Spotlight interview – Dr Jellie Molino  

22 Oct 2024

The Centre for Climate Engagement’s spotlight interview series explores law for climate action through the lens of a range of experts.
Dr Jellie Molino is a Post-Doctoral Research Associate at the Centre for Climate Engagement (CCE) at Hughes Hall, with research focusing on private law, procurement, and climate change. She also teaches at the Faculty of Law. We asked her to share her research and experience. 
Dr Jellie Molino

I completed my PhD in November 2022 and spent much of my time doing consultancy work for international organisations. One project with the International Finance Corporation (IFC) of the World Bank in Vietnam made me realise I needed to return to academic research. I was helping draft procurement legislation to incorporate sustainability provisions when a colleague asked, “How can we encourage the private sector to engage more with sustainable tenders?” Since most of my experience focused on supporting the public sector, this question made me think deeply about the other side of procurement—how to influence the supply side.  

When I saw the call for a postdoctoral position in private law at Hughes Hall, it felt like the perfect opportunity to explore this issue. The role would allow me to focus on regulations that encourage the private sector to adopt more sustainable practices. After a rigorous selection process, I was fortunate to be offered the position.  

I’ve been in Cambridge for about seven months now, and I’m really enjoying it—despite the weather, which I’ve managed to adjust to! What I love most is the working environment. It’s incredibly conducive to scholarly excellence, with a strong, supportive community. My supervisor and colleagues at the CCE have been particularly encouraging, and my involvement with them helps me stay connected to real-world issues beyond my research. The opportunity to collaborate and share updates on external projects keeps my work dynamic and engaging, making my time here both productive and exciting. 

My interest in climate change began in 2012 when I was a young lawyer in the Philippines, supporting local communities. One case stood out—the fight against irresponsible mining and the establishment of new coal-fired power plants. At that time, I had heard of climate change but didn’t fully grasp its implications for legal practice until I was asked to represent communities affected by pollution from these power plants. 

The Philippines is one of the first countries to implement a special environmental protection law known as the Writ of Kalikasan (“kalikasan” meaning “nature” in Filipino). This legal procedure allows for action against environmental damage and includes provisions to compel government agencies to halt activities that harm the environment. As a young lawyer, I immersed myself in studying this law and analysing the petitions filed under it. What I found was alarming: more than 70% of Writ of Kalikasan petitions were dismissed on technical grounds, primarily because the law required that the environmental damage must affect at least two cities or provinces. 

In the case I was handling, the coal-fired power plants were releasing dust particles that severely impacted people in distant municipalities, but not in adjacent cities or provinces. The pollution was carried by the wind to remote areas, and despite the significant harm caused, it didn’t meet the legal criteria for action. This limitation in the law deeply frustrated me and sparked my ongoing concern about the narrow definitions of environmental damage. 

In 2014, I had the opportunity to attend a short program in the US, where I delved deeper into climate change. I realised then that environmental impact assessments for coal-fired power plants were often limited to their immediate geographical area, ignoring broader climate impacts. This was a pivotal moment for me, as I understood that the activities in developed countries, like the US, were contributing to climate risks in vulnerable nations like the Philippines. 

Since then, I’ve dedicated myself to promoting legal frameworks that protect both people and the planet before construction projects, such as power plants, begin. As a lawyer with expertise in both procurement and environmental law, I focus on creating regulations that ensure environmental safeguards are in place before contracts are awarded. Once a project is underway, holding parties accountable in countries without strong enforcement mechanisms becomes incredibly challenging. 

I am currently focused on using procurement strategically in both public and private sectors to reduce carbon emissions across supply chains. Procurement plays a significant role in global emissions, as highlighted by a World Economic Forum report, which found that public procurement alone contributes to 7.5 million tons of CO2 annually—roughly 15% of global greenhouse gas emissions. This figure is comparable to the total emissions of the United States, the world’s second-largest emitter, and half of China’s, the largest emitter. 

