This chapter presents the methodological approach adopted to examine how Global South states constructed their narratives in the ITLOS advisory proceedings on climate change. By combining qualitative and quantitative techniques—particularly categorical content analysis—it investigates the written and oral submissions of eighteen Global South states that participated in the ITLOS advisory proceedings on climate change. Rather than comparing these to Global North submissions, the study emphasizes within-group variation to uncover how legal arguments reflect differing political priorities and strategic objectives. The method includes mapping participation, contextualizing narratives through high-level UNFCCC COP statements, and conducting an inductive analysis of six legal categories. These categories were then linked to political discourses to identify two overarching narratives: one centred on developmental concerns, and the other on existential vulnerability.