FEEDBACK: Do you mean 'Luxury at an environmental cost?' This is potentially a very interesting topic, especially tying it back to environmental justice/inequality could work very well.

However, it's not clear what legal issue you plan to address, so maybe make it clearer? Also, in terms of legal jargon, it's not so clear what you mean by 'underworld spectacle' so make sure you explain that, or consider omitting that. In environmental debate, the discussion is often around affluence and inequality of environmental footprint, in case you want to look more into academic debate around that.

Generally the challenge I see here is to choose a clear angle of analysis: is the main argument going to be about inequality, or about pollution? You can talk about both, but arguably one of them has to be the main point, and the rest are arguments that supports your main point.

FEEDBACK: Yes, this could work well as a topic. I'm not sure COP29 will have as many discussions about carbon markets as previous cops, but you can certainly have a fairly interesting/technical overview of the most salient issues that remain outstanding. Consider finding a specific example of a carbon market that you're interested in, to make this a bit more accessible/concrete.

FEEDBACK: this is very good, but should ideally be made a bit more specific. What about the MPAs under this treaty? Are you interested in their potential, effectiveness, how they'll work, what the challenges might be? Ideally, the title would indicate something a bit more specific what the analysis will be about. Also, can you tie this in with some ongoing debate or a geographical area that has been on the spotlight recently, just to make sure the topic sounds current and topical?

FEEDBACK: it's certainly a good idea to focus on one recent case study/project, so in that sense the focus on rose bank is great. However, more specific legal issue/problem being identified in the title/from the outset would be helpful, to make it even more concrete. Discussing all the legal challenges involved in such a complex project is arguably not feasible

FEEDBACK. I'd say "NIMBYs and the Environment" is way too broad of a topic, but your sub-title could work as a topic, yes. Ideally, you'd be more specific: planning reform where? I'm also not sure how/why such a reform would reduce environmental protection (given that NIMBYsm is term used to describe those who object environmental measures) but I'd be eager to learn more why you think the outcome might be like this. Also, keep in mind that 'NIMBYsm is a highly contentious term, resented by many movements working on just transition. Just something to keep in mind!

FEEDBACK: This is interesting, but potentially too broad for a blog post topic. It could be a topic for an extended essay or a dissertation. Consider how can you narrow this down. Could you focus on one brand (e.g. Apple, Zara, etc) and some story around it? Could you look at one case (e.g. from UK) and look at how it's treated elsewhere (e.g. in Germany), if any? Basically, although this is potentially a very good and interesting focus/area for analysis, there's no way it can be tackled in a short blog post - further specificity/narrowing down of focus required.

- Analysing whether this divergence is a good thing, Whether an outright ban is the correct approach etc

The post will argue that while Canada’s climate and reconciliation policies present carbon markets as opportunities for sustainable development, they may reproduce colonial structures of ownership and control by embedding Indigenous land stewardship within Crown-defined property and market systems. Using Article 32 of UNDRIP as a legal hook, the analysis will question whether current frameworks genuinely support Indigenous jurisdiction over carbon—or transform carbon into a new commodity form under the guise of green finance.

The broader aim is to link this debate to sustainability law and commodification theory (as developed by A. Claire Cutler), illustrating how law constructs both the value of nature and the limits of decolonization in climate governance.

Using the Paris Agreement and the commitments made by the UK to limit global temperatures to 1.5 as the pretext of international law in which this discussion is situated. I will then look at the impact of Glasgow's LEZ on air quality- analysing recent data and reports. I would like to include some discussion on the Social Justice of the LEZ and how it may discriminate against lower-income households who cannot afford new cars, potentially linking this to some of the assigned readings about the importance of involving affected communities in decision-making.