Environmental law

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by MrOllie (talk | contribs) at 12:20, 12 June 2020 (→‎References). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

For other uses, see Environmental Law (disambiguation).
Part of a series on
Environmental law
Pollution control law
Natural resources law
Reference materials
Related topics

Environmental law is a collective term encompassing aspects of the law that provide protection to the environment.[1] A related but distinct set of regulatory regimes, now strongly influenced by environmental legal principles, focus on the management of specific natural resources, such as forests, minerals, or fisheries. Other areas, such as environmental impact assessment, may not fit neatly into either category, but are nonetheless important components of environmental law.

History

Early examples of legal enactments designed to consciously preserve the environment, for its own sake or human enjoyment, are found throughout history. In the common law, the primary protection was found in the law of nuisance, but this only allowed for private actions for damages or injunctions if there was harm to land. Thus, smells emanating from pig sties,[2] strict liability against dumping rubbish,[3] or damage from exploding dams.[4] Private enforcement, however, was limited and found to be woefully inadequate to deal with major environmental threats, particularly threats to common resources. During the "Great Stink" of 1858, the dumping of sewerage into the River Thames began to smell so ghastly in the summer heat that Parliament had to be evacuated. Ironically, the Metropolitan Commission of Sewers Act 1848 had allowed the Metropolitan Commission for Sewers to close cesspits around the city in an attempt to "clean up" but this simply led people to pollute the river. In 19 days, Parliament passed a further Act to build the London sewerage system. London also suffered from terrible air pollution, and this culminated in the "Great Smog" of 1952, which in turn triggered its own legislative response: the Clean Air Act 1956. The basic regulatory structure was to set limits on emissions for households and business (particularly burning coal) while an inspectorate would enforce compliance.

Notwithstanding early analogues, the concept of "environmental law" as a separate and distinct body of law is a twentieth-century development.[5] The recognition that the natural environment was fragile and in need of special legal protections, the translation of that recognition into legal structures, the development of those structures into a larger body of "environmental law," and the strong influence of environmental law on natural resource laws, did not occur until about the 1960s. At that time, numerous influences - including a growing awareness of the unity and fragility of the biosphere; increased public concern over the impact of industrial activity on natural resources and human health; the increasing strength of the regulatory state; and more broadly the advent and success of environmentalism as a political movement - coalesced to produce a huge new body of law in a relatively short period of time. While the modern history of environmental law is one of continuing controversy, by the end of the twentieth century environmental law had been established as a component of the legal landscape in all developed nations of the world, many developing ones, and the larger project of international law.

Pollution control

Air quality

Industrial air pollution now regulated by air quality law
Main article: Air quality law

Air quality laws

Water quality

A typical stormwater outfall.
A typical stormwater outfall, subject to water quality law
Main article: Water quality law

Water quality laws

Waste management

A landfill.
A municipal landfill, operated pursuant to waste management law
Main article: Waste management law

Waste management laws

Contaminant cleanup

Oil spill cleanup.
Oil spill emergency response, governed by environmental cleanup law
Main article: Environmental cleanup law

Environmental cleanup laws

Chemical safety

Chemical safety laws govern the use of chemicals in human activities, particularly man-made chemicals in modern industrial applications. As contrasted with media-oriented environmental laws (e.g., air or water quality laws), chemical control laws seek to manage the (potential) pollutants themselves. Regulatory efforts include banning specific chemical constituents in consumer products (e.g., Bisphenol A in plastic bottles), and regulating pesticides.

Resource sustainability

Impact assessment

Main article: Environmental impact assessment

Environmental impact assessment

Water resources

An irrigation ditch, operated in accordance with water resources law
Main article: Water law

Water resources laws govern the ownership and use of water resources, including surface water and ground water. Regulatory areas may include water conservation, use restrictions, and ownership regimes.

Mineral resources

Main article: Mining law

Mineral resource laws cover

Forest resources

A timber operation.
A timber operation, regulated by forestry law
Main article: Forestry law
Part of a series on
Environmental law
Pollution control law
Natural resources law
Reference materials
Related topics

Forestry laws govern activities in designated forest lands, most commonly with respect to forest management and timber harvesting.[6][7] Forestry laws generally adopt management policies for public forest resources, such as multiple use and sustained yield.[8] Forest management is split between private and public management, with public forests being sovereign property of the State. Forestry laws are now considered an international affair.[9] [10]

Governmental agencies are generally responsible for planning and implementing forestry laws on public forest lands, and may be involved in forest inventory, planning, and conservation, and oversight of timber sales.[11] Forestry laws are also dependent on social and economic contexts of the region in which they are implemented.[12] The development of scientific forestry management is based on the precise measurement of the distribution and volume of wood in a given parcel, the systematic felling of trees, and their replacement by standard, carefully aligned rows of mono-cultural plantations that could be harvested at set times.[13]

Purpose

Forestry laws are intended to protect resources and prevent forest clearing, logging, hunting, and collecting vegetation.[11] However, there are no clear limitations set within these laws in regards to allowable cuts, harvesting rotations, and minimum harvesting diameters. Forest management plans state goals for the upkeep of the land, as well as steps to achieve them. foresters create management plans that account for each differentiated forest itself.[14]

In some cases, plans are made with the assumption that ecosystems within a forest are holding a steady state, separate from the forest that surrounds them.[15] Many foresters who are in third world countries do not have the knowledge nor training to follow by all the guidelines when making a management plan.[16]

Tongass National Forest

Appropriate public policies and legislation serve to foster sustainable economic and social development in rural and urban areas. These policies work to safeguard the environment and protect flora, fauna and cultural heritage.[17] Traditionally, environmental protection has been an element of forestry through emphasizing forest conservation and accounting for environmental impacts on soil and water. In common with other sectors, forestry has been affected by the emergence of environmental awareness and legislation in the last generation.[18] This has brought greater emphasis on the protection of wilderness and aesthetic values.[19]

