¹ Stoutenburg, Jenny Grote, “When Do States Disappear? Thresholds of Effective Statehood and the Continued Recognition of ‘Deterritorialized’ Island States” in Gerrard, Michael & Wannier, Gregory, eds, Threatened Island Nations: Legal Implications of Rising Seas and a Changing Climate (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013) 57 at 87 [Stoutenburg, “When Do”].Google Scholar

² Davor Vidas, “Sea-Level Rise and International Law: At the Convergence of Two Epochs” (2014) 4 Climate Law 70 at 73.

³ See, eg, Derek Wong, “Sovereignty Sunk? The Position of ‘Sinking States’ at International Law” (2013) 14 Melb J Int’l L 346 at 347.

⁴ UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), “Nation-State,” online: UNESCO <http://www.unesco.org/new/en/social-and-human-sciences/themes/international-migration/glossary/nation-state/>; Cara Nine, “Ecological Refugees, States Borders, and the Lockean Proviso” (2010) 27:4 J Applied Philosophy 359 at 362; Pierré-Caps, Stéphane, “La mondialisation et la crise de l’État national” in Mouton, Jean-Denis & Cot, Jean-Pierre, eds, L’État dans la mondialisation: colloque de Nancy (Paris: Éditions Pedone, 2013) 39 at 40.Google Scholar

⁵ See, eg, Immanuel Wallerstein, “The New World Disorder: If the States Collapse, Can the Nations be United?” in Albert Paolini, Anthony Jarvis & Christian Reus-Smit, eds, Between Sovereignty and Global Governance. The United Nations, the State and Civil Society (London: MacMillan Press; and New York: St Martin’s Press, 1998) 171 at 181–82; Roman Kwiecién, “On Some Contemporary Challenges to Statehood in the International Legal Order: International Law between Lotus and Global Administrative Law” (2013) 51:3 Archiv des Völkerrechts 279 at 298; Nico Krisch, “The Decay of Consent: International Law in an Age of Global Public Goods” (2014) 108:1 AJIL 1 at 3, 6–7; Milena Sterio, “A Grotian Moment: Changes in the Legal Theory of Statehood” (2011) 39 Denv J Int’l L & Pol’y 209 at 209. See also, generally, Oscar Schachter, “The Decline of the Nation-State and Its Implications for International Law” (1998) 36 Colum J Transnat’l L 7.

⁶ Kwiecién, supra note 5 at 288, 310–11; Crawford, Emily & Rayfuse, Rosemary, “Climate Change and Statehood” in Rayfuse, Rosemary & Scott, Shirley, eds, International Law in the Era of Climate Change (Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, 2012) 243 at 245Google Scholar; Buchanan, Allen, “The Legitimacy of International Law” in Besson, Samantha & Tasioulas, John, eds, The Philosophy of International Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010) 79 at 91Google Scholar, 93 [Buchanan, “The Legitimacy”]; John Herz, “Rise and Demise of the Territorial State” (1957) 9:4 World Politics 473 at 480; Inger Österdahl, “Relatively Failed: Troubled Statehood and International Law” (2003) 14 Finnish YB Int’l L 49 at 49; Ian Brownlie, “Rebirth of Statehood” in Malcolm Evans, ed, Aspects of Statehood and Institutionalism in Contemporary Europe (Dartmouth, UK: Aldershot, 1996) 5 at 6; Abhimanyu George Jain, “The 21st Century Atlantis: The International Law of Statehood and Climate Change-Induced Loss of Territory” (2014) 50 Stan J Int’l L 1 at 7–9.

⁷ Shaw, Malcolm, International Law, 7th edition (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014) at 151–53.Google Scholar See also Buchanan, Allen & Moore, Margaret, “Introduction: The Making and Unmaking of Boundaries” in Buchanan, Allen & Moore, Margaret, eds, States, Nations and Borders: The Ethics of Making Boundaries (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003) 1 at 1–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁸ Crawford & Rayfuse, supra note 6 at 248; Maxine Burkett, “The Nation Ex-Situ” in Gerrard & Wannier, supra note 1, 89 at 93 [Burkett, “Nation Ex-Situ”]; Julien Jeanneney, “L’Atlantide, remarques sur la submersion de l’intégralité du territoire d’un État” (2014) 118:1 RGDIP 95 at 99; International Law Association (ILA), Committee on International Law and Sea-Level Rise (SLR), Minutes of the Closed Session (I) (Washington, 2014) at 7 (statement by the Chair), online: ILA <http://www.ila-hq.org/en/committees/index.cfm/cid/1043> [ILA SLR 2014 Closed].

⁹ David Caron, “Climate Change, Sea Level Rise and the Coming Uncertainty in Oceanic Boundaries: A Proposal to Avoid Conflict” in Seoung-Yong Hong & Jon M Van Dyke, eds, Maritime Boundary Disputes, Settlement Processes, and the Law of the Sea (Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff, 2009) 1 at 8; Tony George Puthucherril, “Climate Change, Sea Level Rise and Protecting Displaced Coastal Communities: Possible Solutions” (2012) 1 Global J Comp L 225 at 234; Jain, supra note 6 at 4–5.

¹⁰ International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report: Summary for Policymakers at 2, online: <http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/syr/AR5_SYR_FINAL_SPM.pdf>.

¹¹ Ibid at 4.

¹² Davor Vidas, David Freestone & Jane McAdam, “International Law and Sea Level Rise: The New ILA Committee” (2015) 21 ILSA J Int’l & Comp L 397 at 397–98; Maas, Achim & Carius, Alexander, “Territorial Integrity and Sovereignty: Climate Change and Security in the Pacific and Beyond” in Scheffran, Jürgen et al, eds, Climate Change, Human Security and Violent Conflict: Challenges for Societal Stability (Berlin: Springer, 2012) 651 at 653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹³ Puthucherril, supra note 9; Clive Schofield & David Freestone, “Options to Protect Coastlines and Secure Maritime Jurisdictional Claims in the Face of Global Sea Level Rise” in Gerrard & Wannier, supra note 1, 141 at 141; Clive Schofield & I Mande Andi Arsana, “Imaginary Islands? Options to Preserve Maritime Jurisdictional Entitlements and Provide Stable Maritime Limits in the Face of Coastal Instability” (Proceedings of the Advisory Board on the Law of the Sea (ABLOS) Conference on Contentious Issues in UNCLOS – Surely Not?, Monaco, 2010) at 8–9.

¹⁴ Schofield & Arsana, supra note 13 at 2.

¹⁵ Ibid; Puthucherril, supra note 9 at 232.

¹⁶ See, eg, Alfred Soons, “The Effects of a Rising Sea Level on Maritime Limits and Boundaries” (1990) 37 Neth Int’l L Rev 207; David Caron, “When Law Makes Climate Change Worse: Rethinking the Law of Baselines in Light of a Rising Sea Level” (1990) 17 Ecology LQ 621 [Caron, “When Law”]; David Freestone, “International Law and Sea Level Rise” in R Churchill & D Freestone, eds, International Law and Global Climate Change (London: Graham & Trotman / Martinus Nijhoff, 1991) 109 [Freestone, “International Law”].

