International:
Fossil fuel non-proliferation

Establish and utilize international mechanisms such as a fossil fuel non-proliferation treaty, via new or existing regimes, to end the proliferation and use of fossil fuels, hold the industry liable for its abuses, and use liability to help fund a just transition centred on real climate solutions.

What does this look like?

There are a variety of possible avenues for establishing international mechanisms to stop fossil fuel proliferation. Regardless of the forum and process, such mechanisms should:

  • Base these efforts on clear equity principles[1] and new forms of international cooperation, building on the experience of other international regimes such as the nuclear non-proliferation regime.[2]

  • Use funds garnered through liability measures to help finance such a transition.

  • End all new exploration and production of coal, oil and gas, effectively immediately.

  • Reject polluting industry schemes like carbon markets, geo-engineering and BECCs on the basis that they are risky, unproven, inadequate, and full of loopholes that contribute to abuses of human rights and nature.[3][4][5][6]

  • Phase out existing stockpiles and production of fossil fuels in line with keeping global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius, and in line with the principles of a just transition for every worker, community, and country.[7][8]

  • Draw from research that demonstrates that phasing out fossil fuel supply should be prioritized in wealthy, diversified economies that are in the best position to lead in large-scale transformative action right now with the least social cost. These include countries like Canada, the U.K., U.S., and Norway.

 

 Implementing the measures of the liability roadmap

Decision-makers and movements at all levels should keep the following in mind when implementing the measures laid out in this roadmap:

  • Enacting these policies and measures is simply the first step to holding polluting and destructive industries liable: There will be much work for government officials, decision-makers, activists and civil society alike to do to ensure these measures are fully implemented and move us toward the transformative change the world needs.

  • Liability should be applied to all industries and corporations that make business decisions that contribute to climate change and its impacts, or that cause harm to people and nature. In addition to the fossil fuel industry, these industries include but are not limited to agribusiness, forestry, mining, and the energy sector. 

  • Many of these measures could equally apply to state-owned corporations. Because the national contexts and unique needs vary from country to country, it is worth considering where to apply and how to adapt the principles and measures listed in the Liability Roadmap to address state-owned polluting corporations. Factors to consider when doing so could include but are not limited to the degree of democratic control over the entity, role and use of funding from oil/gas revenues, and responsiveness of the entity to transition to regenerative, renewable energy sources. 

  • Measures implemented at the national level should support and reinforce, rather than contradict, measures implemented at the sub-national and local, and vice versa.

    — back to top

 

1 G. Muttitt and S. Kartha. (2020). “Equity, climate justice and fossil fuel extraction: principles for a managed phase out,” Climate Policy (June 1, 2020), https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14693062.2020.1763900

2 Peter Newell and Andrew Simms, "Towards a fossil fuel non-proliferation treaty," Climate Policy (July 2019) https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14693062.2019.1636759.

3 Corporate Accountability. “Article 6 and the invisible hand of carbon chaos,” In Polluting Paris: How Big Polluters are Undermining Global Climate Policy, Corporate Accountability, October 2017, 14-17, accessed August 25, 2020, https://www.corporateaccountability.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/PollutingParis_COP23Report_2017.pdf. 

4 Corporate Accountability. Real Solutions, Real Zero: How Article 6.8 of the Paris Agreement Can Help Pave the Way to 1.5°, November 2019, accessed August 25, 2020, https://www.corporateaccountability.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Article-6.8-of-the-Paris-Agreement-A-Non-Market-Approach-to-1_5_v4_FINAL.pdf. 

5 K. Anderson and G. Peters. “The trouble with negative emissions”, Science, October 2016, 354, no. 3609, 182-183 accessed August 25, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aah4567.

6 "Climate-related Geoengineering and Biodiversity," Convention on Biological Diversity, last modified March 23, 2017, https://www.cbd.int/climate/geoengineering/.

7 "Climate Leadership Requires a Managed Decline of Fossil Fuel Production," The Lofoten Declaration, accessed August 27, 2020, http://www.lofotendeclaration.org.

8 SEI, IISD, ODI, Climate Analytics, CICERO, and UNEP. The Production Gap: The discrepancy between countries’ planned fossil fuel production and global production levels consistent with limiting warming to 1.5°C or 2°C, 2019, http://productiongap.org/.