Under the prevailing consensus that Articles 192 and 194(1)(2) of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) constitute due diligence obligations as obligations of conduct, small island states have advocated that in the context of climate change, these provisions should go beyond the due diligence obligations and encompass obligations of result. Some even argue that climate change has transformed the nature of these provisions into obligations of result. This paper, drawing upon the reasoning in the recent advisory opinion and analysing the specific rationales advanced by small island states, maintains that neither the concept of due diligence nor the aforementioned provisions of UNCLOS can be interpreted as containing or transforming into obligations of result.
The study emphasizes the critical distinction between the ‘standard of compliance’ for due diligence obligations and independent obligations of result. It further demonstrates that subsequent procedural obligations under Part XII of UNCLOS, along with other rules such as climate targets established by the Paris Agreement, could contribute to clarifying the ‘stringent standard’ of due diligence in climate change contexts. Finally, this paper focuses on achieving systemic coordination between procedural obligations and due diligence requirements, aiming to clarify existing controversies in this field.