¹⁷ Jain, supra note 6 at 12, referring to, eg, Michele Klein Solomon & Koko Warner, “Protection of Persons Displaced as a Result of Climate Change: Existing Tools and Emerging Frameworks” in Gerrard & Wannier, supra note 1, 243; Alice Edwards, “Climate Change and International Refugee Law” in Rayfuse & Scott, supra note 6, 58; Catherine Redgewell, “Climate Change and International Environmental Law” in Rayfuse & Scott, supra note 6, 118; Schofield & Freestone, supra note 13; Maketo Robert et al, “Transboundary Climate Challenge to Coal: One Small Step against Dirty Energy, One Giant Leap for Climate Justice” in Gerrard Wannier, supra note 1, 589; Jacob David Werksman, “Could a Small Island Successfully Sue a Big Emitter?: Pursuing a Legal Theory and a Venue for Climate Justice” in Gerrard & Wannier, supra note 1, 409. See also Jenny Grote Stoutenburg, “Implementing a New Regime of Stable Maritime Zones to Ensure the (Economic) Survival of Small Island States Threatened by Sea-Level Rise” (2011) 26 Int’l J Mar & Coast L 263 [Stoutenburg, “Implementing”]; Schofield & Arsana, supra note 13.

¹⁸ Crawford, James, The Creation of States in International Law, 2nd edition (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006);Google Scholar Thomas Grant, “Defining Statehood: The Montevideo Convention and Its Discontents” (1998–99) 37 Colum J Transnat’l L 403; Jure Vidmar, “Territorial Integrity and the Law of Statehood” (2012) 44 Geo Wash Int’l L Rev 697; Österdahl, supra note 6.

¹⁹ Jain, supra note 6 at 13, referring to Burkett, “Nation Ex-Situ,” supra note 8; Stoutenburg, “When Do,” supra note 1; Crawford & Rayfuse, supra note 6; Maxine Burkett, “The Nation Ex-Situ: On Climate Change, Deterritorialized Nationhood and the Post-Climate Era” (2011) 2 Climate Law 345; Vidas, supra note 2; Wong, supra note 3.

²⁰ Crawford & Rayfuse, supra note 6 at 249–50.

²¹ ILA, Committee on Baselines under the International Law of the Sea (CB), Final Report (Sofia, 2012) at 1, online: ILA <http://www.ila-hq.org/en/committees/index.cfm/cid/1028> [ILA CB], cited in Vidas, Freestone & McAdam, supra note 12 at 401.

²² Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States, 26 December 1933, 165 LNTS 19 [Montevideo Convention]. While the other criteria (government and capacity to enter into relations with other states) are touched upon, they are not at the core of the analysis.

²³ Österdahl, supra note 6 at 87.

²⁴ Vidas, Freestone & McAdam, supra note 12 at 400–01.

²⁵ Jeanneney, supra note 8 at 97.

²⁶ See, eg, Shaw, supra note 7 at 143.

²⁷ See, eg, Jain, supra note 6 at 7.

²⁸ Leo Gross, “The Peace of Westphalia, 1648–1948” (1948) 42 AJIL 20 at 20, cited in Wong, supra note 3 at 352. See also Daniel Bethlehem, “The End of Geography: The Changing Nature of the International System and the Challenge to International Law” (2014) 25:1 EJIL 9 at 13; Sterio, supra note 5 at 211.

²⁹ Wong, supra note 3 at 353.

³⁰ Throughout this article, “territoriality” is used in its general sense — that is, a link or connection to a particular territory. It is not limited to the territoriality principle of jurisdiction under international law.

³¹ Herz, supra note 6 at 475, 477.

³² Jain, supra note 6 at 23; Burkett, “Nation Ex-Situ,” supra note 8 at 106; Österdahl, supra note 6 at 76.

³³ Wong, supra note 3 at 365. See also Andrew Hurrell, “International Law and the Making and Unmaking of Boundaries” in Buchanan & Moore, supra note 7, 275 at 279–80.

³⁴ Wong, supra note 3 at 365–66. See also “Yugoslavia Peace Conference Opinion No 1” (1991) 92 ILR 162 at 165 (Arbitration Commission of the Conference on Yugoslavia), cited in Wong, supra note 3 at 354–55; Vidas, supra note 2 at 81–82.

³⁵ Nine, supra note 4 at 362. The issue of self-determination will be discussed in further detail below.

³⁶ Jain, supra note 6 at 23. See also Nine, supra note 4 at 362; Allen Buchanan, “The Making and Unmaking of Boundaries: What Liberalism Has to Say” in Buchanan & Moore, supra note 7, 231 at 232 [Buchanan, “The Making”]; Buchanan & Moore, supra note 7 at 6; Hurrell, supra note 33 at 279.

³⁷ Surya Sharma, Territorial Acquisition, Disputes and International Law (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1997) at 4, cited in Wong, supra note 3 at 365–66. See also Burkett, “Nation Ex-Situ,” supra note 8 at 103.

³⁸ Jain, supra note 6 at 22–23.

³⁹ Jeanneney, supra note 8 at 105: “comme réalité factuelle et comme construction juridique … un cadre fonctionnel.”

⁴⁰ Vidas, supra note 2 at 78.

⁴¹ Charter of the United Nations, 24 October 1945, 1 UNTS XVI, art 2(4) [UN Charter].

⁴² Bethlehem, supra note 28 at 13; Vidmar, supra note 18 at 707.

⁴³ Shaw, supra note 7 at 479–84; Bethlehem, supra note 28 at 13–14.

⁴⁴ Vidmar, supra note 18 at 699–700.

⁴⁵ Schachter, supra note 5 at 9. See also Yves Petit, “Les risques environnementaux globaux et les transformations de la souveraineté” in Mouton & Cot, supra note 4, 177 at 179.

⁴⁶ Brownlie, supra note 6 at 5.

⁴⁷ Österdahl, supra note 6 at 68.

⁴⁸ Jain, supra note 6 at 51, 24–25.

⁴⁹ Ibid at 51. See also Jeanneney, supra note 8 at 116. The issues of the creation and continuity of states are discussed in greater detail in the next sub-section.

⁵⁰ Österdahl, supra note 6 at 68–69.

⁵¹ See, eg, Wong, supra note 3 at 352; Grant, supra note 18 at 413.

⁵² See, eg, Grant, supra note 18 at 455–56; David Harris, Cases and Materials on International Law, 7th edition (London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2010) at 92, cited in Wong, supra note 3 at 353; Jeanneney, supra note 8 at 101.

⁵³ Montevideo Convention, supra note 22, art 1.

⁵⁴ Grant, supra note 18 at 413–14; Wong, supra note 3 at 354; Jeanneney, supra note 8 at 101.

⁵⁵ Louis Henkin, International Law: Politics and Values (Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff, 1995) at 13, cited in Jain, supra note 6 at 16.