Influences

Biological diversity and climate change have specifically influenced forest law.[20] When forest management plans are created, biological diversity is represented in criteria for sustainability. Due to the Kyoto Protocol, the mitigation of climate change has become an objective of forest law and policy, complementing broader climate policies and programs. However, Rosenbaum and colleagues state that there is little legislation containing specific provisions for mitigating forest-based climate change.[21]

The connections between forest and other areas of law have become more complex as they have grown in ambition and scope and as other areas directly and indirectly place guidelines on how forests are managed or used. Thus the links between a country's forest laws and its general environmental laws become more important as the environmental dimensions of forest legislation increase in complexity.[21]

Forest legislation now recognizes the role of forests as a habitat for wildlife, a resource for grazing and agriculture, and a contributor to water and soil conservation. More recently, the general principles of environmental law and the more specific values of biological diversity have become a very visible part of forest law.[21] The UN Forum on Forests, an intergovernmental policy forum created in 2000, has adopted resolutions on the sustainable development of forests, especially those on Social and Cultural Aspects of Forest and Traditional Forest-Related Knowledge.[21]

International

Due to variations in nature, importance, role of forest resources and legal and institutional settings, forest law is not easily adapted between countries. The World Bank states that despite comparative studies of trends in forest legislation, there is a lack of practical guidance on how to assess improve the law.[18] [22]

Actual practices differ from one country to the next, however, in all cases public forests are viewed as a national resource, that is, the sovereign property of the state.[23] For example, even though most forest land in the United States and Canada is privately owned, a considerable amount is held by the state as a "public good" but systematically leased to private timber producers. In India, the Raj took ownership of virtually all forests, declaring them to be "wasteland" and, therefore, unowned. In Indonesia, forests are legally state owned but are treated as private property, while in Brazil, the lack of national government renders forests open access commons. In this role, the conservation of forests is tightly linked to the production of timber and other commodities that generate both capital and jobs, and the economies of large regions are almost wholly dependent on natural resource production from those forests.[13][24]

United Nations Forest Management Plan

New forest laws have been adopted in Eastern European countries as part of their transition to a market economy. These laws had considerable effect on the structure of forest land ownership, improvements in management regulations, and modernization of the forest sector's institutional framework.[18] New forest legislation has also been developed in several countries in Western Europe in order to adapt to changing economic conditions, social demands, and more political participation of interest groups and citizens at local and regional levels.[25]

Economic and social context

The evolution of forest legislation in the European Countries indicates that understanding of how natural resources are to be used in a sustainable manner depends on a given economic and social context.[26] The meaning of sustainable forestry is determined by local circumstances and their significance has considerably changed over time. Today sustainable management is understood as forestry practices which respect the naturally given potentials of the ecosystems and maintain the diversity of forests in their typical landscapes. They leave multiple options for an increasing production of wood, protection of the environment, and recreation.[12]

Regulation of use

Public provisions referring to forest uses over more than one generation are among the oldest forms of long-term environmental policies.[27] Customary law, codified in the 14th century, regulated forest uses in accordance with the demands and options of their times.[9] An increasing number of forest and timber ordinances, issued from the 16th century onward, followed.[27] Meeting local needs, long-term availability of raw materials and energy, and increased outputs through better forestry practices were the issues at stake. Legislation established the requirement of a continuous flow of wood production, which meant stopping exploitation of what was available. It recognized the long-term nature of forests, and promoted the involvement of several generations in forestry activities.[28] Increasingly, it provided for planning and management, and for measures of regeneration and reforestation. This introduced principles of utilizing renewable natural resources as a requirement for sustainability as we understand it today.[17]

United States of America Forestry Law

In the USA the Federal Government manages about 33% of forests, and 9% is managed by local governments.[29] This accounts for 343,901,880 acres (1391722 kilometers) of forest land.[29] Much of this land is made up of National Parks or National Forests which began with the establishment of Yellowstone National Park in 1872. After this, in 1891, the Forest Reserve Act was passed.[29][30] The National Parks are managed by the National Park Service (NPS), which is a bureau of the Department of the Interior (DOI).[31] National Forests are managed by the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), an agency of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).[32]

Economics

New policies place responsibilities for, and powers over, wood fuel management into the hands of economically interested individuals and the Forest Service. The Forest Service maintains complete control of all production and management decisions through required approval and through control of the rules by which production and management can take place.[33]

The role of private forestry reaches up to over 80 percent of forest production in some countries.[34] However, in many countries, private forestry has never been significant and, even when land has been privatized, the state has often retained the forests. In much of Africa, individual land ownership is relatively limited so that the closest approach to private forestry is usually community forestry (although South Africa and Eswatini, among other countries, have extensive private plantations).[35] More recently, the values of farm forestry and of private capital and management have increased official interest in private forestry.[21]

Illegal forestry activities deprive governments of billions of dollars in tax revenues, as well as cause environmental damage and threaten forests.[36] Forest related corruption and widespread violation of forestry laws undermines the rule of law, discourages legitimate investment, and gives unfair advantages. Money generated from illegal forestry activities has even been used to finance armed conflict.[16] Concern about the extent to which illegal logging has been contributing to forest loss has grown sharply since the 1980s.[37] A very large proportion of the timber entering both national and international markets has been accessed, harvested, transported and traded in contravention of national law in countries such as Bolivia, Brazil, Cambodia, Cameroon, Colombia, Honduras, Indonesia, Nicaragua, Peru, Philippines, and Russia.[38]

The World Bank (2002) estimates that illegal logging results in an annual loss of around US$10–15 billion in developing countries worldwide.[39] Although it is anticipated that better governance, increased rent capture by the state, and improved forest management can all benefit the poor indirectly, the direct impacts of illegal logging and forest law enforcement on rural livelihoods have not been a priority consideration to date.[17]

