¹ There are several investigations of subnational policies that address climate change. For the United States (US) and Canada see Selin, H. & VanDeveer, S.D., Changing Climates in North American Politics: Institutions, Policymaking, and Multilevel Governance (The MIT Press, 2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For Australia see Peel, J., Godden, L. & Keenan, R.J., ‘Climate Change Law in an Era of Multi-Level Governance’ (2012) 1(2) Transnational Environmental Law, pp. 245–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For Europe see Bulkeley, H., Cities and Climate Change (Routledge, 2013)Google Scholar; and Bulkeley, H. & Kern, K., ‘Local Government and the Governing of Climate Change in Germany and the UK’ (2006) 43(12) Urban Studies, pp. 2237–2259CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For a wider spectrum of climate action undertaken by cities around the world see Broto, V.C. & Bulkeley, H., ‘A Survey of Urban Climate Change Experiments in 100 Cities’ (2013) 23(1) Global Environmental Change, pp. 92–102Google Scholar; and Lee, T. & Koski, C., ‘Mitigating Global Warming in Global Cities: Comparing Participation and Climate Change Policies of C40 Cities’ (2014) 16(5) Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, pp. 1–18Google Scholar. For a broader view of transnational climate governance see Abbott, K.W., ‘Strengthening the Transnational Regime Complex for Climate Change’ (2014) 3(1) Transnational Environmental Law, pp. 57–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

² The first regional emissions trading systems were established in the US. The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) stimulated interest in regional emissions trading systems, with two further regional schemes – the Midwestern Accord and the Western Climate Initiative (WCI) cap-and-trade schemes. More recently, Chinese provinces have established a pilot carbon emissions trading scheme: see Wu, L., Qian, H. & Li, J., ‘Advancing the Experiment to Reality: Perspectives on Shanghai Pilot Carbon Emissions Trading Scheme’ (2014) 75(C) Energy Policy, pp. 22–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

³ Ostrom, V., Tiebout, C.M. & Warren, R., ‘The Organization of Government in Metropolitan Areas: A Theoretical Inquiry’ (1961) 55(4) American Political Science Review, pp. 831–842CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁴ Ostrom, E., ‘Polycentric Systems for Coping with Collective Action and Global Environmental Change’ (2010) 20(4) Global Environmental Change, pp. 550–557CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁵ Hooghe, L. & Marks, G., ‘Unraveling the Central State, But How? Types of Multi-level Governance’ (2003) 97(2) The American Political Science Review, pp. 233–243Google Scholar. See also Hooghe, L. & Marks, G., ‘Contending Models of Governance in the European Union’, in A. Cafruny & C. Lankowski (eds), Europe’s Ambiguous Unity: Conflict and Consensus in the Post-Maastricht Era (Lynne Rienner, 1997), pp. 21–44Google Scholar; Bache, I. & Flinders, M. (eds), Multi-level Governance (Oxford University Press, 2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hooghe, L., Cohesion Policy and European Integration: Building Multi-Level Governance (Oxford University Press, 2006)Google Scholar; Hooghe, L. & Marks, G., ‘Types of Multi-level Governance’, in H. Enderlein, S. Wälti & M. Zürn (eds), Handbook on Multi-Level Governance (Edward Elgar, 2010), pp. 17–31Google Scholar; Pierre, J. & Peters, B.G., Governance, Politics and the State (Macmillan, 2000)Google Scholar.

⁶ Piattoni, S., The Theory of Multi-level Governance: Conceptual, Empirical, and Normative Challenges (Oxford University Press, 2000)Google Scholar, p. 19.

⁷ Hooghe & Marks (1997), n. 5 above.

⁸ Kohler-Koch, B. & Larat, F., European Multi-Level Governance: Contrasting Images in National Research (Edward Elgar, 2009)Google Scholar.

⁹ Hooghe & Marks (2010), n. 5 above.

¹⁰ E.g., Sassen explores the ways in which economic globalization and the emergence of new information and communication technologies have made world cities key nodes for cross-border networks and resource concentration: see Sassen, S., ‘Locating Cities on Global Circuits’ (2002) 14(1) Environment and Urbanization, pp. 13–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹¹ See Bulkeley, H., ‘Cities and the Governing of Climate Change’ (2010) 35(1) Annual Review of Environment and Resources, pp. 229–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹² See M. Buizer, B. Arts & K. Kok, ‘Governance, Scale and the Environment: The Importance of Recognizing Knowledge Claims in Transdisciplinary Arenas’ (2011) 16(1) Ecology and Society, available at: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol16/iss1/art21.