⁵⁶ Grant, supra note 18 at 453. See also Österdahl, supra note 6 at 87.

⁵⁷ Grant, supra note 18 at 437–47, 450–51.

⁵⁸ See further Stoutenburg, “When Do,” supra note 1 at 73–74.

⁵⁹ The necessity of recognition by other states forms the basis of the constitutive theory, one of the two theories of statehood under international law, the other being the declaratory theory, which is based solely on satisfaction of the Montevideo criteria. For more on this topic, see, eg, Shaw, supra note 7 at 150–51.

⁶⁰ While there might be no express definition of state or statehood under international law, these “newly considered” elements, taken together with the classical criteria described above, as well as state practice, still form a set of tools that could be relied upon as a functional definition of statehood by a decision maker required to determine whether an entity should be considered a state.

⁶¹ Crawford & Rayfuse, supra note 6 at 246.

⁶² Grant, supra note 18 at 447.

⁶³ Wong, supra note 3 at 351; Stoutenburg, “When Do,” supra note 1 at 57; Jain, supra note 6 at 6, 52.

⁶⁴ Crawford, supra note 18 at 52; Western Sahara, Advisory Opinion, [1975] ICJ Rep 12 at para 81.

⁶⁵ Stoutenburg, “When Do,” supra note 1 at 61, 64–65; In Re Duchy of Sealand, [1978] 80 ILR 683 at 687 (Administrative Court of Cologne), cited and discussed in Michael Gagain, “Climate Change, Sea Level Rise, and Artificial Islands: Saving the Maldives’ Statehood and Maritime Claims through the ‘Constitution of the Oceans’” (2012) 23 Colo J Int’l Envt’l L & Pol’y 7 at 116–17.

⁶⁶ Stoutenburg, “When Do,” supra note 1 at 90.

⁶⁷ Crawford & Rayfuse, supra note 6 at 246; Jain, supra note 6 at 18, 21.

⁶⁸ Wong, supra note 3 at 355; North Sea Continental Shelf Cases (Federal Republic of Germany v Denmark; Federal Republic of Germany v The Netherlands), [1969] ICJ Rep 3 at 32–33, cited in Gagain, supra note 65 at 90.

⁶⁹ Wong, supra note 3 at 355. See also In Re Duchy of Sealand, supra note 65 at 685.

⁷⁰ The issue of artificial structures will be discussed further in the second part of this article.

⁷¹ Maritime Delimitation and Territorial Questions between Qatar and Bahrain (Qatar v Bahrain), Merits, Judgment, [2001] ICJ Rep 40 at para 100, cited in Stoutenburg, “When Do,” supra note 1 at 60.

⁷² Island of Palmas case (or Miangas) (United States v The Netherlands), [1928] II RIAA 829 at 839, cited in Crawford & Rayfuse, supra note 6 at 250.

⁷³ See Vidas, supra note 2 at 78–79.

⁷⁴ Rosemary Rayfuse, “International Law and Disappearing States: Maritime Zones and the Criteria for Statehood” (2011) 41:6 Envtl Pol’y & L 281. See also Lilian Yamamoto & Miguel Esteban, “Vanishing Island States and Sovereignty” (2010) 53 Ocean & Coastal Management 1 at 6 [Yamamoto & Esteban, “Vanishing Island”].

⁷⁵ Ineta Ziemele, “States, Extinction of,” Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (May 2007) at para 3, online: <http://opil.ouplaw.com/home/EPIL>.

⁷⁶ Jeanneney, supra note 8 at 98–99.

⁷⁷ Wong, supra note 3 at 362.

⁷⁸ Crawford, supra note 18 at 701; Jain, supra note 6 at 27.

⁷⁹ Crawford & Rayfuse, supra note 6 at 246–47. See also Grant, supra note 18 at 435; Sterio, supra note 5 at 216.

⁸⁰ Jain, supra note 6 at 35.

⁸¹ Montevideo Convention, supra note 22, art 6: “The recognition of a state merely signifies that the state which recognizes it accepts the personality of the other with all the rights and duties determined by international law. Recognition is unconditional and irrevocable.” Cited in Lilian Yamamoto & Miguel Esteban, Atoll Island States and International Law (Berlin: Springer, 2014) at 186 [Yamamoto & Esteban, Atoll Island].

⁸² Grant, supra note 18 at 435; Gagain, supra note 65 at 91; Jeanneney, supra note 8 at 102–03; Colin Warbrick, “Recognition of States: Recent European Practice” in Evans, supra note 6, 9 at 13.

⁸³ See, generally, eg, Jain, supra note 6; Yamamoto & Esteban, Atoll Island, supra note 81 at 202.

⁸⁴ Jain, supra note 6 at 27.

⁸⁵ Ibid at 9. See also Sterio, supra note 5 at 217–19, on the reasons for which statehood is important.

⁸⁶ Yamamoto & Esteban have argued that since they are recognized as UN members, SIDS could not lose that membership only by losing recognition of their statehood by other states. Indeed, according to art 6 of the UN Charter, supra note 41, UN membership can only be lost if the principles of the Charter have been violated, which would not generally be the case with SIDS. See Yamamoto & Esteban, Atoll Island, supra note 81 at 202.

⁸⁷ Wong, supra note 3 at 349.

⁸⁸ Ibid at 349–50.

⁸⁹ Jain, supra note 6 at 28, 33.

⁹⁰ Crawford & Rayfuse, supra note 6 at 248.

⁹¹ Crawford, supra note 18 at 5, cited in Wong, supra note 3 at 352; Vidmar, supra note 18 at 702, 747; Warbrick, supra note 82 at 12; Sterio, supra note 5 at 215–16.

⁹² Rosemary Rayfuse, “Sea Level Rise and Maritime Zones: Preserving the Maritime Entitlements of ‘Disappearing’ States” in Gerrard & Wannier, supra note 1, 167 at 177 [Rayfuse, “Sea Level Rise”].

⁹³ Burkett, “Nation Ex-Situ,” supra note 8 at 92.

⁹⁴ David Freestone, “Can the UN Climate Regime Respond to the Challenges of Sea Level Rise?” (2013) 35 U Haw L Rev 671 at 672 [Freestone, “Can the UN”].

⁹⁵ Gagain, supra note 65 at 93

⁹⁶ See, eg, Gregory Wannier & Michael Gerrard, “Overview” in Gerrard & Wannier, supra note 1, 3 at 8; Freestone, “Can the UN,” supra note 94 at 674, quoting Schofield & Freestone, supra note 13 at 141.

⁹⁷ Ann Powers & Christophe Stucko, “Introducing the Law of the Sea and the Legal Implications of Rising Sea Levels” in Gerrard & Wannier, supra note 1, 123 at 131; Gagain, supra note 65 at 94.

⁹⁸ Powers & Stucko, supra note 97 at 132.

⁹⁹ Gagain, supra note 65 at 94.

¹⁰⁰ Maas & Carius, supra note 12 at 656.

¹⁰¹ Puthucherril, supra note 9 at 258.

¹⁰² See, e.g. Jeanneney, supra note 8 at 109.