Livelihood

The ways in which people use and value forests are changing. Growing populations, changing culture, technology, and science are increasing the demand for forest resources. In recent years forest laws around the world have been significantly revised in response to these changes.[21] However, the lack of information about who really uses forests presents a major problem to forestry policy makers and supportive development agencies that are mandated to adopt a pro-poor approach. Without clear data it becomes all too easy to overlook the interests of lower income individuals when designing policy interventions aimed at improving forest management or asserting forest law.[17] Some forest laws specifically favor poor rural households and ethnic minorities. Over the last few decades, many governments in Latin America recognized indigenous peoples' rights over large territories, but indigenous people often find it difficult to protect those territories from invasion by loggers, miners, and farmers.[16]

According to the World Bank, "more than 1.6 billion people depend to varying degrees on forests for their livelihoods. About 60 million indigenous people are almost wholly dependent on forests. Some 350 million people who live in or adjacent to dense forests depend on them to a high degree for subsistence and income. In developing countries about 1.2 billion people rely on agroforestry farming systems that help to sustain agricultural productivity and generate income."[40]

Schmithüsen et al., advocate for a rights-based approach to forestry management with emphasis upon strengthening human rights networks, improving the independence of the judiciary, promoting legal literacy among rural communities, and providing legal aid; rather than a singular focus on forestry laws. They state a rights-based approach should be linked to governance reform programs aimed at creating public accountability and transparency in the management of natural resources and should be developed through processes of broad engagement with civil society organisations and based on national governments' commitments to reform law.[17]

A large portion of forestry legislation focuses on administrative requirements, fees, taxes, and property rights.[16] The recognition of traditional-group rights to areas used in common, such as forest or pasture is still lacking, despite governments or colonial powers recognising individual claims, based on custom or usage, to land used for agriculture or housing. according to the World Bank. By treating such land as "empty" during the process of settling rights, governments around the world have vested in the state ownership of vast expanses of forest land.[21]

Enforcement

Law enforcement is the last resort for obtaining compliance with the law. There are at least three approaches to overcoming the difficulties of proving offenses that have taken place in remote locations. One is to focus enforcement on more visible acts, such as transport. Another, common in civil law, is to make the official report of a sworn official admissible as evidence in further proceedings. This effectively shifts the burden of proof to the defendant. A third device is the use of evidentiary presumptions, which similarly shifts the burden of proof to the defendant.[18]

In many countries the contrast between what forestry law prescribes and practical implementation may vary. Even where the law is strong, illegal behavior by both public and private actors often continues.[41] The United Nations explains illegal behavior due to the lack of financial and human resources to monitor and control forest activities in, forest departments. As these forest activities occur in remote areas, government officials may be under immense pressure to condone violations, or engage in violations themselves; court systems are backlogged or bankrupt; the difficulties of daily life for the rural poor may overwhelm any likely risks associated with violating the law; etc.[42]

These explanations underscore the point that while good forestry legislation is necessary, it is obviously not sufficient. The laws in many countries lie unused or underused for reasons like failure of political will, weak institutions, or even general disregard for the rule of law.[21]

A dual approach of private as well as public law schemes might possibly become an interesting modern policy mix enhancing enforcement: private law certification schemes might support public regulations (f.i. DDS, due diligence systems, like the EU Timber Regulation).[43]

History and development

Further information: Forestry § History

Forestry management dates back to customary law codified in the 14th century. In 1992, representatives of 180 countries met in Rio de Janeiro to consider, among other things, the adoption of an Agreement on Forestry Principles.[23] They adopted the Agreement on Forestry Principles, entitled a "Non-legally binding authoritative statement of principles for a global consensus on the management, conservation and sustainable development of all types of forests."[13]

Scientific forestry was based on the precise measurement of the distribution and volume of wood in a given parcel, the systematic felling of trees, and their replacement by standard, carefully aligned rows of mono-cultural plantations that could be harvested at set times.[13]

The tendencies that become apparent from recent changes in forest laws and regulations in several European countries show a variety of approaches and may be judged from different point of views. Relevant criteria for analysis on the advancement of legislation are consistency, comprehensiveness, subsidiarity, and applicability.[44]

Consistency requires the compatibility of forest regulations with constitutional values and democratic rules, with national policies addressing land-use, economic development and environmental protection, and with international commitments and multilateral agreements. Comprehensiveness refers to the objectives of forest legislation with regard to forest protection and forestry development, to different types of forest tenures, and to the rights and responsibilities of various categories of forest owners. Subsidiarity relates to the role of forests as national, regional and local resources. It also relates to the double nature of forests as private production means that may be used according to the decisions of land owners and as resources that yield numerous benefits to the community. Subsidiarity indicates to what extent public programs support the activities of land owners.[45] Applicability refers in particular to the organisational framework of public forest administrations in relation to changing responsibilities and tasks, and to appropriate forms of participation of forest owners and interest groups in regulating forest uses and management practices. Coordination of competencies among public entities is an important aspect in evaluating the applicability of new or amended regulations.[17]

