Climate technologies are not being spread at the pace and to the locations where they are most needed. This is particularly relevant for the energy sector as seen in the significant energy gap between developed and developing countries. To address this challenge, there is a need for enabling environments to be created through the removal of barriers. This thesis seeks to address the barriers to the creation of an enabling legal environment for international climate technology transfer. To this end, the thesis relies on the international law principles of responsibility and solidarity as its framework for analysis. In developing this framework, the thesis relied on the responsibility matrix which asks the question “who is responsible for what and to whom” (leading to three vectors of responsibility: who, what, to whom). For solidarity, Dann’s tripartite concept of solidarity (comprising of an obligation to help, equality of parties, and mutuality of obligations) was relied upon. The approach in the thesis is to consider the existing international obligations pertaining to international climate technology transfer and discussing measures which can be taken to strengthen the responsibility matrix for these obligations as a necessary precondition for the generation of solidarity. The underlying motivations for solidarity are also considered where necessary. The thesis tackles four key issues, which if addressed would lead to greater solidarity for international climate technology transfer. The first relates to voluntary mechanisms under the international climate regime and how the strengthening of the responsibility matrix can position these mechanisms to deliver sustainable development benefits. The thesis examines the failures of the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) in this regard and proposes measures which are necessary to avoid a repeat of this situation under the Article 6.4 mechanism, based on a responsibility-solidarity perspective. The second relates to governmental obligations to supply technology transfer. In this regard, the thesis seeks to draw lessons for the climate regime from the ozone layer protection regime and considers the underlying motivations for solidarity under both regimes. It also considers the obligations for climate technology transfer through the responsibility-solidarity lens and proffers recommendations aimed at strengthening these obligations. Third, the thesis discusses intellectual property rights (IPRs) as a barrier to climate technology transfer. It stresses on the need for patent and licensing costs to be paid for pursuant to the obligation to finance technology transfer. It however notes three key issues to be tackled in this regard: lack of individual responsibility, lack of clear linkage between the obligations of technology transfer and finance, and non-inclusion of patents and licensing costs as agreed full incremental costs under the international climate regime. Finally, the thesis discusses Germany’s (representing technology suppliers) implementation of its push obligations and Nigeria’s (representing technology recipients) implementation of its pull obligations under the international climate and TRIPS regimes. It notes the responsibility deficits in both regimes and recommends necessary steps to strengthen the implementation of these push and pull obligations. The thesis also considers the potential linkages between the UNFCCC’s technology transfer framework and the Paris Agreement’s Technology Framework. In addition, it calls for enabling environments to be included in the implementation of the obligations of conduct under Article 13(7)(b) and (9) of the Paris Agreement and recommends measures aimed at strengthening the responsibility matrix for these obligations.
Mark Kuro Amakoromo (Wed,) studied this question.