¹⁰³ United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, 10 December 1982, 1833 UNTS 3, art 121(3) [UNCLOS]. See also Yamamoto & Esteban, “Vanishing Island,” supra note 74 at 6.

¹⁰⁴ Vidas, supra note 2 at 75.

¹⁰⁵ Stoutenburg, “When Do,” supra note 1 at 78. See also Gagain, supra note 65 at 94–95; ILA SLR 2014 Closed, supra note 8 at 2.

¹⁰⁶ UNCLOS, supra note 103, arts 5, 57, 76(1). See also, eg, Gagain, supra note 65 at 95–96.

¹⁰⁷ See, eg, Caron, “When Law,” supra note 16 at 632.

¹⁰⁸ ILA CB, supra note 21 at 31.

¹⁰⁹ See, eg, Soons, supra note 16; Stoutenburg, “Implementing,” supra note 17 at 275; Moritaka Hayasi, “Sea Level Rise and the Law of the Sea: Legal and Policy Options” (International Symposium on Islands and Oceans, Tokyo, 22–23 January 2009) 79 at 82; Moritaka Hayasi, “Sea-level Rise and the Law of the Sea: How Can the Affected States be Better Protected” in Clive Schofield, Seokwoo Lee & Moon-Sang Kwoon, eds, The Limits of Maritime Jurisdiction (Leiden: Brill, 2013) 609 at 616–17 [Hayasi, “Affected States”]; ILA, SLR, Draft Conference Report (Johannesburg, 2016) at 12–4, online: ILA <http://www.ila-hq.org/en/committees/index.cfm/cid/1043> [ILA SLR 2016].

¹¹⁰ See, eg, Stoutenburg, “Implementing,” supra note 17 at 275.

¹¹¹ UNCLOS, supra note 103, arts 49, 52–53.

¹¹² Yamamoto & Esteban, “Vanishing Island,” supra note 74 at 7.

¹¹³ Burkett, “Nation Ex-Situ,” supra note 8 at 107, citing Rosemary Rayfuse, “W(h)ither Tuvalu? Oceans Governance and Disappearing States” (International Symposium on Islands and Oceans, Tokyo, 22–23 January 2009) at 101 [Rayfuse, “W(h)ither Tuvalu”].

¹¹⁴ ILA, SLR, Minutes of the Open Session (Washington, 2014) at 5, online: ILA <http://www.ila-hq.org/en/committees/index.cfm/cid/1043> [ILA SLR 2014 Open].

¹¹⁵ Puthucherril, supra note 9 at 234–35. The term “environmentally displaced persons” is preferable to expressions such as environmental, ecological or climate refugees because there is legal uncertainty as to whether people forced to move for environmental reasons, including climate change, can benefit from refugee protection. Further, the expression “environmentally displaced persons” covers both people who are suddenly displaced because of natural disasters, and people who have to move gradually or in a planned manner: see Yamamoto & Esteban, Atoll Island, supra note 81 at 288.

¹¹⁶ Vidas, Freestone & McAdam, supra note 12 at 405–06 (emphasis in original).

¹¹⁷ Ibid.

¹¹⁸ Commission on Human Rights, Report of the Representative of the Secretary-General, Mr. Francis M. Deng, Submitted Pursuant to Commission Resolution 1997/39: Addendum: Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement, UNESC, Doc E/CN.4/1998/53/Add.2 (1998).

¹¹⁹ Ibid at 3, para 9. See also Puthucherril, supra note 9 at 246.

¹²⁰ Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, 28 July 1951, 189 UNTS 150, art 1A(2) [Refugee Convention].

¹²¹ See, eg, BG (Fiji), [2012] NZIPT 800091; AF (Kiribati), [2013] NZIPT 800413; AD (Tuvalu), [2014] NZIT 800517–520.

¹²² Puthucherril, supra note 9 at 252. See also Yamamoto & Esteban, Atoll Island, supra note 81 at 234; Jeanneney, supra note 8 at 107–09.

¹²³ AF (Kiribati), supra note 121 at para 57.

¹²⁴ International Law Commission (ILC), Protection of Persons in the Event of Disasters: Texts and Titles of the Draft Articles Adopted by the Drafting Committee on First Reading, Doc A/CN.4/L.831 (2014).

¹²⁵ Stoutenburg, “When Do,” supra note 1 at 76–77 (emphasis added). On the issue of cultural identity, see also ILA SLR 2016, supra note 109 at 17.

¹²⁶ International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 16 December 1966, 999 UNTS 171, art 1(1) [ICCPR]; International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 16 December 1966, 993 UNTS 3, art 1(1) [ICESCR]. The same wording is used in the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, GA Res 1514 (XV), UNGAOR, Doc A/RES/1514(XV) (14 December 1960) at para 2. See also Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in Accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, GA Res 2625 (XXV), UNGAOR, Doc A/RES/25/2625 (24 October 1970) at principle 5. Mostly used in the context of decolonization, the concept of self-determination, however, has been applied outside this traditional context. See, eg, Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovo, Advisory Opinion, [2010] ICJ Rep 403 at para 79; Daniel Thürer & Thomas Burri, “Self-Determination,” Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (December 2008) at para 34.

¹²⁷ See, generally, Yamamoto & Esteban, Atoll Island, supra note 81 at 176.

¹²⁸ Jörgen Ödalen, “Underwater Self-determination: Sea-level Rise and Deterritorialised Small Island States” (2014) 17:2 Ethics, Policy & Environment 225 at 233. See also Nine, supra note 4 at 362.

¹²⁹ Ödalen, supra note 128 at 226, 232.

¹³⁰ Ibid at 229–30.

¹³¹ Nine, supra note 4 at 366.

¹³² Stoutenburg, “When Do,” supra note 1 at 80. See also ILC, Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, UN Doc A/56/83 (3 August 2001), art 2; Jain, supra note 6 at 41–42.

¹³³ IPCC, supra note 10 at 2, 4.

¹³⁴ United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, 9 May 1992, 1771 UNTS 107, art 4 [UNFCCC].

¹³⁵ Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, 11 December 1997, 2303 UNTS 162, arts 3–4, 6, 12, 17 [Kyoto Protocol]. The targets were subsequently amended at the Doha Conference in 2012 for the second commitment period (2013–20), but the amendments are not yet into force (as of May 2016).

¹³⁶ Adoption of the Paris Agreement, UNFCCC, UN Doc FCCC/CP/2015/L.9 (12 December 2015), arts 2–3, 4(9) [Paris Agreement]. The Paris Agreement will enter into force when fifty-five states representing 55 percent of global emissions will have ratified or acceded to the Agreement. It will be open for signature from 22 April 2016 to 21 April 2017. See Daniel Bodansky, “Reflections on the Paris Conference” (15 December 2015), online: Opinio Juris <http://opiniojuris.org/2015/12/15/reflections-on-the-paris-conference/>.

¹³⁷ Eg, the United States is not a party to the Kyoto Protocol; China, while a party to the protocol, is not bound by the reduction targets; and Canada withdrew from the protocol in 2011, before the start of the second commitment period.

