ABSTRACT
This chapter discusses public institutional integrity concepts through an examination of differential obligations within the global climate regime. Getting global consensus on how the principle of Common But Differentiated Responsibility (CBDR) should apply within the 2020 Climate Regime is one of the most contentious issues within the negotiations. The chapter focuses on the interpretation of the principle in respect of legally binding mitigation obligations as this is where the principle has been most fiercely debated. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) specifically recognized the principle within the text of the agreement and the Kyoto Protocol adopted under the Convention applied the principle of CBDR to form two categories of membership: one with legally binding mitigation obligations and one without legally binding mitigation obligations. The global climate regime can be considered to have full integrity if its activities, values, ethics, internal organization and external relations accord with its Public Institutional Justification (PIJ).