See also

References

  1. ^ Phillipe Sands (2003) Principles of International Environmental Law. 2nd Edition. p. xxi Available at [1] Accessed 19 February, 2020
  2. ^ Aldred's Case (1610) 9 Co Rep 57b; (1610) 77 ER 816
  3. ^ R v Stephens (1866) LR 1 QB 702
  4. ^ Rylands v Fletcher [1868] UKHL 1
  5. ^ See generally R. Lazarus, The Making of Environmental Law (Cambridge Press 2004); P. Gates, History of Public Land Law Development.
  6. ^ "Forestry regulation". www.dpi.nsw.gov.au. 2018. Retrieved 2021-12-09.
  7. ^ "What is Forestry Law? - Becoming a Forestry Lawyer". Retrieved 2021-12-09.
  8. ^ CIFOR (2006). Justice in the forest: rural livelihoods and forest law enforcement. Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR). doi:10.17528/cifor/001939.
  9. ^ a b Fre., Schmithüsen, Franz Josef Forstwissenschafter, 1940- Ger. Schmithüsen, Franz Josef Forestry scientist, 1940- Eng. Schmithüsen, Franz Josef Ingénieur forestier, 1940- (2007). Multifunctional forestry practices as a land use strategy to meet increasing private and public demands in modern societies. ETH, Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich, Department of Environmental Sciences, Institute for Human-Environmental Sciences. OCLC 730303720.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  10. ^ KAIMOWITZ, D. (2003). Forest law enforcement and rural livelihoods. The International Forestry Review, 5(3), 199–210. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43740118
  11. ^ a b Enters, Thomas; B. Durst, Patrick; B. Applegate, Grahame; C.S. Kho, Peter; Man, Gary (2001). "29. Policies, strategies and technologies for forest resource protection - William B. Magrath* and Richard Grandalski". Applying Reduced Impact Logging to Advance Sustainable Forest Management. Kuching, Malaysia: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
  12. ^ a b "Principles of sustainable tropical forest management where wood production is the primary objective". Guidelines for the management of tropical forests 1. The production of wood (FAO forestry paper 135). Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 1998.
  13. ^ a b c d "Why Is There No International Forestry Law?: An Examination of International Forestry Regulation, both Public and Private [eScholarship]". Escholarship.org. doi:10.5070/L5191019219. Retrieved 2016-11-30.
  14. ^ CIFOR (2006). Justice in the forest: rural livelihoods and forest law enforcement. Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR). doi:10.17528/cifor/001939.
  15. ^ "Elements of a Management Plan". Forest A Syst. University of Georgia Warnell School of Forestry & Natural Resources and College of Agricultural & Environmental Sciences. December 2018. Retrieved 9 December 2021.
  16. ^ a b c d Kaimowitz, D. (2003). "Forest law enforcement and rural livelihoods". International Forestry Review. 5 (3): 199–210. doi:10.1505/IFOR.5.3.199.19146.
  17. ^ a b c d e f Franz Schmithüsen; Peter Herbst; Dennis C. Le Master (2000). "Forging a New Framework for Sustainable Forestry: Recent Developments in European Forest Law". Vienna: IUFRO. Retrieved 30 November 2016.
  18. ^ a b c d C., Christy, Lawrence (2007). "Forest Law and the Environment". Forest Law and Sustainable Development Addressing Contemporary Challenges Through Legal Reform. Washington DC: World Bank. pp. 117–119. ISBN 978-0-8213-7038-4. OCLC 931686319.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  19. ^ Ribe, Robert G. (January 1989). "The aesthetics of forestry: What has empirical preference research taught us?". Environmental Management. 13 (1): 55–74. Bibcode:1989EnMan..13...55R. doi:10.1007/bf01867587. ISSN 0364-152X. S2CID 55767653.
  20. ^ Grebner, Donald L.; Bettinger, Pete; Siry, Jacek P. (2013), "Forest Policies and External Pressures", Introduction to Forestry and Natural Resources, Elsevier, pp. 359–383, doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-386901-2.00015-4, ISBN 9780123869012, retrieved 2021-12-09
  21. ^ a b c d e f g h Christy, L., & Ebrary, Inc. 2007. Forest law and sustainable development addressing contemporary challenges through legal reform. World Bank, Washington, DC.
  22. ^ KAIMOWITZ, D. (2003). Forest law enforcement and rural livelihoods. The International Forestry Review, 5(3), 199–210. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43740118
  23. ^ a b Lipschutz, Ronnie D. (2000). "Why Is There No International Forestry Law?: An Examination of International Forestry Regulation, both Public and Private". UCLA Journal of Environmental Law and Policy. 19 (1). doi:10.5070/l5191019219. ISSN 1942-8553.
  24. ^ Sharma, Shubhechchha; Yonariza (2021). "Chapter 7 - Evaluating forest reforestation policies in Southeast Asia: A case study from Indonesia, Philippines, and Thailand". Natural Resource Governance in Asia: From Collective Action to Resilience Thinking. pp. 79–97. doi:10.1016/B978-0-323-85729-1.00004-9. ISBN 9780323857291. S2CID 235832309.
  25. ^ Nichiforel; et al. (June 2020). "Two decades of forest-related legislation changes in European countriesanalysed from a property rights perspective". Forest Policy and Economics. 115: 102146. doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2020.102146. hdl:2164/14158.
  26. ^ "Forests — European Environment Agency". www.eea.europa.eu. Retrieved 2021-12-09.
  27. ^ a b Schmithüsen, Franz (1999). The Expanding Framework of Law and Public Policies Governing Sustainable Uses and Management in European Forests. Zurich: Chair Forest Policy and Forest Economics Department of Forest Sciences. pp. 1–5. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.513.8999.
  28. ^ Sasaki, Nophea; Asner, Gregory P.; Pan, Yude; Knorr, Wolfgang; Durst, Patrick B.; Ma, Hwan O.; Abe, Issei; Lowe, Andrew J.; Koh, Lian P.; Putz, Francis E. (2016-08-03). "Sustainable Management of Tropical Forests Can Reduce Carbon Emissions and Stabilize Timber Production". Frontiers in Environmental Science. 4. doi:10.3389/fenvs.2016.00050. ISSN 2296-665X.
  29. ^ a b c "Forestry Overview - National Agricultural Law Center". nationalaglawcenter.org. Retrieved 2021-11-11.
  30. ^ "US Forest Service Forest Management - Laws, Regulations & Policies". www.fs.fed.us. Retrieved 2021-11-11.
  31. ^ "National Park Service". www.doi.gov. 2015-10-21. Retrieved 2021-11-11.
  32. ^ "About Us". www.fs.fed.us. Retrieved 2021-11-11.
  33. ^ "Participation Without Representation: Chiefs, Councils and Forestry Law in the West African Sahel". Cultural Survival. 1972-06-17. Retrieved 2016-11-30.
  34. ^ Lobovikov, Maxim; Paudel, Shyam; Ball, Lynn; Piazza, Marco; Guardia, María; Nations, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United; Ren, Hong; Wu, Junqi (2007). World Bamboo Resources: A Thematic Study Prepared in the Framework of the Global Forest Resources Assessment 2005. Food & Agriculture Org. ISBN 978-92-5-105781-0.
  35. ^ Primmer, Eeva; Karppinen, Heimo (February 2010). "Professional judgment in non-industrial private forestry: Forester attitudes and social norms influencing biodiversity conservation". Forest Policy and Economics. 12 (2): 136–146. doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2009.09.007. ISSN 1389-9341.
  36. ^ Kaimowitz, D. (2003-09-01). "Forest law enforcement and rural livelihoods". International Forestry Review. 5 (3): 199–210. doi:10.1505/IFOR.5.3.199.19146.
  37. ^ Palmer, C. (2001). "The extent and causes of illegal logging: an analysis of a major cause of tropical deforestation in Indonesia". (CSERGE Working Papers ). Centre for Social and Economic Research on the Global Environment (CSERGE): London, UK. (2001). Retrieved 2022-03-28.
  38. ^ Marcus., Colchester (2006). Justice in the forest : rural livelihoods and forest law enforcement. Center for International Forestry Research. pp. 33–37. ISBN 979-24-4618-4. OCLC 503000680.
  39. ^ "Sustaining Forests and Livelihoods in a Changing World". World Bank. Retrieved 2021-12-09.
  40. ^ "Forests and poverty reduction". www.fao.org. Retrieved 2021-12-09.
  41. ^ Organization., Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. International Tropical Timber (2005). Best practices for improving law compliance in the forestry sector. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. ISBN 92-5-105381-2. OCLC 62593354.
  42. ^ "Rationalizing the policy and legal environment". Best practices for improving law compliance in the forest sector. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 2005. ISBN 92-5-105381-2.
  43. ^ Kistenkas, Frederik Hendrik, Concurring regulation in European forest law. Forest certification and the new EU Timber Regulation, GAiA 22/3 (2013): 166-168.
  44. ^ Cross-sectoral Policy Impacts Between Forestry and Other Sectors, Part 1. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 2003. p. 39.
  45. ^ Dube, Yves C.; Schmithüsen, Franz, eds. (2003). Cross-sectoral Policy Impacts Between Forestry and Other Sectors. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. p. 39.

