Summary/Abstract
International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR), and International Court of Justice (ICJ) have successively issued advisory opinions on climate change, requiring States Parties to fulfill their emission reduction obligations. This paper aims to explore the interaction between these advisory opinions and maritime carbon emission reduction legislation. It first systematically examines the core legal developments in the advisory opinions regarding the characterization of greenhouse gases, the specification of State obligations, transboundary obligations and the precautionary principle, as well as the principle of Common But Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities (CBDR). Based on this, it analyzes whether and how these developments in legal understanding have produced substantive impacts at the level of maritime carbon emission reduction legislation. The paper concludes that while the advisory opinions have injected crucial legal certainty and political momentum into maritime carbon emission reduction legislation, the implementation of the advocated emission reduction obligations faces significant resistance, and the risk of fragmentation in global rules remains serious. Based on this, to break through the current predicament and promote the orderly advancement of legislation on carbon reduction in shipping, it is recommended that the international community strengthen multilateral cooperation and push forward the construction of a unified and coordinated regulatory system for carbon reduction in shipping.