Sentences with phrase «requires national commitment»

Not exact matches

The vitality of our national conversation around engagement with China requires a commitment to open debate and free exchange of ideas.

It will require that we turn more of our attention homeward, away from raging national controversies and toward the everyday lives of our living moral communities — toward family, school, and congregation; toward civic priorities and local commitments; toward neighbors in need and friends in crisis.

Reaching the new national goal of cutting food loss and waste in half by 2030, which was announced in 2015, is going to require renewed commitments to aggressively cut food loss and waste.

That NASCAR hasn't had a fatality in one of its three national divisions since 2001 is a testament to its steadfast commitment to safety, including requiring drivers to wear head - and - neck restraints, tracks to install energy - absorbent barriers, and stringent rules covering the construction of cars so that when a crash does occur the driver doesn't bear the brunt of the impact.

Secondly, there is the simple reality that sending people to Mars will require an enormous amount of political will and commitment of national, and probably international, resources.

According to the Denver - based National Conference of State Legislatures, 48 states revised public - employee plans between 2009 and 2012, often by raising contributions or the required age or service commitments, or by reducing benefits.

Strand credited animal sheltering groups and national dog organizations like the American Kennel Club (AKC) for launching ongoing campaigns encouraging pet owners to select their pets more carefully, neuter dogs not intended for breeding programs, and understand the lifelong commitment that responsible dog ownership requires.

... Commitment to a price target does not require national carbon taxes, or even fossil - fuel taxes.

However, a clear understanding of how national emissions reductions commitments affect global climate change impacts requires an understanding of complex relationships between atmospheric ghg concentrations, likely global temperature changes in response to ghg atmospheric concentrations, rates of ghg emissions reductions over time and all of this requires making assumptions about how much CO2 from emissions will remain in the atmosphere, how sensitive the global climate change is to atmospheric ghg concentrations, and when the international community begins to get on a serious emissions reduction pathway guided by equity considerations.

Requires the President, beginning June 30, 2018, and every four years thereafter, to determine, for each eligible industrial sector, whether more than 85 % of U.S. imports for that sector are from countries that: (1) are parties to international agreements requiring economy - wide binding national commitments at least as stringent as those of the United States; (2) have annual energy or GHG intensities for the sector comparable or better than the equivalent U.S. sector; or (3) are parties to an international or bilateral emission reduction agreement for that sector.

In the executive summary (which can be downloaded in full here), we conclude that among the design elements the 2015 agreement should avoid because they would inhibit linkage are so - called «supplementarity requirements» that require parties to accomplish all (or a large, specified share) of their emissions - reduction commitments within their national borders.

In the absence of a court adjudicating what equity requires of nations in setting their national climate change commitments, a possibility but far from a guarantee under existing international and national law (for an explanation of some of the litigation issues, Buiti, 2011), the best hope for encouraging nations to improve the ambition of their national emissions reductions commitments on the basis of equity and justice is the creation of a mechanism under the UNFCCC that requires nations to explain their how they quantitatively took equity into account in establishing their INDCs and why their INDC is consistent with the nation's ethical obligations to people who are most vulnerable to climate change and the above principles of international law.

And so although it may not be possible to say precisely what equity requires of nations in advance, strong arguments can be made that some national commitments fail to satisfy reasonable interpretations of what equity requires.

Although reasonable disagreements exist about what equity and justice requires of nations in setting their INDCs as demonstrated by numerous proposed equity frameworks discussed by the recent IPCC chapter in the 5th Assessment Report on equity (IPCC, 2014, chapter 4), the national commitments that are based upon national economic interests alone clearly fail to pass minimum ethical scrutiny.

It would appear that some of the national commitments that are referenced in the Cancun agreements are based upon grandfathering emissions reductions from existing levels not on what justice requires of nations.

Because allocation of national ghg emissions is inherently a matter of justice, nations should be required to explain how their ghg emissions reduction commitments both will lead to a specific atmospheric greenhouse gas concentration that is not dangerous, that is, what remaining ghg CO2 equivalent budget they have assumed that their commitment will achieve, and on what equitable basis have they determined their fair share of that budget.

Where national commitments have been deduced from collective decision making — such as the case in the EU — nations should be required to explain the equity and justice basis for its national commitment.

For this reason, it is likely a practical mistake to not insist that any national commitment conforms to some reasonable definition of what equity requires.

In light of the fact that any attempt to reach consensus on the operationalization of equity will run into conflicts with national interest, the paper recommends a completely new approach that would fund a new carbon revolution while abandoning the current approach in which nations make individual emissions reductions commitments consistent with what equity requires of them.

Although reasonable people may disagree on what equity and justice may require of national ghg emission reduction commitments, there are only a few considerations that are arguably morally relevant to national climate targets.

There has also been a fairly wide - spread understanding that the international community will not avoid very dangerous climate change unless nations increase their national commitments to levels required of them based upon equity while working with other nations to keep atmospheric concentrations of ghg from exceeding dangerous levels.

This requires a commitment to increase national targets as the first round of the ambition mechanism kicks in in 2018.

A strong ethical case can be made that if nations have duties to limit their ghg emissions to their fair share of safe global emissions, a conclusion that follows both as a matter of ethics and justice and several international legal principles including, among others, the «no harm principle,» and promises nations made in the 1992 UNFCCC to adopt policies and measures required to prevent dangerous anthropocentric interference with the climate system in accordance with equity and common but differentiated responsibilities, nations have a duty to clearly explain how their national ghg emissions reductions commitments arguably satisfy their ethical obligations to limit their ghg emissions to the nation's fair share of safe global emissions.

The obvious place to look for increases in ambition in national commitments is from nations that are obviously above emissions reduction levels that equity would require of them.

Although most nations have now made some commitments that have included ghg emissions reductions targets starting in the Copenhagen COP in 2009, almost all nations appear to be basing their national targets not on what equity would require of them but at levels determined by their economic and national interests.

In terms of renewable energy, «a long - term national commitment» such as a national renewable portfolio standard, carbon price, or long - term renewable energy tax incentives is required.

In particular, the AG seems to suggest a shift from a reading founded on the proof of a mere control exerted by the State over the resources engaged by the national measure concerned (transfer of State resources) and over the public undertaking (imputability) to an understanding requiring an actual commitment of public resources (transfer of State resources) and a causal link between alleged advantage and State budget (imputability).

As noted above, the Paris Agreement does not legally require Canada to re-work its national target for greenhouse gases to reflect its commitment to strive to prevent global temperature increases of 1.5 ˚C, but morally we hope that Canada was not speaking out of both sides of its mouth in calling for a more ambitious international target.

Title Insurance We require an acceptable ALTA Loan Policy (or equivalent in Texas, Florida and California) issued by an approved national title insurer, insuring the Loan as a valid first lien on the security (unless another priority is specified in the loan commitment) without exception other than taxes not yet due and payable and such other exceptions as we approve.

This approach would require State and Commonwealth government commitment to capacity development within native title negotiations; adequately resourced NTRBs; flexible Federal Court timeframes to support capacity development and effective native title negotiations; co-operative relationships between State and Federal governments and NTRBs; and the support of the National Native Title Tribunal through its mediation role.

It is clear, however, that action on broader intersectoral issues also requires a commitment to undertake activity consistent with the overall vision of this National Strategic Framework from government ministers in other portfolios at the Commonwealth and state / territory level.167