Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

3 results

  • ~ A ~ - In Defence of the Paris Agreement’s Compliance System: The Case for Facilitative Compliance

  • from Debate 4: Compliance
  • Edited by Benoit Mayer, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Alexander Zahar
  • Book:
    Debating Climate Law
    Published online:
    15 June 2021
    Print publication:
    24 June 2021, pp 86-98

  • Summary

    This chapter debates the appropriateness of the Paris Agreement’s ‘compliance’ system. The treaty’s Article 15 establishes ‘a mechanism to facilitate implementation of and promote compliance with the provisions of this Agreement’. Views differ radically on the legal mandate of this mechanism and its capacity to ensure that states comply with their treaty obligations. Meinhard Doelle praises the mechanism’s ability to sensitively inform domestic political and legal processes and, thus, to increase the likelihood of an effective implementation of states’ obligations. Anna Huggins develops the argument that an effective compliance system comprises both facilitation and enforcement elements, yet the Paris mechanism limits itself to facilitation. Moreover, in its facilitative role, the mechanism is duplicative of other facilitative elements of the Agreement.

  • ~ B ~ - The Paris Agreement’s Article 15 Mechanism: An Incomplete Compliance Strategy

  • from Debate 4: Compliance
  • Edited by Benoit Mayer, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Alexander Zahar
  • Book:
    Debating Climate Law
    Published online:
    15 June 2021
    Print publication:
    24 June 2021, pp 99-110

  • Summary

    This chapter debates the appropriateness of the Paris Agreement’s ‘compliance’ system. The treaty’s Article 15 establishes ‘a mechanism to facilitate implementation of and promote compliance with the provisions of this Agreement’. Views differ radically on the legal mandate of this mechanism and its capacity to ensure that states comply with their treaty obligations. Meinhard Doelle praises the mechanism’s ability to sensitively inform domestic political and legal processes and, thus, to increase the likelihood of an effective implementation of states’ obligations. Anna Huggins develops the argument that an effective compliance system comprises both facilitation and enforcement elements, yet the Paris mechanism limits itself to facilitation. Moreover, in its facilitative role, the mechanism is duplicative of other facilitative elements of the Agreement.

  • Chapter 11 - New professionalism

  • Edited by Dinesh Bhugra, Institute of Psychiatry, London, Amit Malik
  • Book:
    Professionalism in Mental Healthcare
    Published online:
    10 November 2010
    Print publication:
    28 October 2010, pp 115-126

  • Summary

    In the past two decades, a run of highly publicized medical scandals in the UK have affected the reputation of the medical profession. Beginning with Bristol, it was the cumulative effect of several such scandals. This chapter begins by considering what constitutes professionalism in medicine. It then looks at the recent history of medical professionalism in the UK and concludes that, whilst one have reached a position in which the regulatory framework is modern and potentially robust, there is still much to be done to ensure that professionalism is embedded deep within every doctor, part of their identity. The professionalism advanced by the General Medical Council (GMC) has four main elements: the foundation, the standards themselves; compliance mechanisms mainly through regulation and contracts of service; the responsibility for internalizing the professional standards primarily through medical education; and the moral obligation on professional institutions.