cbd-ts-66-en

Part II: The Regulatory Framework for Climate-related Geoengineering Relevant to the Convention on Biological Diversity
CHAPTER 4
INSTITUTIONS
Rules and institutions do not necessarily go hand in hand. In theory, governance could be conceived of in terms
of only rules or only institutions. A simple form of geoengineering governance could consist of merely one rule
with an outright prohibition, without any special institution dealing with it. In contrast, governance could also
consist of an institution with a mandate, for instance, to collect and disseminate information on geoengineering,
without material obligations on States. However, there already are institutions with a mandate that would allow
them to address at least some geoengineering concepts, and there already are rules.
Governance of geoengineering in all likelihood requires institutions: a forum for exchanging views or agreeing on
permissions or restrictions on geoengineering, for monitoring implementation and compliance with expectations
and rules, and for exchanging and pooling scientific information, etc.
This section looks at institutions that were created independent of material treaty obligations.
4.1 UNITED NATIONS SECURITY COUNCIL
The Security Council has so far not addressed geoengineering, although it has taken up related issues such as peace
and security. An initial special session on the security implications of climate change provided no outcome and
some countries expressed doubt as to whether the Security Council was the appropriate forum.154 Following another
debate, in July 2011, the Security Council could not agree on a resolution but instead issued a Presidential Statement
that in weak wording acknowledged possible security implications of climate change, without recommending
particular steps for addressing that potential threat.155
4.2 UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY
The United Nations General Assembly has directly addressed ocean fertilization in the context of its annual resolution
on oceans and the law of the sea by noting the work undertaken by the London Convention / London Protocol and
the Convention on Biological Diversity,156 and in resolution 62/215 of 22 December 2007, the General Assembly
also encouraged States to support the further study and enhance understanding of ocean iron fertilization.157 The
General Assembly has also considered the importance of the application of the precautionary approach.158
With regard to the development of environmental impact assessment processes, in resolution 65/37 A of 7 December
2010, the General Assembly encouraged States, directly or through competent international organizations, to
consider the further development of environmental impact assessment processes covering planned activities
under their jurisdiction or control that may cause substantial pollution of, or significant and harmful changes to,
the marine environment.159
Issues relating to ocean fertilization, the precautionary approach and environmental impact assessment processes
have also been discussed by the United Nations Open-ended Informal Consultative Process on Oceans and the
Law of the Sea (the “Informal Consultative Process”), which was established by the General Assembly to facilitate
154 United Nations Security Council, open debate on energy, security and climate, on 17 April 2007, 5663rd meeting.
155 Security Council press release SC/10332 of 20 July 2011, http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2011/sc10332.doc.htm.
156 Resolution 65/37 A, paras. 149–152. Cf. UNGA resolutions in UN documents A/RES/62/215; A/RES/63/111, paras 115–116; A/
RES/64/71, paras. 132–133; A/RES/65/37, paras. 149–152 (draft doc. A/65/L.20 adopted); A/RES/66/231, paras. 154–156.
157 Resolution 62/215, para. 98.
158 See, for example, resolution 65/37 A, paras. 132 and 173.
159 Resolution 65/37 A, para. 132.
138