Glacial Melt and Transboundary Water Insecurity: A Legal Dilemma

DOI: https://doi.org/10.62517/jel.202614312

Author(s)

Ning Xia

Affiliation(s)

Law, Fujian University of Technology, Fuzhou, Fujian, China

Abstract

Global climate change is causing glaciers in the polar regions and high mountain ranges to melt at an unprecedented rate. This process directly threatens water resource security and ecological stability in transboundary river basins. The current international legal system, however, exhibits significant structural shortcomings in providing judicial remedies for such harm. Drawing upon potential customary international law, this study examines the applicability and limitations of existing legal frameworks in addressing the emerging challenge of glacial melt as a novel form of cross-border damage. The findings indicate that holding major contributing states accountable faces three intertwined dilemmas: difficulty in attributing responsibility, confusion in establishing causation, and a lack of applicable legal norms. Together, these obstacles substantially hinder states from seeking judicial redress. The paper concludes that while transboundary harm resulting from glacial melt demands a response from international law, traditional litigation alone is insufficient to resolve this crisis. Only through innovative mechanisms-such as implementing the precautionary principle and establishing a global glacier adaptation fund-can we move beyond the litigation dilemma and achieve effective remedies and climate justice.

Keywords

Glacial Melt; Transboundary Harm; International Law Dilemma; Global Glacier Adaptation Fund; Climate Justice

References

[1] He, X.B. (2020) The Environmental Law Approach to Climate Change Regulation: Legal Demands and Institutional Choices. China Legal Science, (5): 25-41. [2] Du, J.X. (2025) On the Environmental Legal Liability System Centered on “Ecological Restoration”. Jianghuai Tribune, (1): 112-119. [3] Aggarwal, A., Frey, H., McDowell, G., et al. (2022) Adaptation to climate change induced water stress in major glacierized mountain regions. Climatic Change, 170(3-4): 22. [4] Urgenda Foundation v. The State of the Netherlands. (2019) Supreme Court of the Netherlands, Case No. 19/00135. [5] Birnie, P., Boyle, A., Redgwell, C. (2009) International Law and the Environment. 3rd ed. Oxford University Press, Oxford. [6] Saúl Luciano Lliuya v. RWE AG. (2022) Higher Regional Court of Hamm (Germany), Case No. 5 U 15/17. [7] Mace, M.J., Verheyen, R. (2016) Loss, damage and responsibility after COP21: All options on the table. Review of European, Comparative & International Environmental Law, 25(2): 197-212. [8] International Court of Justice. (2025) Advisory Opinion on the Obligations of States in respect of Climate Change, 23 July 2025.