is an effective and vital mechanism for such disputes.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\nFurthermore, as the IBA Report<\/a> provided, there is a need for all arbitration\ninstitutions to develop specialised arbitration rules and\/or procedures for the effective resolution\nof climate change disputes. The first set of arbitral rules created particularly for environmental\ndisputes is the PCA Environment Rules , published in 2001<\/a>. The Environmental Rules provide for creating a specialized list of arbitrators with\nexpertise in this field. They also provide for the establishment of a list of scientific and technical\nspecialists who may be called as expert witnesses. Parties have the freedom to select arbitrators\nand expert witnesses.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\nInternational arbitration is advantageous to combat climate-related disputes in many ways. As a\nresult, exactly like the PCA environmental rules, a well-structured set of specialized rules should consider the following factors to make arbitration an efficient means of resolving climate change\nconflicts.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Effective Factors of Arbitration in Resolving Climate Related Disputes<\/em><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n1. Recourse to appropriate Scientific and Technical Expertise:<\/strong> Keeping in mind the\ndynamism involved, like disputes in general, it is preferable to have specialist expertise in\nthe matters involved. The specialised arbitration rules allow parties to choose and appoint\nmembers to the Tribunal with appropriate and relevant legal, scientific, and technical\nexpertise related to climate change disputes. For instance, in the Kishenganga\nArbitration<\/em>, an engineer (a non-lawyer) was appointed as one of the members of the\narbitral Tribunal whose expertise was relevant since the arbitration involved technical\nengineering and environmental issues.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n2. Expedited Resolution:<\/strong> By having access to specific technical expertise in the arbitral\nTribunal, the process of identifying and resolving contentious issues can be sped up. As it\nis, under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996, the proceedings require\nculmination within 18 months. Additionally, bespoke arbitration rules may provide\nseveral measures to expedite the dispute resolution process, including emergency\narbitrations, expedited proceedings for certain disputes, the use of escalating dispute\nresolution clauses, etc.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n3. Public Participation:<\/strong> Climate change disputes concern the public interest and may\nbenefit from the involvement of additional third parties. Specialized rules should consider\nthe role and claims of third parties in contractual arbitrations. NGOs, research\ninstitutions, amicus curiae, and joinder of additional parties are some examples that allow\nnon-parties to participate in the proceedings. Climate change disputes are complex and\nmulti-faceted. Depending upon the relevance and involvement of the many interested\nparties, appropriate steps may be taken to include them in the arbitral proceedings.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n4. Transparency:<\/strong> Climate change impacts people, organizations, and states globally. Thus,\ntransparency is crucial in climate change disputes because the severe consequences of\nclimate change are a matter of public interest. Increased transparency for such conflicts\ncan be achieved by (i) making the proceedings available to the public and (ii) publishing\nawards and other case documents. An ideal example to follow is the UNCITRAL Rules\non Transparency in Treaty-Based Investor-State Arbitration<\/a>, which provide greater\ntransparency in investor-state treaty-based disputes.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Conclusion<\/em><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\nLike the Permanent Court of Arbitration<\/a> and American\nArbitration Association<\/a>, steps may be taken by Indian\ninstitutions, particularly domestic arbitration associations such as the Indian Council of\nArbitration (ICA), to encourage and develop sector-specific rules, particularly in the field of\nclimate change disputes to inculcate a cross culture of arbitration, mediation, and conciliation. A\npanel of scientific and technical experts across all fields is drawn up for parties to choose from.\nArbitration can give the parties a free range and autonomy to choose their own adjudicators\ndepending upon the nature and complexity of the dispute. Notably, there is full judicial support\nfor establishing a solid and vibrant ADR system. As such, this could provide a much-needed\nniche and relief to the climate change dispute sector in the Indian economy. The prospects of\narbitrability of climate change disputes in the energy and infrastructure sector are promising.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Disclaimer<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The views and opinions expressed in this blog post are solely those of the individual authors\nand does not reflect the opinion of their respective firms or practices.<\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

About the Authors<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\nDrishtana Singh is an independent legal consultant and practitioner at the Punjab & Haryana\nHigh Court at Chandigarh with extensive dispute resolution\u00a0experience.\n

\nVedika Gandhi is an Attorney (Disputes) at JSA Advocates and Solicitors, New Delhi. She has\ncompleted her LL.M in International Arbitration and Dispute Resolution from National\nUniversity\u00a0of\u00a0Singapore.\n<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Editorial Team<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Managing Editor: Naman Anand<\/em>
Editors-in-Chief: Abeer Tiwari & Muskaan Singh<\/em>
Senior Editor: Muskaan Aggarwal<\/em>
Associate Editor: Joel Blah Kyndiah<\/em>
Junior Editor: Kanishka Bhukya<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Abstract Examining the challenges associated with legal claims and disputes resulting from a changing climate and the initiatives to tackle the same, this blog discusses India's initiatives toward climate action, renewable energy transition, and pledges made under the Paris Climate Agreement, while also touching upon the global context to highlight the shortcomings of states in […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":267,"featured_media":8322,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","footnotes":"","wp_social_preview_title":"","wp_social_preview_description":"","wp_social_preview_image":0},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ijpiel.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8162"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ijpiel.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ijpiel.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ijpiel.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/267"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ijpiel.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=8162"}],"version-history":[{"count":159,"href":"https:\/\/ijpiel.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8162\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":8321,"href":"https:\/\/ijpiel.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8162\/revisions\/8321"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ijpiel.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/8322"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ijpiel.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8162"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ijpiel.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8162"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ijpiel.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8162"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}