Wildlife and plants

Wildlife laws govern the potential impact of human activity on wild animals, whether directly on individuals or populations, or indirectly via habitat degradation. Similar laws may operate to protect plant species. Such laws may be enacted entirely to protect biodiversity, or as a means for protecting species deemed important for other reasons. Regulatory efforts may including the creation of special conservation statuses, prohibitions on killing, harming, or disturbing protected species, efforts to induce and support species recovery, establishment of wildlife refuges to support conservation, and prohibitions on trafficking in species or animal parts to combat poaching.

Fish and game

Main article: Game law
Further information: Fisheries law

Fish and game laws regulate the right to pursue and take or kill certain kinds of fish and wild animal (game). Such laws may restrict the days to harvest fish or game, the number of animals caught per person, the species harvested, or the weapons or fishing gear used. Such laws may seek to balance dueling needs for preservation and harvest and to manage both environment and populations of fish and game. Game laws can provide a legal structure to collect license fees and other money which is used to fund conservation efforts as well as to obtain harvest information used in wildlife management practice.

Principles

Environmental law has developed in response to emerging awareness of and concern over issues impacting the entire world. While laws have developed piecemeal and for a variety of reasons, some effort has gone into identifying key concepts and guiding principles common to environmental law as a whole.[1] The principles discussed below are not an exhaustive list and are not universally recognized or accepted. Nonetheless, they represent important principles for the understanding of environmental law around the world.

Sustainable development

Main article: Sustainable development

Defined by the United Nations Environment Programme as "development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs," sustainable development may be considered together with the concepts of "integration" (development cannot be considered in isolation from sustainability) and "interdependence" (social and economic development, and environmental protection, are interdependent).[2] Laws mandating environmental impact assessment and requiring or encouraging development to minimize environmental impacts may be assessed against this principle.

The modern concept of sustainable development was a topic of discussion at the 1972 United Nations Conference on the Human Environment (Stockholm Conference), and the driving force behind the 1983 World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED, or Bruntland Commission). In 1992, the first UN Earth Summit resulted in the Rio Declaration, Principle 3 of which reads: "The right to development must be fulfilled so as to equitably meet developmental and environmental needs of present and future generations." Sustainable development has been a core concept of international environmental discussion ever since, including at the World Summit on Sustainable Development (Earth Summit 2002), and the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Earth Summit 2012, or Rio+20).

Equity

Further information: Intergenerational equity

Defined by UNEP to include intergenerational equity - "the right of future generations to enjoy a fair level of the common patrimony" - and intragenerational equity - "the right of all people within the current generation to fair access to the current generation's entitlement to the Earth's natural resources" - environmental equity considers the present generation under an obligation to account for long-term impacts of activities, and to act to sustain the global environment and resource base for future generations.[3] Pollution control and resource management laws may be assessed against this principle.

Transboundary responsibility

Defined in the international law context as an obligation to protect one's own environment, and to prevent damage to neighboring environments, UNEP considers transboundary responsibility at the international level as a potential limitation on the rights of the sovereign state.[4] Laws that act to limit externalities imposed upon human health and the environment may be assessed against this principle.

Public participation and transparency

Identified as essential conditions for "accountable governments,... industrial concerns," and organizations generally, public participation and transparency are presented by UNEP as requiring "effective protection of the human right to hold and express opinions and to seek, receive and impart ideas,... a right of access to appropriate, comprehensible and timely information held by governments and industrial concerns on economic and social policies regarding the sustainable use of natural resources and the protection of the environment, without imposing undue financial burdens upon the applicants and with adequate protection of privacy and business confidentiality," and "effective judicial and administrative proceedings." These principles are present in environmental impact assessment, laws requiring publication and access to relevant environmental data, and administrative procedure.