¹³ Andonova and Mitchell identify a shift in the locus, agency and scope of global environmental politics and governance across scales: Andonova, L.B. & Mitchell, R.B., ‘The Rescaling of Global Environmental Politics’ (2010) 35(1) Annual Review of Environment and Resources, pp. 255–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Bulkeley, H., ‘Reconfiguring Environmental Governance: Towards a Politics of Scales and Networks’ (2005) 24(8) Political Geography, pp. 875–902CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁴ See Betsill, M. & Bulkeley, H., ‘Cities and the Multilevel Governance of Global Climate Change’ (2006) 12(2) Global Governance, pp. 141–159Google Scholar.

¹⁵ Stern, N., Stern Review: The Economics of Climate Change (Cambridge University Press, 2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁶ On climate governance at the regional (state) level, see Rabe, B.G., ‘Beyond Kyoto: Climate Change Policy in Multilevel Governance Systems’ (2007) 20(3) Governance, pp. 423–444CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Selin & VanDeveer, n. 1 above.

¹⁷ Newell, P., Pattberg, P. & Schroeder, H., ‘Multiactor Governance and the Environment’ (2012) 37(1) Annual Review of Environment and Resources, pp. 365–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 372.

¹⁸ See http://www.iclei.org.

¹⁹ See http://www.c40.org. For studies on the participation of cities in climate governance and transnational networks of cities see Bulkeley, H. & Betsill, M., Cities and Climate Change: Urban Sustainability and Global Environmental Governance (Routledge, 2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Betsill, M. & Bulkeley, H., ‘Transnational Networks and Global Environmental Governance: The Cities for Climate Protection Program’ (2004) 48(2) International Studies Quarterly, pp. 471–493CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Toly, N.J., ‘Transnational Municipal Networks in Climate Politics: From Global Governance to Global Politics’ (2008) 5(3) Globalizations, pp. 341–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Davies, A.R., ‘Local Action for Climate Change: Transnational Networks and the Irish Experience’ (2005) 10(1) Local Environment, pp. 21–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For an account of the participation of cities from developing countries in such networks see Holgate, C., ‘Factors and Actors in Climate Change Mitigation: A Tale of Two South African Cities’ (2007) 12(5) Local Environment, pp. 471–484CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Romero-Lankao, P., ‘How Do Local Governments in Mexico City Manage Global Warming?’ (2007) 12(5) Local Environment, pp. 519–535CrossRefGoogle Scholar; J. Setzer, ‘Subnational and Transnational Climate Change Governance: Evidence from the State and City of São Paulo, Brazil’, paper presented at the 5^th World Bank Urban Research Symposium ‘Cities and Climate Change: Responding to an Urgent Agenda’, June 2009, Marseille (France), available at: http://tinyurl.com/SetzerWB2009. It should be noted that ICLEI’s Cities for Climate Protection (CCP) Programme was replaced in June 2012 by the Green Climate Cities Campaign. For studies on the C40 network see Acuto, M., Global Cities, Governance and Diplomacy: The Urban Link (Routledge, 2013)Google Scholar.

²⁰ See http://www.provincie.drenthe.nl/encoreweb.

²¹ See http://www.nrg4sd.org.

²² Happaerts, S., Van den Brande, K. & Bruyninckx, H., ‘Subnational Governments in Transnational Networks for Sustainable Development’ (2011) 11(4) International Environmental Agreements, pp. 321–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

²³ See http://regions20.org.

²⁴ See Osofsky, H.M., ‘Multiscalar Governance and Climate Change: Reflections on the Role of States and Cities at Copenhagen’ (2010) 25(1) Maryland Journal of International Law, pp. 64–85Google Scholar.

²⁵ Betsill, M. & Bulkeley, H., ‘Looking Back and Thinking Ahead: A Decade of Cities and Climate Change Research’ (2007) 12(5) Local Environment, pp. 447–456CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Gustavsson, E., Elander, I. & Lundmark, M., ‘Multilevel Governance, Networking Cities, and the Geography of Climate Change Mitigation: Two Swedish Examples’ (2009) 27(1) Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, pp. 59–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Krause, M.R., ‘An Assessment of the Impact that Participation in Local Climate Networks Has on Cities’ Implementation of Climate, Energy, and Transportation Policies’ (2012) 29(5) Review of Policy Research, pp. 585–604CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Lidskog, R. & Elander, I., ‘Addressing Climate Change Democratically: Multi-level Governance, Transnational Networks and Governmental Structures’ (2010) 18(1) Sustainable Development, pp. 32–41Google Scholar.

