Just Transition and Workers’ Rights in the Global South: The Recent Argentine and Chilean Nationally Determined Contributions

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The article presents the interesting case study of two Latin American countries: Chile and Argentina, as the first LAC countries to consider the Just Transition in their NDC. It is unclear in the introduction whether countries on other continents have done so and may be considered best practice. Other countries are mentioned in the paragraph starting with line 271, but it is still unclear if they may be considered best practices, or if they are just instances of other implementation of the Just Transition.

The methodology is extremely vague and vaguely described. The reason for choosing the two countries is stated, but there is not method allocated to the proposed analysis on line 87.

Line 118 - "decent and green job creation" - there is no definition of 'decent job' / or a reference. Also mentioned on line 157

Author Response

Thank you very much for your comments and suggestions, which we have taken on board. As for the specific points:
1. We have decided to eliminate line 271 so we think it may not necessary to include the other countries.
2. As requested, we have decided to clearly spell out the research question that has guided our article. We have also included the two main legal methodologies that we have used in our paper, namely: doctrinal-black letter and comparative methodologies. 
3. Although there is no a legal definition of what constitutes decent work, we have provided the definition given by the ILO.

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper was very informative and concerns a very significant topic of interest to readers.  The relationship between workers' issues and environmental policies in countries of the Global South with high degrees of informality is certainly crucial to understand.  The main reason for my lukewarm review was that I didn't see much original research or theoretical analysis here--the paper was largely descriptive and comparative.  That is certainly valid, but seems almost more like a term paper project based on synthesis of policy documents than a piece of original research.  What is expressed in these documents may have little relationship to what actually occurs, especially in relation to informal workers.  Even though I learned a good deal about the steps these countries are taking to move towards carbon neutrality while protecting vulnerable workers, I was not sure if this is really reflective of what is happening "on the ground."  Some inclusion of sources such as contemporary newspapers or activist media might offer some more critical perspective on these policy promises.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your comments and suggestions, which we have taken on board. As for the specific points:
1. In terms of what happens in the ground (in opposition to what it is enshrined in the law), the state seems to be leading the way in both countries. This does not mean that non-state actors have not played a relevant role. We have decided to include some plans elaborated by trade unions in order to ensure just transition. 

2. Despite their interest in being major actors of the green revolution, they are understandably quite focused on job creation in the short-term.

It is worth noting that given the recent nature of both NDCs (Chile - March 2020 and Argentina - December 2020), the role that unions (and civil society) may play in this field remains to be seen.

Reviewer 3 Report

The methodology section (chapter 2) needs to be significantly improved. The only reference to the research method used is a mere reference to 'an examination' of the documents (line 89.) There is no mentioning of the method of analysis/examination used. The research question needs to be stated. Working hypothesis are missing. The overall research design is weak. 

While the documents (NDC's for the two countries) are well described in terms of content, as well as being well placed in their wider context, the thesis is not clearly formulated. The discussion of the findings is therefore also weak and needs further substantiation. The engagement with existing literature also needs more attention.

The connections between the various chapters need to be improved in order to make the logical coherence of the thesis clearer. 

Author Response

Thank you very much for your comments and suggestions, which we have taken on board. As for the specific points:

1. As requested, we have decided to clearly spell out the research question that has guided our article. In order to answer it, we have mainly followed two traditional legal methodologies namely: doctrinal-black letter in order to explore the law - in a broader sense -  and comparative methodologies. 
2. We have focused on the 2015 ILO guidelines as a point of reference to determine whether the Argentine and Chilean NDCs meet the standards developed by the ILO in terms of content as well as decision-making procedures.
3. We have reviewed the entire document in order to ensure that it reads more smoothly and the connections between sections is more logical. 
4. Finally, it is worth noting that given the recent nature of both NDCs (Chile - March 2020 and Argentina - December 2020), the role that institutional bodies and unions as well as civil society may play in this field remains to be seen. It is a bit challenging to make definitive statements at this point.

2.  
3. Although there is no a legal definition of what constitutes decent work, we have provided the definition given by the ILO.

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

revision was properly conducted.