¹³⁸ See, eg, Corinne Lepage & Christian Huglo, “Commentaire iconoclaste (?) de ‘l’Accord de Paris’” (2016) 41:1 Revue juridique de l’environnement 9; Benoît Mayer, “Enjeux et résultats de la COP21” (2016) 41:1 Revue juridique de l’environnement 13; Sophie Lavallée, “L’Accord de Paris: trois questions passées sous silence” (23 December 2015), online: Policy Options Politiques <http://policyoptions.irpp.org/fr/magazines/december-2015/laccord-de-paris-troisquestions-passees-sous-silence/>.

¹³⁹ Trail Smelter Case (United States v Canada), [1938/1941] III RIAA 1905 at 1963: “A state owes at all times a duty to protect against injurious acts by individuals from within its jurisdiction” and “no State has the right to use or permit the use of its territory in such a manner as to cause injury by fumes in or to the territory of another … when the case is of serious consequence” (at 1965); Stockholm Declaration on the Human Environment, UN Doc A/Conf.48/14/Rev. 1 (1973), Principle 21 (Stockholm Declaration): “States have … the responsibility to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to the environment of other States or of areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction.” See also Rio Declaration on Environmental and Development, UN Doc A/CONF.151/26 (vol I) (1992), Principle 2 (Rio Declaration).

¹⁴⁰ ILC, Articles on Prevention of Transboundary Harm from Hazardous Activities, UN Doc A/56/10 (2001), art 3: “The State of origin shall take all appropriate measures to prevent significant transboundary harm or at any event to minimize the risk thereof.” See also ILA, Committee on the Legal Principles Relating to Climate Change, ILA Legal Principles Relating to Climate Change (Washington, 2014), online: ILA <http://www.ila-hq.org/en/committees/index.cfm/cid/1029/member/1>. Draft art 7A(1) deals with the obligation of prevention, putting the emphasis on climate change. These drafts articles have been raised as relevant for the work of the ILA Committee on Sea Level Rise. See ILA SLR 2014 Open, supra note 114 at 5.

¹⁴¹ Sands, Philippe & Peel, Jacqueline, Principles of International Environmental Law, 3rd edition (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012) at 242–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁴² Stoutenburg, “When Do,” supra note 1 at 80–81; Yamamoto & Esteban, Atoll Island, supra note 81 at 276.

¹⁴³ Jain, supra note 6 at 41–42.

¹⁴⁴ Stoutenburg, “When Do,” supra note 1 at 75.

¹⁴⁵ Ibid.

¹⁴⁶ Ibid at 78.

¹⁴⁷ Universal Declaration of Human Rights, GA Res 217 (III), UNGAOR, 3d Sess Supp No 13, UN Doc A/810 (1948), arts 3, 25(1) [UDHR]; ICCPR, supra note 126, arts 6(1), 9(1); ICESCR, supra note 126, art 11(1). See, eg, Maxine Burkett, “A Justice Paradox: On Climate Change, Small Island Developing States, and the Quest for Effective Legal Remedy” (2013) 35 U Haw L Rev 633 at 646–47 [Burkett, “Justice Paradox”]; Human Rights and Climate Change, UNHCR, UN Doc A/HRC/RES/26/27 (2014) at para 1 and preamble; Human Rights and Climate Change, UNHCR, UN Doc A/HRC/RES/18/22 (2011) at para 1; ILA SLR 2016, supra note 109 at 16–17.

¹⁴⁸ UDHR, supra note 147, art 15(1). Lisa Friedman, “If a Country Sinks beneath the Sea, Is It Still a Country?” New York Times (23 August 2010), online: New York Times <http://www.nytimes.com/cwire/2010/08/23/23climatewire-if-a-country-sinks-beneath-the-sea-is-it-sti-70169.html?pagewanted=all>.

¹⁴⁹ Stoutenburg, “When Do,” supra note 1 at 79 (emphasis added).

¹⁵⁰ Jain, supra note 6 at 41–42.

¹⁵¹ Puthucherril, supra note 9 at 238.

¹⁵² IPCC, supra note 10 at 2. It must however be underlined that climate change and sea-level rise are not only triggered by human activities but also come from natural causes.

¹⁵³ Stoutenburg, “When Do,” supra note 1 at 84–85.

¹⁵⁴ Jain, supra note 6 at 42.

¹⁵⁵ Burkett, “Justice Paradox,” supra note 147 at 643. See also Stoutenburg, “When Do,” supra note 1 at 59.

¹⁵⁶ See, eg, Lawrence Hurley, “Island Nation Girds for Legal Battle against Industrial Emissions,” New York Times (28 September 2011), online: New York Times <http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2011/09/28/28greenwire-island-nation-girds-for-legal-battle-against-i-60949.html>.

¹⁵⁷ Burkett, “Justice Paradox,” supra note 147 at 635.

¹⁵⁸ Wong, supra note 3 at 389.

¹⁵⁹ Burkett, “Justice Paradox,” supra note 147 at 634; Hayasi, “Affected States,” supra note 109 at 620; Powers & Stucko, supra note 97 at 139–40; Rayfuse, “Sea Level Rise,” supra note 92 at 178. The issue of legitimacy will be discussed further in the third part of this article.

¹⁶⁰ Burkett, “Justice Paradox,” supra note 147 at 661.

¹⁶¹ Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat, 2 February 1971, 996 UNTS 245; Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, 23 November 1972, 1037 UNTS 151; Convention on Biological Diversity, 5 June 1992, 1760 UNTS 79. See Burkett, “Justice Paradox,” supra note 147 at 642; Wannier & Gerrard, supra note 96 at 12; ILA SLR 2014 Closed, supra note 8 at 4–5.

¹⁶² Burkett, “Justice Paradox,” supra note 147 at 652–53.

¹⁶³ ILA SLR 2016, supra note 109 at 8.

¹⁶⁴ Vidas, supra note 2 at 83.

¹⁶⁵ Gross, supra note 28 at 378, cited in Wong, supra note 3 at 352.

¹⁶⁶ The Cancun Agreements: Outcome of the Work of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention, Conference of the Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Doc FCCC/CP/2010/7/Add.1 (2011) at paras 11–20.

¹⁶⁷ Crawford & Rayfuse, supra note 6 at 249–50; Jeanneney, supra note 8 at 117–19.

¹⁶⁸ The expression “ex-situ nation” has also been used in the literature. See, eg, Burkett, “Nation Ex-Situ,” supra note 8.

¹⁶⁹ ILA SLR 2014 Closed, supra note 8 at 5; ILA SLR 2016, supra note 109 at 20; Yamamoto & Esteban, “Vanishing Island,” supra note 74 at 3.

¹⁷⁰ See, eg, Gagain, supra note 65 at 113–14.

¹⁷¹ Schofield & Freestone, supra note 13 at 155; Rayfuse, “Sea Level Rise,” supra note 92 at 176.

