Independent inputs should be encouraged but verification expectations should be kept moderate

Although all three institutions first and foremost rely on national reporting within a fundamentally decentralized context, various independent data (networks) exist in all cases. The most prominent example is probably the EMEP monitoring system in the context of transboundary air pollution, which offers a certain possibility for independent checks of national reports. In the case of ozone, the GOOS provides data on the state of the ozone layer. This offers, of course, only a very indirect check on what the parties say they have done. And, in the EU, some independent evidence is produced through an informal complaint procedure. However, as further discussed below, the interest and willingness to use this data actively for verification purposes and checks on national reporting seem moderate in all three institutions.

In the climate change context, there are first and foremost the Expert Review Teams, which serve as checks on the governments' reports. As no such review teams exist in the three institutions focused on here, this must be noted as one (of several) areas where the climate regime is an innovator and forerunner in international environmental politics.66

0 0

Post a comment