²⁶ Andonova, L.B., ‘The Climate Regime and Domestic Politics: The Case of Russia’ (2008) 21(4) Cambridge Review of International Affairs, pp. 483–504CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Selin & VanDeveer, n. 1 above.

²⁷ Krause, n. 25 above.

²⁸ Abbott, n.1 above, at p. 61.

²⁹ Indeed, subnational governments are involved in a large number of transnational interactions that go beyond the types of interaction that are generally considered by the MLG literature. When engaging in an international environmental agenda, subnational governments promote at least six forms of rescaling. A consideration of this wider and more nuanced picture of the rescaling processes promoted by subnational governments can be found in J. Setzer, ‘How Subnational Governments Are Rescaling Environmental Governance: The Case of the Brazilian State of São Paulo’ (2014) Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, available at: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1523908X.2014.984669#.VQq22fmsXTp.

³⁰ There is a substantial debate on the adequacy of the term ‘paradiplomacy’. Other terms suggested to describe the participation of subnational actors in the international arena are ‘multilayered diplomacy’ (B. Hocking, Localizing Foreign Policy: Non-central Governments and Multilayered Diplomacy (Palgrave Macmillan, 1993)), ‘catalytic diplomacy’ (Hocking, B., ‘The Woods and the Trees: Catalytic Diplomacy and Canada’s Trials as a Forestry Superpower’ (1996) 5(3) Environmental Politics, pp. 448–475CrossRefGoogle Scholar), and ‘sub-state diplomacy’ (N. Cornago, ‘On the Normalization of Sub-State Diplomacy’ (2010) 5(1–2) The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, pp. 11–36).

³¹ Aldecoa, F. & Keating, M. (eds), Paradiplomacy in Action: The Foreign Relations of Subnational Governments (Frank Cass, 1999)Google Scholar; Duchacek, I.D., ‘Perforated Sovereignties: Towards a Typology of New Actors in International Relations’, in H.J. Michelmann & P. Soldatos (eds), Federalism and International Relations: The Role of Subnational Units (Clarendon Press, 1990), pp. 1–33Google Scholar; Lecours, A., ‘Paradiplomacy: Reflections on the Foreign Policy and International Relations of Regions’ (2002) 7 International Negotiation, pp. 91–114Google Scholar.

³² Aguirre, I., ‘Making Sense of Paradiplomacy? An Intertextual Enquiry about a Concept in Search of a Definition’ (1999) 9(1) Regional & Federal Studies, pp. 185–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar; N. Cornago, ‘Diplomacy and Paradiplomacy in the Redefinition of International Security: Dimensions of Conflict and Cooperation’, in Aldecoa & Keating, ibid., pp. 40–57; Kincaid, J., ‘The American Governors in International Affairs’ (1984) 14(4) Publius: The Journal of Federalism, pp. 95–114Google Scholar; McMillan, S.L., The Involvement of State Governments in US Foreign Relations (Palgrave Macmillan, 2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Michelmann, H.J. (ed.), Foreign Relations in Federal Countries (McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2009)Google Scholar.

³³ See Acuto, n. 19 above; see also Pluijm, R. & Melissen, J., ‘City Diplomacy: The Expanding Role of Cities in International Politics’, in Netherlands Institute of International Relations (ed.), Clingendael Diplomatic Studies Papers, Vol. 10 (Netherlands Institute of International Relations, 2007), pp. 5–36Google Scholar.

³⁴ Pluijm & Melissen, ibid., at p. 6.

³⁵ Acuto, n. 19 above.

³⁶ Andrade e Barros, M., ‘Outlooks for the Legal Framing of Paradiplomacy: The Case of Brazil’ (2010) 7(3) Federal Governance, pp. 39–49Google Scholar; Bursens, P. & Deforche, J., ‘Going Beyond Paradiplomacy? Adding Historical Institutionalism to Account for Regional Foreign Policy Competences’ (2010) 5(1–2) The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, pp. 151–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Cornago, n. 30 above.

