The recent advisory opinion by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) marks a seismic shift in the global climate landscape. For the first time, the world’s highest legal authority has affirmed what climate vulnerable developing countries have been saying for years: the climate crisis is profoundly unjust, and governments have a legal duty to act. Members of the Zurich Climate Resilience Alliance share their thoughts on the ruling’s implications.
We know that those who have contributed least to the climate crisis are suffering its most devastating consequences, and are often leading the response without adequate resources to do so. We have heard from those on the frontlines of climate change that a flood or drought can destroy crops, displace communities, and erase decades of progress overnight. Meanwhile, major emitters have skirted responsibility and accountability for a crisis they caused.
Just last year in Western Nepal, entire villages were flooded, homes were destroyed and families were left without shelter or livelihoods. For communities like these, last week’s ICJ ruling wasn’t just legal theory; it was long overdue recognition of the injustice they live with every day.
Governments have a clear legal duty to protect people, and the planet, from the devastating impacts of climate change. But what does this mean in practice?
Advancing global accountability
States must now accelerate emissions reductions and prevent private companies polluting with impunity. This long overdue accountability means phasing out fossil fuel production, consumption, and finally putting an end to new exploration licenses and subsidies. It must also bolster greater recognition of calls within the UNFCCC for a formal agreement on fossil fuel phase-out and parallel initiatives such as the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty, giving momentum to demands that have, until now, been sidelined in formal negotiations. Under international law, polluters can no longer hide behind loopholes or political inaction.
The ICJ has also made clear that historical responsibility should be accounted for when considering whether states have met their climate obligations. This means those most responsible for causing the crisis must take on a greater share of the effort to address it.
Adaptation must no longer be ignored
The Court’s ruling could also be a game-changer for climate adaptation, all too often sidelined in favour of mitigation. The provision of adequate, predictable, and accessible adaptation finance has historically been dictated by voluntary ambition and political preferences; but now, the ICJ has made it clear that international support for adaptation, including through finance, must be viewed as binding obligations. At a time when the vast gap between adaptation needs and funding is growing, this ruling only strengthens calls for a new adaptation finance commitment to be agreed at COP30.
Compensation, not charity
Crucially, the ruling has also called for wealthy countries historically responsible for climate change to provide compensation for the loss and damage they have caused, a principle long championed by Small Island States and Least Developed Countries.
Since the historic decision to establish a dedicated Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage at COP27, progress has been slow; the Fund is yet to be fully operationalized, and current pledges fall far short of the needs of the most vulnerable communities. This decision offers an opportunity to reinvigorate loss and damage finance and breathe new ambition into the Fund at a critical point in its development, ensuring that funding is understood as owed, not charity.
What this means for the future
The ICJ’s ruling makes clear that climate justice is not an abstract construct or optional extra, but a central, binding pillar of international law. So, where do we go from here?
These victories are the result of a years-long campaign led by Vanuatu and youth movements from climate-vulnerable countries facing unprecedented sea level rise, extreme rainfall, and many other threats to their survival. Their tireless efforts have provided us with a powerful tool that can shape climate ambition for decades to come.
How we use this tool now matters deeply, both in the lead up to COP30 and the demands we make to our own governments. We must hold them and other powerful actors accountable, and ensure pressure is applied to catalyze meaningful finance and action.
The full ramifications of the ICJ ruling will take a while to become clear. But the immediate actions that developed countries must now take are:
- Fill the Loss and Damage Fund. This is a critical year for the Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage. We need wealthy countries to provide real, accessible funding that addresses the full spectrum of averting, minimizing, and addressing loss and damage.
- Commit to a new adaptation finance goal. COP30 must agree a new target to scale up vital adaptation finance. COP26 in Glasgow agreed a commitment to double adaptation finance by 2025; as this runs out, it should be replaced with a new, ambitious target.
- Scale up international climate finance. States must now end fossil fuel subsidies, and channel these funds as grants to support climate-vulnerable countries and communities adapt and build resilience to climate shocks.
The ICJ’s ruling has brought renewed energy and ambition to climate negotiations, as well as the potential for long-overdue justice for communities impacted by the climate crisis. The law is on their side, and it’s time for action to follow.
Read our recent blog to find out more about the need for a new adaptation finance goal at COP30.
Comments