Precautionary principle

Main article: Precautionary principle

One of the most commonly encountered and controversial principles of environmental law, the Rio Declaration formulated the precautionary principle as follows:

In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely applied by States according to their capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.

The principle may play a role in any debate over the need for environmental regulation.

Prevention

The concept of prevention . . . can perhaps better be considered an overarching aim that gives rise to a multitude of legal mechanisms, including prior assessment of environmental harm, licensing or authorization that set out the conditions for operation and the consequences for violation of the conditions, as well as the adoption of strategies and policies. Emission limits and other product or process standards, the use of best available techniques and similar techniques can all be seen as applications of the concept of prevention.[5]

Polluter pays principle

Main article: Polluter pays principle

The polluter pays principle stands for the idea that "the environmental costs of economic activities, including the cost of preventing potential harm, should be internalized rather than imposed upon society at large."[6] All issues related to responsibility for cost for environmental remediation and compliance with pollution control regulations involve this principle.

Theory

Environmental law is a continuing source of controversy. Debates over the necessity, fairness, and cost of environmental regulation are ongoing, as well as regarding the appropriateness of regulations vs. market solutions to achieve even agreed-upon ends.

Allegations of scientific uncertainty fuel the ongoing debate over greenhouse gas regulation, and are a major factor in debates over whether to ban particular pesticides.[7] In cases where the science is well-settled, it is not unusual to find that corporations intentionally hide or distort the facts, or sow confusion.[8]

It is very common for regulated industry to argue against environmental regulation on the basis of cost.[9] Difficulties arise in performing cost-benefit analysis of environmental issues. It is difficult to quantify the value of an environmental value such as a healthy ecosystem, clean air, or species diversity. Many environmentalists' response to pitting economy vs. ecology is summed up by former Senator and founder of Earth Day Gaylord Nelson, "The economy is a wholly owned subsidiary of the environment, not the other way around."[10] Furthermore, environmental issues are seen by many as having an ethical or moral dimension, which would transcend financial cost. Even so, there are some efforts underway to systemically recognize environmental costs and assets, and account for them properly in economic terms.

While affected industries spark controversy in fighting regulation, there are also many environmentalists and public interest groups who believe that current regulations are inadequate, and advocate for stronger protection.[11][12][13] Environmental law conferences - such as the annual Public Interest Environmental Law Conference in Eugene, Oregon - typically have this focus, also connecting environmental law with class, race, and other issues.

An additional debate is to what extent environmental laws are fair to all regulated parties. For instance, researchers Preston Teeter and Jorgen Sandberg highlight how smaller organizations can often incur disproportionately larger costs as a result of environmental regulations, which can ultimately create an additional barrier to entry for new firms, thus stifling competition and innovation.[14]

International environmental law

See also: List of international environmental agreements
Further information: Environmental protocol

Global and regional environmental issues are increasingly the subject of international law. Debates over environmental concerns implicate core principles of international law and have been the subject of numerous international agreements and declarations.

Customary international law is an important source of international environmental law. These are the norms and rules that countries follow as a matter of custom and they are so prevalent that they bind all states in the world. When a principle becomes customary law is not clear cut and many arguments are put forward by states not wishing to be bound. Examples of customary international law relevant to the environment include the duty to warn other states promptly about icons of an environmental nature and environmental damages to which another state or states may be exposed, and Principle 21 of the Stockholm Declaration ('good neighbourliness' or sic utere).

Numerous legally binding international agreements encompass a wide variety of issue-areas, from terrestrial, marine and atmospheric pollution through to wildlife and biodiversity protection. International environmental agreements are generally multilateral (or sometimes bilateral) treaties (a.k.a. convention, agreement, protocol, etc.). Protocols are subsidiary agreements built from a primary treaty. They exist in many areas of international law but are especially useful in the environmental field, where they may be used to regularly incorporate recent scientific knowledge. They also permit countries to reach agreement on a framework that would be contentious if every detail were to be agreed upon in advance. The most widely known protocol in international environmental law is the Kyoto Protocol, which followed from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

While the bodies that proposed, argued, agreed upon and ultimately adopted existing international agreements vary according to each agreement, certain conferences, including 1972's United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, 1983's World Commission on Environment and Development, 1992's United Nations Conference on Environment and Development and 2002's World Summit on Sustainable Development have been particularly important. Multilateral environmental agreements sometimes create an International Organization, Institution or Body responsible for implementing the agreement. Major examples are the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN).

International environmental law also includes the opinions of international courts and tribunals. While there are few and they have limited authority, the decisions carry much weight with legal commentators and are quite influential on the development of international environmental law. One of the biggest challenges in international decisions is to determine an adequate compensation for environmental damages.[15] The courts include the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the international Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), the European Court of Justice, European Court of Human Rights[16] and other regional treaty tribunals.