³⁷ Engel, K., ‘Courts and Climate Policy: Now and in the Future’, in B.G. Rabe (ed.), Greenhouse Governance: Addressing Climate Change in America (Brookings Institution Press, 2010), pp. 229–259Google Scholar; Farber, D.A., ‘Climate Policy and the United States System of Divided Powers: Dealing with Carbon Leakage and Regulatory Linkage’ (2014) 3(1) Transnational Environmental Law, pp. 31–55Google Scholar; Kysar, D. & Meyler, B.A., ‘Like a Nation State’ (2008) 55 UCLA Law Review, pp. 1621–1673Google Scholar; LaMotte, R.K., Williamson, D.M. & Hopkins, L.A., ‘Emissions Trading in the US: Legal Issues’, in D. Freestone & C. Streck (eds), Legal Aspects of Carbon Trading: Kyoto, Copenhagen, and Beyond (Oxford University Press, 2009), pp. 391–423CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

³⁸ Criekemans, e.g., suggests that the ‘full spectrum’ of diplomatic instruments that regions can utilize encompasses seven activities: (i) political representation abroad; (ii) treaty-making power; (iii) entering into agreements of a formalized nature (political declarations of intent and/or cooperation agreements, transnational contracts, and cultural agreements and partnerships); (iv) developing programmes of assistance and sharing of know-how (bilateral or multilateral programmes, programmes on cross-boundary cooperation); (v) participating in multilateral frameworks and organizations (observing or participating in technical committees, becoming an associate member of multilateral organizations); (vi) participation in formal or informal networks; and (vii) developing a public diplomacy, both domestic and international: see D. Criekemans, ‘Introduction’ (2010) 5(1–2) The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, pp. 1–9.

³⁹ Keohane, R.O. & Nye, J.S., ‘Transgovernmental Relations and International Organizations’ (1974) 27(1) World Politics, pp. 39–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁴⁰ Ibid.

⁴¹ Acuto, M., ‘The New Climate Leaders?’ (2013) Review of International Studies, pp. 1–23Google Scholar.

⁴² Blank, Y., ‘Federalism, Subsidiarity, and the Role of Local Governments in an Age of Global Multilevel Governance’ (2009) 37(2) Fordham Urban Law Journal, pp. 509–558Google Scholar.

⁴³ Farber, n. 37 above.

⁴⁴ This idea is also presented in Pluijm & Melissen, n. 33 above.

⁴⁵ Goldsmith, J.L. & Posner, E.A., The Limits of International Law (Oxford University Press, 2007)Google Scholar.

⁴⁶ Pluijm & Melissen, n. 33 above.

⁴⁷ Vienna (Austria), 23 May 1969, in force 27 Jan 1980, available at: http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/1_1_1969.pdf.

⁴⁸ Heyvaert, V., ‘Governing Climate Change: Towards a New Paradigm for Risk Regulation’ (2011) 74(6) The Modern Law Review, pp. 817–844CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kirton, J.J. & Trebilcock, M.J. (eds), Hard Choices, Soft Law: Voluntary Standards in Global Trade, Environment, and Social Governance (Ashgate, 2004)Google Scholar; Osofsky, n. 24 above.

⁴⁹ Raustiala, K., ‘The Architecture of International Cooperation: Transgovernmental Networks and the Future of International Law’ (2002) 43(1) Virginia Journal of International Law, pp. 1–92Google Scholar.

⁵⁰ Bulkeley, H., ‘Cities and the Governing of Climate Change’ (2010) 35(1) Annual Review of Environment and Resources, pp. 229–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Byrne, J. et al., ‘American Policy Conflict in the Greenhouse: Divergent Trends in Federal, Regional, State, and Local Green Energy and Climate Change Policy’ (2007) 35(9) Energy Policy, pp. 4555–4573CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Engel, K. & Orbach, B.Y., ‘Micro-motives and State and Local Climate Change Initiatives’ (2008) 119(2) Harvard Law & Policy Review, pp. 119–138Google Scholar; C.R. Sunstein, ‘The Complex Climate Change Incentives of China and the United States’, University of Chicago Law & Economics Olin Working Paper No. 352, available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1008598.

⁵¹ Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Kyoto (Japan), 11 Dec. 1997, in force 16 Feb. 2005, available at: http://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/items/2830.php.

⁵² Levit, J.K., ‘Bottom-up International Lawmaking: Reflections on the New Haven School of International Law’ (2007) 32 Yale Journal of International Law, pp. 393–420Google Scholar, at 395.

⁵³ New York (NY) US, 9 May 1992, in force 21 Mar. 1994, available at: http://unfccc.int. Decision 1/CP.16, The Cancún Agreements: Outcome of the Work of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention, UN Doc. FCCC/CP/2010/7/Add.1, 15 Mar. 2011, available at: http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2010/cop16/eng/07a01.pdf.