¹⁷² Schofield & Freestone, supra note 13 at 155–56; Yamamoto & Esteban, “Vanishing Island,” supra note 74 at 4–6; “Summary of Recommendations of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf in Regard to the Submission Made by Japan on 12 November 2008” at paras 6, 15–20, <http://www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/jpn08/com_sumrec_jpn_fin.pdf>.

¹⁷³ Schofield & Freestone, supra note 13 at 151.

¹⁷⁴ Ibid at 152.

¹⁷⁵ Schofield & Arsana, supra note 13 at 10.

¹⁷⁶ Stoutenburg, “When Do,” supra note 1 at 62 (emphasis in original). See also Schofield & Freestone, supra note 13 at 157; Jain, supra note 6 at 48.

¹⁷⁷ Soons, supra note 16 at 222–23; Schofield & Freestone, supra note 13 at 160; Rayfuse, “Sea Level Rise,” supra note 92 at 175–76.

¹⁷⁸ Gagain, supra note 65 at 101.

¹⁷⁹ UNCLOS, supra note 103, art 60(8). See also Wong, supra note 3 at 384.

¹⁸⁰ Stoutenburg, “When Do,” supra note 1 at 62.

¹⁸¹ Ibid at 63.

¹⁸² Wong, supra note 3 at 384.

¹⁸³ In Re Duchy of Sealand, supra note 65 at 685. Indeed, the Court held that a British Second World War platform attached to the seabed off the coast of Great Britain did not fulfil the requirement of territory. However, it must be underlined that this case dealt with an artificial installation.

¹⁸⁴ Gagain, supra note 65 at 107.

¹⁸⁵ Ibid at 111.

¹⁸⁶ Soons, supra note 16 at 231. See also Jain, supra note 6 at 48.

¹⁸⁷ Hayasi, “Affected States,” supra note 109 at 615; Jeanneney, supra note 8 at 121–23.

¹⁸⁸ Yamamoto & Esteban, Atoll Island, supra note 81 at 187.

¹⁸⁹ Jain, supra note 6 at 48.

¹⁹⁰ Yamamoto & Esteban, Atoll Island, supra note 81 at 197–98, 200; Stoutenburg, “When Do,” supra note 1 at 61.

¹⁹¹ Maas & Carius, supra note 12 at 659; Yamamoto & Esteban, Atoll Island, supra note 81 at 188; Convention between the United States and Denmark. Cession of the West Indies, 25 January 1917, 39 US Stat 1706: online: <http://www.doi.gov/oia/about/upload/vitreaty.pdf>.

¹⁹² Stoutenburg, “When Do,” supra note 1 at 61.

¹⁹³ Crawford & Rayfuse, supra note 6 at 249–50.

¹⁹⁴ Yamamoto & Esteban, Atoll Island, supra note 81 at 198, 200.

¹⁹⁵ Rosemary Rayfuse “International Law and Disappearing States: Utilizing Maritime Entitlements to Overcome the Statehood Dilemma” (2010) University of New South Wales Faculty of Law Research Paper no 2010-52 at 9. See also Hayasi, “Affected States,” supra note 109 at 615; Soons, supra note 16 at 230; Rayfuse, “Sea Level Rise,” supra note 92 at 178.

¹⁹⁶ Maritime Boundary in the Area between Greenland and Jan Mayen (Denmark v Norway), Advisory Opinion, [1993] ICJ Rep 38 at paras 46, 48, 50.

¹⁹⁷ Rayfuse, “Sea Level Rise,” supra note 92 at 179.

¹⁹⁸ Schofield & Freestone, supra note 13 at 162.

¹⁹⁹ See, eg, Wong, supra note 3 at 383.

²⁰⁰ Crawford & Rayfuse, supra note 6 at 249–50; Rayfuse, “Sea-Level Rise,” supra note 92 at 178; Jain, supra note 6 at 48.

²⁰¹ Yamamoto & Esteban, “Vanishing Island,” supra note 74 at 189.

²⁰² Puthucherril, supra note 9 at 255.

²⁰³ Rayfuse, “W(h)ither Tuvalu,” supra note 113.

²⁰⁴ Burkett, “Nation Ex-Situ” supra note 8 at 90; Wong, supra note 3 at 385; Stoutenburg, “When Do,” supra note 1 at 85–86; Jain, supra note 6 at 49.

²⁰⁵ Ödalen, supra note 128 at 230.

²⁰⁶ Reference could be made, eg, to the separate opinion of Judge Ago in the Advisory Opinion on the Agreement between the World Health Organization and Egypt, underlining that international organizations, even if they have a different international legal capacity than states, are subjects of international law even if they lack a territorial basis. See Interpretation of the Agreement of 25 March 1951 between the WHO and Egypt, Advisory Opinion, [1980] ICJ Rep 73 at 155. See also Crawford & Rayfuse, supra note 6 at 252.

²⁰⁷ See, eg 1995 Agreement for the Implementation of the Provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 Relating to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks, 4 December 1995, 2167 UNTS 3, art 2(2)(b); UNCLOS, supra note 103, art 291, art 20(2) of Annex VI, art 13 of Annex XIII. See also Crawford & Rayfuse, supra note 6 at 253.

²⁰⁸ Crawford & Rayfuse, supra note 6 at 252–53; Yamamoto & Esteban, Atoll Island, supra note 81 at 203.

²⁰⁹ See, eg, Yamamoto & Esteban, Atoll Island, supra note 81 at 203; Wong, supra note 3 at 385; Maas & Carius, supra note 12 at 659.

²¹⁰ Crawford & Rayfuse, supra note 6 at 251.

²¹¹ Stoutenburg, “When Do,” supra note 1 at 85; Maas & Carius, supra note 12 at 659.

²¹² Wong, supra note 3 at 385. See also Jeanneney, supra note 8 at 128.

²¹³ Yamamoto & Esteban, Atoll Island, supra note 81 at 211.

²¹⁴ Wong, supra note 3 at 385–86.

²¹⁵ Jain, supra note 6 at 49–51.

²¹⁶ Burkett, “Nation Ex-Situ,” supra note 8 at 90.

²¹⁷ Stoutenburg, “When Do,” supra note 1 at 68. See also Jeanneney, supra note 8 at 126.

²¹⁸ Yamamoto & Esteban, “Vanishing Island,” supra note 74 at 7.

²¹⁹ Crawford & Rayfuse, supra note 6 at 253.

²²⁰ Stoutenburg, “When Do,” supra note 1 at 69.

²²¹ See, eg, Columbia Law School, Consolidated Notes from Threatened Island Nations: Legal Implications of Rising Seas and a Changing Climate, (New York: Center for Climate Change Law, Columbia Law School, 2011) at 10, 14, online: Columbia Law School <http://web.law.columbia.edu/sites/default/files/microsites/climate-change/files/Past- Conferences-and-Events/Threatened%20Island%20Nations%20-%20Compiled%20Notes.pdf>; Wong, supra note 3 at 368; Maas & Carius, supra note 12 at 658.

²²² Yamamoto & Esteban, “Vanishing Island,” supra note 74 at 7.