Around the world

See also: List of environmental laws by country and List of international environmental agreements

Africa

According to the International Network for Environmental Compliance and Enforcement (INECE), the major environmental issues in Africa are “drought and flooding, air pollution, deforestation, loss of biodiversity, freshwater availability, degradation of soil and vegetation, and widespread poverty.” [17] The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is focused on the “growing urban and industrial pollution, water quality, electronic waste and indoor air from cookstoves.” [18] They hope to provide enough aid on concerns regarding pollution before their impacts contaminate the African environment as well as the global environment. By doing so, they intend to “protect human health, particularly vulnerable populations such as children and the poor.” [18] In order to accomplish these goals in Africa, EPA programs are focused on strengthening the ability to enforce environmental laws as well as public compliance to them. Other programs work on developing stronger environmental laws, regulations, and standards.[18]

Asia

The Asian Environmental Compliance and Enforcement Network (AECEN) is an agreement between 16 Asian countries dedicated to improving cooperation with environmental laws in Asia. These countries include Cambodia, China, Indonesia, India, Maldives, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Nepal, Philippines, Pakistan, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Vietnam, and Lao PDR.[19]

European Union

The European Union issues secondary legislation on environmental issues that are valid throughout the EU (so called regulations) and many directives that must be implemented into national legislation from the 28 member states (national states). Examples are the Regulation (EC) No. 338/97 on the implementation of CITES; or the Natura 2000 network the centerpiece for nature & biodiversity policy, encompassing the bird Directive (79/409/EEC/ changed to 2009/147/EC)and the habitats directive (92/43/EEC). Which are made up of multiple SACs (Special Areas of Conservation, linked to the habitats directive) & SPAs (Special Protected Areas, linked to the bird directive), throughout Europe.

EU legislation is ruled in Article 249 Treaty for the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). Topics for common EU legislation are:

Middle East

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is working with countries in the Middle East to improve “environmental governance, water pollution and water security, clean fuels and vehicles, public participation, and pollution prevention.”[20]

Oceania

The main concerns on environmental issues in the Oceanic Region are “illegal releases of air and water pollutants, illegal logging/timber trade, illegal shipment of hazardous wastes, including e-waste and ships slated for destruction, and insufficient institutional structure/lack of enforcement capacity”.[21] The Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environmental Programme (SPREP)[22] is an international organization between Australia, the Cook Islands, FMS, Fiji, France, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Nauru, New Zealand, Niue, Palau, PNG, Samoa, Solomon Island, Tonga, Tuvalu, USA, and Vanuatu. The SPREP was established in order to provide assistance in improving and protecting the environment as well as assure sustainable development for future generations.[23][24]

Australia

The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 is the center piece of environmental legislation in the Australian Government. It sets up the “legal framework to protect and manage nationally and internationally important flora, fauna, ecological communities and heritage places”.[25] It also focuses on protecting world heritage properties, national heritage properties, wetlands of international importance, nationally threatened species and ecological communities, migratory species, Commonwealth marine areas, Great Barrier Reef Marine Park, and the environment surrounding nuclear activities.[25] Commonwealth v Tasmania (1983), also known as the "Tasmanian Dam Case", is the most influential case for Australian environmental law.[26]

Brazil

The Brazilian government created the Ministry of Environment in 1992 in order to develop better strategies of protecting the environment, use natural resources sustainably, and enforce public environmental policies. The Ministry of Environment has authority over policies involving environment, water resources, preservation, and environmental programs involving the Amazon.[27]

Canada

The Department of the Environment Act establishes the Department of the Environment in the Canadian government as well as the position Minister of the Environment. Their duties include “the preservation and enhancement of the quality of the natural environment, including water, air and soil quality; renewable resources, including migratory birds and other non-domestic flora and fauna; water; meteorology;"[28] The Environmental Protection Act is the main piece of Canadian environmental legislation that was put into place March 31, 2000. The Act focuses on “respecting pollution prevention and the protection of the environment and human health in order to contribute to sustainable development."[29] Other principle federal statutes include the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, and the Species at Risk Act. When provincial and federal legislation are in conflict federal legislation takes precedence, that being said individual provinces can have their own legislation such as Ontario's Environmental Bill of Rights, and Clean Water Act.[30]

China

See also: Ministry of Environmental Protection of the People's Republic of China

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "China has been working with great determination in recent years to develop, implement, and enforce a solid environmental law framework. Chinese officials face critical challenges in effectively implementing the laws, clarifying the roles of their national and provincial governments, and strengthening the operation of their legal system."[31] Explosive economic and industrial growth in China has led to significant environmental degradation, and China is currently in the process of developing more stringent legal controls.[32] The harmonization of Chinese society and the natural environment is billed as a rising policy priority.[33][34][35]

Ecuador

With the enactment of the 2008 Constitution, Ecuador became the first country in the world to codify the Rights of Nature. The Constitution, specifically Articles 10 and 71–74, recognizes the inalienable rights of ecosystems to exist and flourish, gives people the authority to petition on the behalf of ecosystems, and requires the government to remedy violations of these rights. The rights approach is a break away from traditional environmental regulatory systems, which regard nature as property and legalize and manage degradation of the environment rather than prevent it.[36]

The Rights of Nature articles in Ecuador's constitution are part of a reaction to a combination of political, economic, and social phenomena. Ecuador's abusive past with the oil industry, most famously the class-action litigation against Chevron, and the failure of an extraction-based economy and neoliberal reforms to bring economic prosperity to the region has resulted in the election of a New Leftist regime, led by President Rafael Correa, and sparked a demand for new approaches to development. In conjunction with this need, the principle of "Buen Vivir," or good living—focused on social, environmental and spiritual wealth versus material wealth—gained popularity among citizens and was incorporated into the new constitution.[37]

The influence of indigenous groups, from whom the concept of "Buen Vivir" originates, in the forming of the constitutional ideals also facilitated the incorporation of the Rights of Nature as a basic tenet of their culture and conceptualization of "Buen Vivir." [38]

Egypt

The Environmental Protection Law outlines the responsibilities of the Egyptian government to “preparation of draft legislation and decrees pertinent to environmental management, collection of data both nationally and internationally on the state of the environment, preparation of periodical reports and studies on the state of the environment, formulation of the national plan and its projects, preparation of environmental profiles for new and urban areas, and setting of standards to be used in planning for their development, and preparation of an annual report on the state of the environment to be prepared to the President."[39]

India

Main article: Indian environmental law

In India, Environmental law is governed by the Environment Protection Act, 1986.[40] This act is enforced by the Central Pollution Control Board and the numerous State Pollution Control Boards. Apart from this, there are also individual legislations specifically enacted for the protection of Water, Air, Wildlife, etc. Such legislations include :-