⁵⁴ Nrg4SD, ‘Subnational Governments: Key Actors in the Rio+20 Process – nrg4SD Input to the Rio+20 Process’, Oct. 2011 – reviewed Apr. 2012, available at: http://tinyurl.com/Nrg4SD-Rio-20.

⁵⁵ Happaerts, Van den Brande & Bruyninckx, n. 22 above.

⁵⁶ Duran, M., ‘French Regions as Diplomatic Actors: The Case of Provence-Alpes-Cote d’Azur’ (2011) 9(4) French Politics, pp. 339–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁵⁷ A. Kleiman & G.M.A. Rodrigues, ‘The MERCOSUR Committee of Municipalities, States, Provinces and Departments: Process of Creation and Perspectives’, paper presented at the Fifth Annual Conference of the Euro-Latin Study Network on Integration and Trade, Barcelona (Spain), 26–27 Oct. 2007, available at: http://www10.iadb.org/intal/intalcdi/PE/2012/11120a16.pdf; T.L. Prazeres, ‘Por uma atuação constitucionalmente viável das unidades federadas brasileiras ante os processos de integração regional’, in T. Vigevani et al. (eds), A dimensão subnacional e as relações internacionais (EDUC, 2004), pp. 283–312.

⁵⁸ LaMotte, Williamson & Hopkins, n. 37 above, at p. 409.

⁵⁹ Kysar & Meyler, n. 37 above; Sovacool, B.K., ‘The Best of Both Worlds: Environmental Federalism and the Need for Federal Action on Renewable Energy and Climate Change’ (2008) 27(2) Stanford Environmental Law Journal, pp. 397–476Google Scholar.

⁶⁰ Farber, D., ‘Climate Change, Federalism, and the Constitution’ (2008) 50(3) Arizona Law Review, pp. 879–924Google Scholar; Rose, C., ‘Federalism and Climate Change: The Role of the States in a Future Federal Regime – An Introduction’ (2008) 50(3) Arizona Law Review, pp. 673–679Google Scholar.

⁶¹ The Treaty Clause is contained in Art. II(2)(2) US Constitution; the Compact Clause is a provision in Art. I(10)(3) US Constitution; the Foreign Commerce Clause is found in part of Art. I(8)(3) US Constitution,

⁶² California Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), cap-and-trade programme, available at: http://www.arb.ca.gov.

⁶³ California EPA, ‘Auction and Reserve Sale Information’, last updated 23 Feb. 2015, available at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/capandtrade/auction/auction.htm.

⁶⁴ See, e.g., ‘EU Plans to Link Emissions Trading Scheme with California’, The Guardian, 7 Apr. 2011, available at: http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/apr/07/eu-emissions-trading-california; and L. Zetterberg, ‘Linking the Emissions Trading Systems in EU and California’, Mistra Indigo Program, 2012, available at: http://www.ceps.eu/system/files/article/2012/10/Linking%20the%20Emission%20Trading%20Systems%20in%20EU%20and%20California.pdf.

⁶⁵ See http://www.sister-cities.org.

⁶⁶ See http://www.uclg.org.

⁶⁷ N. 19 above.

⁶⁸ N. 23 above.

⁶⁹ US State Department, Office of the Special Representative for Global Intergovernmental Affairs, available at: http://www.state.gov/s/srgia/resources/index.htm.

⁷⁰ Kelman, I. et al., ‘Island Disaster Paradiplomacy in the Commonwealth’ (2006) 95(386) The Journal of International Affairs, pp. 561–574Google Scholar, at 565.

⁷¹ Brazilian Federal Constitution, Arts 21(I) and 24(VII)–(VIII).

⁷² Ibid., Art. 21(I).

⁷³ Ibid., Art. 84(VII).

⁷⁴ Ibid., Art. 84(VIII).

⁷⁵ Art. 7(III).

⁷⁶ Vigevani, T., ‘The Legal and Institutional Framework for the International Management of Subnational Government Players in Brazil’ (2004) 8(21) Integration & Trade, pp. 25–43Google Scholar, at 30.

⁷⁷ Milani, C.R.S. & Ribeiro, M.C.M., ‘International Relations and the Paradiplomacy of Brazilian Cities: Crafting the Concept of Local International Management’ (2011) 8(1) Brazilian Administration Review, pp. 21–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Tavares, R., ‘As relações internacionais do estado de São Paulo’ (2012) 20(4) Revista Política Externa, pp. 169–184Google Scholar.