²²³ Ibid.

²²⁴ The UN Charter trusteeship regime (UN Charter, supra note 41, ch XIII), poses two main obstacles. First, a UN member state cannot be put under the supervision of the Council. Second, the state responsible for the supervision should be the state in charge of the administration of the territory. The majority of SIDS, being UN member states under the supervision of no other state, would first have to withdraw from the UN for the UN trusteeship regime to apply. However, such withdrawal would undermine the benefits SIDS obtain from being part of multilateral organizations such as the UN, the main one being the preservation of their statehood, which is strengthened by the recognition of other states. See Wong, supra note 3 at 386–87; Burkett, “Nation Ex-Situ,” supra note 8 at 109.

²²⁵ UN Charter, supra note 41, art 88; Wong, supra note 3 at 386.

²²⁶ Wannier & Gerrard, supra note 96 at 7. See also Yamamoto & Esteban, Atoll Island, supra note 81 at 206–08.

²²⁷ Burkett, “Nation Ex-Situ,” supra note 8 at 108. See also Wannier & Gerrard, supra note 96 at 7.

²²⁸ Burkett, “Nation Ex-Situ,” supra note 8 at 109–14.

²²⁹ Wannier & Gerrard, supra note 96 at 6.

²³⁰ Burkett, “Nation Ex-Situ,” supra note 8 at 118.

²³¹ Yamamoto & Esteban, Atoll Island, supra note 81 at 207.

²³² Wong, supra note 3 at 386.

²³³ Burkett, “Nation Ex-Situ,” supra note 8 at 113.

²³⁴ Ibid at 114.

²³⁵ Ibid at 106; Rayfuse, “Sea Level Rise,” supra note 92 at 180.

²³⁶ Bethlehem, supra note 28 at 24.

²³⁷ Jeanneney, supra note 8 at 113, 115–16.

²³⁸ Thomas Friedman, The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Globalized World in the Twenty-First Century (London: Allen Lane, 2005) at 9, 11, 19.

²³⁹ Ibid at 10.

²⁴⁰ Ibid at 9.

²⁴¹ Schachter, supra note 5 at 8. See also Pierré-Caps, supra note 4 at 39.

²⁴² Schachter, supra note 5 at 12–13.

²⁴³ Bethlehem, supra note 28 at 15.

²⁴⁴ Hurrell, supra note 33 at 278, 281. See also Benedict Kingsbury, “People and Boundaries: An ‘Internationalized Public Law’ Approach” in Buchanan & Moore, supra note 7, 298 at 299–302.

²⁴⁵ Sterio, supra note 5 at 219. See, generally, Tullio Treves, “General Course: The Expansion of International Law” (Lecture delivered at The Hague Academy of International Law, 6–24 July 2015).

²⁴⁶ Friedman, supra note 238 at 10 (emphasis in original).

²⁴⁷ Hurrell, supra note 33 at 285. See also Schachter, supra note 5 at 11.

²⁴⁸ Petit, supra note 45 at 184.

²⁴⁹ See, generally, Antônio Cançado Trindade, “Quelques réflexions sur l’humanité comme sujet du droit international” in Denis Alland et al, eds, Unité et diversité du droit international: Écrits en l’honneur du Professeur Pierre-Marie Dupuy (Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff, 2014) 157.

²⁵⁰ Hurrell, supra note 33 at 285. See also Schachter, supra note 5 at 11.

²⁵¹ See generally Boaventura De Sousa Santos, “Law: A Map of Misreadings: Towards a Post-Modern Conception of Law” (1987) 14:3 J L & Soc’y 279.

²⁵² Bethlehem, supra note 28 at 17. See also Kwiecién, supra note 5 at 287; Vidas, supra note 2 at 73; Petit, supra note 45 at 178, 190; Buchanan, “The Making,” supra note 36 at 236; Schachter, supra note 5 at 7.

²⁵³ Jeanneney, supra note 8 at 121.

²⁵⁴ Hurrell, supra note 33 at 276, 280. See also Buchanan, “The Making,” supra note 36 at 236.

²⁵⁵ Hurrell, supra note 33 at 275.

²⁵⁶ Buchanan, “The Making,” supra note 36 at 244; Cançado Trindade, supra note 249 at 172.

²⁵⁷ Buchanan, Allen & Keohane, Robert, “The Legitimacy of Global Governance Institutions” in Wolfrum, Rüdiger & Röben, Volker, eds, Legitimacy in International Law (Berlin: Springer 2008) 25 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, cited in Rüdiger Wolfrum, “Legitimacy in International Law,” Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (November 2006) at paras 6–8.

²⁵⁸ Buchanan, “The Legitimacy,” supra note 6 at 82.

²⁵⁹ This last approach is controversial. For example, and briefly, the intervention of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in Kosovo, while not legitimate from the source-oriented and procedure-oriented perspective because it was not authorized by the UN Security Council, has been argued to be legitimate from a result-oriented perspective, as it aimed at protecting human rights.

²⁶⁰ See, eg, Jain, supra note 6 at 10; Burkett, “Justice Paradox,” supra note 147 at 659; Petit, supra note 45 at 177, 180.

²⁶¹ Jain, supra note 6 at 11.

²⁶² Burkett, “Nation Ex-Situ,” supra note 8 at 106–07.

²⁶³ See, eg, Buchanan, “The Legitimacy,” supra note 6 at 87.

²⁶⁴ Kwiecién, supra note 5 at 286.

²⁶⁵ Jochen von Bernstorff & Ingo Venzke, “Ethos, Ethics, and Morality in International Relations,” Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (August 2011) at paras 13, 28; Cançado Trindade, supra note 249 at 161, 164.

²⁶⁶ See generally Onuma Yasuaki, “The Need for an Intercivilizational Approach to Evaluating Human Rights” (1997) 1:10 Human Rights Dialogue, online: Carnegie Council, <http://www.carnegiecouncil.org/publications/archive/dialogue/1_10/articles/574.html>.

²⁶⁷ Pierré-Caps, supra note 4 at 41; Cançado Trindade, supra note 249 at 166.

²⁶⁸ Bethlehem, supra note 28 at 18.

²⁶⁹ Vidas, supra note 2 at 73; Jeanneney, supra note 8 at 95–96, 100.

²⁷⁰ Burkett, “Nation Ex-Situ,” supra note 8 at 91.

²⁷¹ This subsection is mostly based on the argumentation in Burkett, supra note 8.

²⁷² Buchanan & Moore, supra note 7 at 7.

²⁷³ Buchanan, “The Making,” supra note 36 at 231 (emphasis in original).

²⁷⁴ Burkett, “Nation Ex-Situ,” supra note 8 at 102. The term “diaspora” is, throughout this article, understood as the physical dispersion of the people of a same nation or sharing the same culture. We acknowledge the existence of other meanings of the term, in particular, the one referring to a diaspora as a “way of living,” not linked to any ethnic and/or cultural belonging. However, this alternative meaning goes beyond the scope of this article, which focuses on a meaning of diaspora that is linked to “deterritorialized” nationalism or “deterritorialized” communal belonging.

