A/HRC/20/7 Stephen Humphreys, lecturer in law at the London School of Economics; Maria Theresa Lauron, IBON International; and Theodor Rathgeber of the German Forum Human Rights. 27. The panellists in Session 2 raised several conceptual issues that must be addressed. The States and peoples most likely to be affected are those who have contributed the least to climate change through greenhouse gas emissions. The effects of climate change transcend national borders and take on a global dimension. As a result, States face the challenge of responding not only at the national level, but also at the international level. Efforts taken in isolation to address climate change and its effects will no longer work. 28. Another obstacle to international cooperation is the significant cost of implementing mitigation and adaptation measures. Nevertheless, the panellists concluded that these costs are largely unavoidable and will only increase the longer it takes to implement these measures. Climate finance from developed countries is necessary to offset these economic burdens. The panellists noted that climate finance presently means one thing to developing countries and something rather different to developed countries, but concluded that this financial support to developing countries and small island States can no longer be framed as charitable contributions. 29. The panellists also considered the difficulty of addressing the effects of climate change on migration policy. Migration serves as one available form of adaptation, but policymakers should recognize that this solution will also increase the vulnerability of the displaced individuals. Attention should be paid to addressing possible protection gaps within the migration, climate change, and human rights-related discussions, and additional effort should be placed on capacity-building. 30. Finally, the panellists discussed reconciling the transboundary responsibilities of climate change with the largely domestic implications of human rights obligations. One proposal was not only to use human rights to influence climate change, but also to use the approaches of the environmental community to inform human rights in the area of transboundary obligations. Attention was also drawn to the newly published Maastricht Principles on Extraterritorial Obligations of States in the area of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights as another instrument for addressing the extraterritoriality issues. The conceptual difficulties posed by the transboundary effects of climate change further reinforce the need for coordinated effort at the international level. 31. After raising these conceptual hurdles, the panellists clarified what international cooperation means. International cooperation is often perceived only in terms of humanitarian responses in times of suffering, yet it also entails coordinated processes for achieving common goals. International cooperation must consider and facilitate both crisis management and risk management. 32. International cooperation will also require utilization of existing international principles and mechanisms for climate change and human rights. Legal instruments such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, as well as mechanisms such as the UNFCCC and the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20), must be employed. Furthermore, the international community should ensure that core human rights obligations remain non-derogable in times of conflict, emergencies, and natural disasters. These human rights protections play a crucial role in national and international policy by ensuring accountability and protection for individuals. A victim-focused approach to climate change and human rights may help the international community to come together to address the issue. 33. Concrete steps involving capacity-building, climate finance, and technology transfer were recommended. Capacity-building requires global recognition that maintaining the status quo will not provide a solution, but is rather exacerbating the problem. All countries 9