Global Governance On International Aviation Emissions: A Multidimensional Approach

With the accelerating deterioration of global climate change and the rapiddevelopment of international aviation transportation, international aviation emissionsarouse more and more concern from international community. The initiation ofEuropean Aviation Emission Directive enables the issue of international aviationemissions to be a heated topic and make the Global Aviation Climate Negotiation bebeset with difficulties. The globality and negative externality of InternationalAviation Emission proves it to be a global issue.International Aviation Emission is not only an international problem, but also amultidimensional problem. The theory of Global Governance provides a feasibleapproach to this global issue. It is compulsory to establish an effective and efficientglobal governance mechanism to solve the problem of international aviationemissions. This mechanism is not based on government authority from top to bottom,but lies in the extensive participation of various actors as and the fullyimplementation of the mechanism of coordination and cooperation established by theinternational community. The essence of this mechanism is to reconcile divergentand conflicting interests of all parties and continuously take joined measures, whichincludes not only formal institutions and regulations, but also informal institutionalarrangements conforming to the common interests of all parties. This mechanismattaches great importance to the plurality of governance subjects. Sovereign States,Inter-governmental international organization, non-governmental organization, civilsociety, together with transnational corporation constitute the governance’s subjectsand forces on international aviation emissions, thus making a multidimensional approach of global governance on international aviation emissions not only possiblebut necessary.The international approach of global governance on international aviationemissions especially emphasizes the leading role played by International AviationOrganization for two reasons. On the one hand, the International AviationOrganization has issued a series of resolutions on international aviation emissions,created the Committee on Aviation Environmental Protection (CAEP), set up thestrategic target on environmental protection and undoubtedly promoted the steadyprogress on international aviation emissions. On the other hand, due to someinherent limitations of International Aviation Organization such as the lack ofenforcement of its legislation, the absent of the principle of common butdifferentiated responsibilitiesμ, the defections in legislative procedures and thefurther amendment of its objectives and goals, the problem of international aviationemissions has been delayed for a quite long time. However, in the future,International Aviation Organization will definitely play an irreplaceable role inleading international aviation negotiation, guiding the technology upgrades, andpromoting international cooperation. This shows the value of internationalapproach of global governance.European Union·s action of including aviation industry into European UnionEmission Trading Scheme (ETS) arouses a global concern. The regional approach ofglobal governance on international aviation emissions recognizes the EuropeanUnion as the legal governance subject of international aviation emissions, but it hasno solid foundation of law to unilaterally deal with the problem. European AviationEmission Directive does not only violate the customary international law of ChicagoConvention on national airspace sovereignty, but also contradict with ChicagoConvention on prohibition of aviation emissions tax levy. In view of its compatibilitywith international environmental law, European Aviation Emission Directiveimplements the same formula of free quota for aircraft operators of EU memberstates and non-EU member states, while not giving necessary attention to the advancement of developing countries’ airlines companies. This phenomenon is anapparent contrary to the principle of common but differentiated responsibilitiesμ.By examining the relevant texts of Kyoto Protocol, EU·s unilateral action is just atodds with the protocol’s requirement that multilateral cooperation and joint actionsshould be done to address climate issue. Moreover, in the case of Air TransportAssociation of America and others v.s Secretary of State for Energy and ClimateChange, European Court·s ruling, to some extent, highlights the embarrassment oflawsuit in Europe. As a member-driven international organization, WTO provides anew approach to solve the problem of international aviation emissions. Internationalaviation transportation is both a serve trade practice and a trade in goods. From theanalysis of Annex on Air Transport Services of GATS, it is seen that EuropeanAviation Emission Directive is neither a service measure influencing traffic rightsnor directly related to the exercise of traffic rights; therefore, it should not excludedfrom all the matters covered by GATS. There are some conflicts between EuropeanAviation Emission Directive and GATT·s most-favoured-nation treatment andnational treatment. The directive makes a difference between the products fromcountries with the regulations on aviation emissions of carbon dioxide and theproducts from those countries without such regulations, which violates themost-favoured-nation treatment; the directive leads to the increasing fare of cargoshipping and the additional cost burden of imported products, which violates thenational treatment.Title II Part B of Clean Air Act of United States is a special regulation onaviation emissions and NextGen action further promotes the reduction of aviationemissions compared to United States, China has more policies instead of speciallaws on the regulation of aviation emissions, which requires to make further effortsto improve the regulation of aviation emissions. Meanwhile, the different positionsof China and United States on the international aviation negotiation reflect theinterest game of aviation emissions between developed countries and developingcountries. To view the international aviation emissions of global governance from the national perspective，it is necessary to perfect each country·s domestic legislationand strengthen efforts to reduce domestic aviation emissions.As an industrial alliance of airlines, the International Air Transport Associationpresents four-pillar strategy to address aviation environmental issues, namelyupgrade technologies, carry out more efficient aircraft operations, improveinfrastructures and take market-based measures. On the69thannual meeting held inSouth Africa, the International Air Transport Association voted to adopt CNG2020resolution. Unfortunately, the resolution is not only an apparent contrary to thedeveloping countries· stand on climate change, but also a contradiction with ChicagoConvention·s principles of non-discriminationμ and the fair access to developmentopportunitiesμ. As one of the plural subjects of global governance, the InternationalAir Transport Association should actively participate in international negotiations onaviation emissions as a better coordinating player.