²⁷⁵ Michelle McKinley, “Conviviality, Cosmopolitan Citizenship, and Hospitality” (2009) 5 Unbound 55 at 81, cited in Burkett, “Nation Ex-Situ,” supra note 8 at 101.

²⁷⁶ Burkett, “Nation Ex-Situ,” supra note 8 at 104.

²⁷⁷ See generally the writings of Emmanuel Kant, Jacques Derrida, and, most recently, Kwame Anthony Appiah, Cosmopolitanism: Ethics in a World of Strangers (London: Penguin, 2007).

²⁷⁸ James, Paul, “Political Philosophies of the Global: A Critical Overview” in James, Paul, ed, Globalization and Politics, Volume IV: Political Philosophies of the Global (London: Sage, 2014) vii at x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²⁷⁹ Pierré-Caps, supra note 4 at 50. See also Yasuaki, supra note 266.

²⁸⁰ McKinley, supra note 275 at 68, cited in Burkett, “Nation Ex-Situ,” supra note 8 at 101. It is worth noting that, while we believe both the differential equality principle and the notion of solidarity as a moral obligation can be used to describe cosmopolitanism, they represent two approaches to legitimacy and morality. Indeed, as discussed earlier in this article, the former can be linked to inter-civilizationalism while the latter is based on a more Western-oriented system of shared common values.

²⁸¹ Burkett, “Nation Ex-Situ,” supra note 8 at 100.

²⁸² Ibid at 99.

²⁸³ Jeanneney, supra note 8 at 127–28.

²⁸⁴ Schachter, supra note 5 at 19.

²⁸⁵ Krisch, supra note 5 at 3.

²⁸⁶ Karl-Heinz Ladeur, “Governance, Theory of,” Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (September 2010) at para 13.

²⁸⁷ Donald Rothwell & Tim Stephens, The International Law of the Sea (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2010) at 462. See also Ladeur, supra note 286 at para 5.

²⁸⁸ Ladeur, supra note 286 at para 14.

²⁸⁹ Kwiecién, supra note 5 at 281, 303–04.

²⁹⁰ Two other meanings of global governance have also been underlined: “[I]t may also imply that the role of private self-organization, as opposed to traditional public organization of decision-making, has become a fundamental challenge of public international law, while the other terminology (‘international governance’) seems to try to reduce the new hybrid forms of governance to a supplementary role in order to preserve the traditional centrality of the concept of State and government in international relations and international law.” Ladeur, supra note 286 at para 18.

²⁹¹ James, supra note 278 at xi.

²⁹² Ladeur, supra note 286 at para 5.

²⁹³ JHH Weiler, “The Geology of International Law: Governance, Democracy and Legitimacy” (2004) 64 Heidelberg J Int’l L 547 at 547, 556, cited in Kwiecién, supra note 5 at 285. See also Krisch, supra note 5 at 28.

²⁹⁴ Krisch, supra note 5 at 36; Kwiecién, supra note 5 at 303; Petit, supra note 45 at 193.

²⁹⁵ Non-binding, soft law mechanisms can be more appropriate when addressing new legal issues to which traditional mechanisms are not yet ready to be applied. See Treves, supra note 245; Yamamoto & Esteban, Atoll Island, supra note 81 at 223; Petit, supra note 45 at 192.

²⁹⁶ Krisch, supra note 5 at 16.

²⁹⁷ Ibid at 5.

²⁹⁸ Kwiecién, supra note 5 at 309.

²⁹⁹ Ibid at 303.

³⁰⁰ Burkett, “Nation Ex-Situ,” supra note 8 at 91.

³⁰¹ Francisco Francioni, “Equity in International Law,” Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (June 2013) at paras 1, 3, 10. The second refers to the possibility for the International Court of Justice to decide cases on an ex æquo et bono basis. See Statute of the International Court of Justice, 24 October 1945, 1 UNTS XV1, art 38(2).

³⁰² Francioni, supra note 301 at para 10.

³⁰³ Ibid at paras 7, 9.

³⁰⁴ Ibid at para 29.

³⁰⁵ Burkett, “Nation Ex-Situ,” supra note 8 at 95.

³⁰⁶ Ibid at 105–06.

³⁰⁷ Davor Vidas & Peter Johan Schei, “The World Ocean in Globalization: Challenges and Responses for the Anthropocen Epoch” in Davor Vidas & Peter Johan Schei, eds, The World Ocean in Globalization. Climate Change, Sustainable Fisheries, Biodiversity, Shipping, Regional Issues (Leiden: Brill and Martinus Nijhoff, 2011) 3 at 6–7 (emphasis in original).

³⁰⁸ See, eg, Thürer & Burri, supra note 126 at para 15; Schachter, supra note 5 at 15.

³⁰⁹ See, eg, Pierré-Caps, supra note 4 at 44.

³¹⁰ Nine, supra note 4 at 359, 362, 366.

³¹¹ Wannier & Gerrard, supra note 96 at 7.

³¹² Stoutenburg, “When Do,” supra note 1 at 58–59, 66, 85; Jeanneney, supra note 8 at 123.

³¹³ Stoutenburg, “When Do,” supra note 1 at 87.

³¹⁴ Jain, supra note 6 at 46.

³¹⁵ Burkett, “Nation Ex-Situ,” supra note 8 at 91.

³¹⁶ Jain, supra note 6 at 44.

³¹⁷ Hurrell, supra note 33 at 287; Buchanan, “The Making,” supra note 36 at 236.

³¹⁸ Treves, supra note 245.

³¹⁹ See, eg, Petit, supra note 45 at 191.

³²⁰ Jeanneney, supra note 8 at 115: “des mutations juridiques sur un territoire plutôt que des mutations subies par le territoire” (emphasis in original).

³²¹ Ibid at 113.

³²² See, generally, Robert Scott, “Chaos Theory and the Justice Paradox” (1993) 35:1 Wm & Mary L Rev 329, cited in Burkett, “Justice Paradox,” supra note 147 at 636.

³²³ Kingsbury, supra note 244 at 298; Jeanneney, supra note 8 at 109.

³²⁴ Cançado Trindade, supra note 249 at 157; Schachter, supra note 5 at 22–23; Petit, supra note 45 at 185.

³²⁵ Buchanan & Moore, supra note 7 at 8; Pierré-Caps, supra note 4 at 39: “il [l’État-nation] est la structure juridique de prédilection des nouveaux États, alors même que les États les plus anciens s’efforcent de l’adapter … sans rien concéder, pour autant, de ses principes.”

³²⁶ Maas & Carius, supra note 12 at 660.

³²⁷ ILA CB, supra note 21 at 2, cited in Vidas, Freestone & McAdam, supra note 12 at 401.

³²⁸ Serge Sur, “Cours général: La créativité du droit international” (lecture delivered at The Hague Academy of International Law, 9–27 July 2012), reprinted in (2012) 363 Rec des Cours 9 at 98: “Transformation n’est pas métamorphose.”