⁷⁸ Chamber of Deputies, Commission of Justice and Citizenship, ‘Manifestation over the Draft Law No. 475/2005, which Proposed the Addition of a Paragraph to Article 23 of the Federal Constitution to Allow States, the Federal District, and Municipalities to Promote Acts and Enter Agreements with Foreign Entities’, PRL1CCJC/PEC457/2005.

⁷⁹ C. Brigadão, Relações internacionais federativas no Brasil: Estados e munícipios (Gramma, 2005), p. 21.

⁸⁰ Decree 6,207, of 16 Sept. 2007. Art. 7 establishes the attributions of the Division for Federative Affairs. It revokes Decree 5,526, of 26 Aug. 2005, which in turn revoked Decree 4,968, of 30 Jan. 2004.

⁸¹ SAF, ‘A cooperação internacional federativa da Subchefia de Assuntos Federativos’, available at: http://www.portalfederativo.gov.br/bin/view/Inicio/CooperacaoInternacionalFederativa.

⁸² Milani & Ribeiro, n. 77 above, p. 26.

⁸³ 26 out of the 27 governments, according to Tavares, n. 77 above, at p. 175.

⁸⁴ M. Andrade e Barros, A atuação internacional dos governos subnacionais (Del Rey, 2010).

⁸⁵ Bastos, C.R., Curso de direito constitucional (Malheiros Editores, 2010)Google Scholar; Husek, C.R., Direito internacional público (LTR, 2010)Google Scholar; Varela, M.D., Direito internacional público (Saraiva, 2009)Google Scholar.

⁸⁶ A.P.C. Medeiros, ‘Legal Opinion on the Legal Limits of the Agreement Entered by the City of Rio de Janeiro with an International Entity (1999)’, in A.P. Cachapuz de Medeiros (ed.), Pareceres dos Consultores Jurídicos do Itamaraty, Vol. IX, 1990–2000 (Fundação Alexandre de Gusmão, 2009), pp. 227–31, at 230.

⁸⁷ See Andrade e Barros, n. 84 above.

⁸⁸ Decree 57.932, of 2 Apr. 2012, available at: http://www.al.sp.gov.br/repositorio/legislacao/decreto/2012/decreto-57932-02.04.2012.html.

⁸⁹ REDD+ is a mechanism for encouraging forest conservation and cultivation in developing countries, using funding from the developed world. REDD+ assigns financial value to carbon stored within forest resources, to make local preservation efforts eligible for foreign financing, including voluntary investment and offset credits generated through foreign carbon markets. The REDD+ terminology and concept originate from a 2005 proposal to the UN by the governments of Papua New Guinea and Costa Rica, in response to the Kyoto Protocol’s (n. 51 above) lack of mechanism to reduce deforestation emissions. The ‘+’ in REDD+ indicates the last category of strategies, which includes conservation, sustainable management of forests, and enhancement of forest carbon stocks. For more information on REDD+ and the California REDD+ experience see J. Lueders et al., ‘The California REDD+ Experience: The Ongoing Political History of California’s Initiative to Include Jurisdictional REDD+ Offsets within its Cap-and-Trade System’, Center for Global Development Working Paper 386, Nov. 2014, available at: http://www.cgdev.org/publication/california-redd-experience-ongoing-political-history-californias-initiative-include.

⁹⁰ The GCF has been working since 2009 to advance jurisdictional programmes to reduce emissions from deforestation and land use, and to link these activities to emerging GHG compliance regimes and other pay-for-performance opportunities. Based on their experience in the GCF, in 2010 the states of California (US), Acre (Brazil), and Chiapas (Mexico) signed a separate MOU. Their aim was to cooperate more closely on the technical, legal, and institutional design issues associated with the effort to link state REDD+ programmes with California’s cap-and-trade programme. See the working group report, Evan Johnson (ed.), ‘California, Acre and Chiapas: Partnering to Reduce Emissions from Tropical Deforestation’, July 2013, available at: http://www.unredd.net/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=9893&Itemid=53. On the California-Acre process see also E. Roessing Neto, ‘Linking Subnational Climate Change Policies: A Commentary on the California-Acre Process’ (2015) 4(2) Transnational Environmental Law (forthcoming).

⁹¹ Transcript of an interview with the author, Dec. 2010.