Abstract
In the high-stakes world of international climate negotiations, words can be both sword and shield. This article exposes how "constructive ambiguity" worked as a double-edged sword in shaping the discourse on differentiated responsibilities for climate change mitigation. This linguistic diplomatic maneuver may have temporarily bridged seemingly insurmountable divides. However, it has also undermined global climate justice. This article traces the evolution of differentiation in the climate change regime, revealing three distinct interpretations that emerge from the mist of constructive ambiguity. This article's central point is that the success of international climate action hinges on a bold recalibration: embracing each stage of differentiation to align countries' mitigation commitments with the imperatives of climate justice. In doing so, a challenge is thrown to the international community, especially climate negotiators, to transcend the comfort and allure of constructive ambiguity and confront the hard truths needed to forge an equitable and effective path forward in the collective effort to address climate change through mitigation.
First Page
77
Recommended Citation
Enam
K.
Antonio
The Effect of Constructive Ambiguity on Differentiation in the Climate Change Regime: Mitigation and Climate Justice,
21
Loy. U. Chi. Int'l L. Rev.
77
().
Available at:
https://lawecommons.luc.edu/lucilr/vol21/iss2/2