Despite the existence of robust environmental impact assessments (EIAs), which account for biodiversity and ecological factors, these assessments often fail to be incorporated into tender documents. Without this inclusion, construction companies are not held accountable for protecting biodiversity, and there is little to no post-project monitoring. As a result, environmental findings are often disregarded once contracts are awarded, as they carry no binding contractual obligations.  

This issue is particularly pronounced in projects funded by Official Development Assistance (ODA), where “tied aid” stipulates that only contractors from the donor country can be selected. In some cases, firms are pre-selected before EIAs are even completed, making the assessments irrelevant. Moreover, monitoring of contract performance is often weak, with little accountability for compliance. I’ve witnessed firsthand the corruption and lack of enforcement that allow substandard work and even ghost buildings to go unchallenged. 

To address these challenges, it’s crucial to embed sustainability at every stage of the procurement process. By making low-carbon criteria mandatory in tender documents and ensuring stronger post-contract monitoring, we can help meet climate goals. Developing nations need support to build capacity for implementing and enforcing these regulations effectively. 

In my field of work, I’ve noticed that people are often overwhelmed by their daily tasks, with systems that don’t encourage thinking creatively. For example, during a recent project in the Philippines focused on delivering health commodities to remote areas, the emphasis was solely on efficiency—ensuring timely delivery to beneficiaries. However, my recommendations aimed not only at improving logistics but also at reducing emissions by consolidating deliveries based on geographical proximity, reducing the number of trips and the carbon footprint. 

This approach could be more widely adopted if procurement and logistics laws required mandatory reporting on carbon emissions and reductions as performance indicators. In countries like New Zealand, public officials must report their carbon reductions when procuring public vehicles, tracking baselines and improvements, such as switching to electric vehicles. These mandatory reports ensure that climate considerations are factored into everyday decisions. 

When laws require climate action, even in routine activities like procurement and logistics, it shifts the way people work. Moving away from a business-as-usual mindset is crucial if we want to meet global goals of limiting temperature increases to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels. 

When people lose their lives due to government projects failing to meet their intended purpose, it is often preventable. These deaths could be avoided if regulations required that only contractors with verifiable proof of successfully completed, high-quality projects—certified by third parties—are eligible. However, in many countries like the Philippines, the default criteria for government contractors are often based on cost rather than the quality of their previous work. Without robust monitoring, it’s difficult to assess contractors’ past performance accurately. 

As a result, contractors responsible for substandard projects, such as failed flood control infrastructure, may still be hired for future projects because their eligibility is based on completion rather than effectiveness. Whether their previous projects fulfilled their purpose (like controlling floods) becomes irrelevant in the selection process. This creates a vicious cycle of constructing ineffective projects, ultimately at the expense of human lives. 

I left my role as a legal and procurement specialist at the Office of General Counsel of the Asian Development Bank (ADB) in 2015 because, at that time, ADB wasn’t practicing sustainable procurement. In fact, sustainable public procurement was not widely known then; I wasn’t even familiar with it. My focus was on learning how to protect people and the planet before procurement contracts were awarded. 

 Through academic research, particularly within graduate law schools, I began to explore this area. I presented my work at conferences, published papers, and advocated for the role of international organisations in promoting sustainable public procurement as a means to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals, a key focus of my PhD research. Over the past decade, multilateral development banks, including ADB, have implemented sustainable procurement policies and regulations. I’ve even had the opportunity to serve as a peer reviewer for some of these policies. Now, I am working with the World Bank, supporting member countries in promoting sustainable public procurement. 

Yes, just a month ago, I was invited to collaborate on a research project focused on the need for legal innovation in the UNFCCC and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). We have already completed the research, presented as a legal opinion, and submitted it for potential publication. One key issue that caught my attention is the lack of emphasis on “nature-based solutions procurement”—a form of green procurement—as a strategy to help achieve the goals of the CBD. This is an area I hope to explore further in my upcoming research.  

…………………….  

Read a full profile of Dr Jellie Molino on the Hughes Hall website here.  She will speak about her work at Hughes Hall on Monday 10 March as part of the Cambridge Seminar Series on Law and the Climate Crisis. See full details here.