  • The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974
  • The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess Act, 1977
  • The Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980
  • The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981
  • Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) (Union Territories) Rules, 1983
  • The Biological Diversity Act, 2002 and the Wild Life Protection Act, 1972
  • Batteries (Management and Handling) Rules, 2001
  • Recycled Plastics, Plastics Manufacture and Usage Rules, 1999
  • The National Green Tribunal established under the National Green Tribunal Act of 2010[41] has jurisdiction over all environmental cases dealing with a substantial environmental question and acts covered under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974.
  • Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess Rules, 1978
  • Ganga Action Plan, 1986
  • The Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980
  • Wildlife protection Act, 1972
  • The Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991 and the Biological Diversity Act, 2002. The acts covered under Indian Wild Life Protection Act 1972 do not fall within the jurisdiction of the National Green Tribunal.[42] Appeals can be filed in the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.[43]
  • Basel Convention on Control of TransboundaryMovements on Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal, 1989 and Its Protocols
  • Hazardous Wastes (Management and Handling) Amendment Rules, 2003[44]

Japan

The Basic Environmental Law is the basic structure of Japan's environmental policies replacing the Basic Law for Environmental Pollution Control and the Nature Conservation Law. The updated law aims to address “global environmental problems, urban pollution by everyday life, loss of accessible natural environment in urban areas and degrading environmental protection capacity in forests and farmlands.”[45]

The three basic environmental principles that the Basic Environmental Law follows are “the blessings of the environment should be enjoyed by the present generation and succeeded to the future generations, a sustainable society should be created where environmental loads by human activities are minimized, and Japan should contribute actively to global environmental conservation through international cooperation.”[45] From these principles, the Japanese government have established policies such as “environmental consideration in policy formulation, establishment of the Basic Environment Plan which describes the directions of long-term environmental policy, environmental impact assessment for development projects, economic measures to encourage activities for reducing environmental load, improvement of social infrastructure such as sewerage system, transport facilities etc., promotion of environmental activities by corporations, citizens and NGOs, environmental education, and provision of information, promotion of science and technology."[45]

New Zealand

Main article: New Zealand environmental law

The Ministry for the Environment and Office of the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment were established by the Environment Act 1986. These positions are responsible for advising the Minister on all areas of environmental legislation. A common theme of New Zealand's environmental legislation is sustainably managing natural and physical resources, fisheries, and forests. The Resource Management Act 1991 is the main piece of environmental legislation that outlines the government's strategy to managing the “environment, including air, water soil, biodiversity, the coastal environment, noise, subdivision, and land use planning in general.”[46]

Russia

The Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment of the Russian Federation makes regulation regarding “conservation of natural resources, including the subsoil, water bodies, forests located in designated conservation areas, fauna and their habitat, in the field of hunting, hydrometeorology and related areas, environmental monitoring and pollution control, including radiation monitoring and control, and functions of public environmental policy making and implementation and statutory regulation."[47]

South Africa

Main article: South African environmental law

United Kingdom

Main article: UK environmental law

United States

Main article: United States environmental law

Vietnam

Vietnam is currently working with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on dioxin remediation and technical assistance in order to lower methane emissions. In March 2002, the U.S and Vietnam signed the U.S.-Vietnam Memorandum of Understanding on Research on Human Health and the Environmental Effects of Agent Orange/Dioxin.[48]

See also

Notes

  1. ^ For example, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) has identified eleven "emerging principles and concepts" in international environmental law, derived from the 1972 Stockholm Conference, the 1992 Rio Declaration, and more recent developments. UNEP, Training Manual on International Environmental Law (Chapter 3).
  2. ^ UNEP Manual, ¶¶ 12-19.
  3. ^ UNEP Manual, ¶¶ 20-23.
  4. ^ UNEP Manual, ¶¶ 24-28.
  5. ^ UNEP Manual, ¶¶ 58.
  6. ^ Rio Declaration Principle 16; UNEP Manual ¶ 63.
  7. ^ See, e.g., DDT.
  8. ^ The Christian Science Monitor (22 June 2010). "Merchants of Doubt". The Christian Science Monitor.
  9. ^ In the United States, estimates of environmental regulation total costs reach 2% of GDP. See Pizer & Kopp, Calculating the Costs of Environmental Regulation, 1 (2003 Resources for the Future) Archived 2009-03-26 at the Wayback Machine.
  10. ^ Nelson, Gaylord (November 2002). Beyond Earth Day: Fulfilling the Promise. Wisconsin Press. ISBN 978-0-299-18040-9. Retrieved 2016-03-14.
  11. ^ "Can the World Really Set Aside Half of the Planet for Wildlife?". Smithsonian.
  12. ^ "Climate Coalition Vows 'Peaceful, Escalated' Actions Until 'We Break Free from Fossil Fuels'". Common Dreams.
  13. ^ "A Guide to Environmental Non-Profits". Mother Jones.
  14. ^ Teeter, Preston; Sandberg, Jorgen (2016). "Constraining or Enabling Green Capability Development? How Policy Uncertainty Affects Organizational Responses to Flexible Environmental Regulations" (PDF). British Journal of Management. 28 (4): 649–665. doi:10.1111/1467-8551.12188.
  15. ^ Hardman Reis, T., Compensation for Environmental Damages Under International Law, Kluwer Law International, The Hague, 2011, ISBN 978-90-411-3437-0.
  16. ^ "ECtHR case-law factsheet on environment" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2012-11-10. Retrieved 2012-11-08.
  17. ^ "INECE Regions- Africa". Archived from the original on 20 August 2002. Retrieved 18 October 2012.
  18. ^ a b c "Africa International Programs". Environmental Protection Agency. Retrieved October 18, 2012.
  19. ^ "AECEN". www.aecen.org. Archived from the original on 2015-09-06. Retrieved 2015-08-27.
  20. ^ "EPA Middle East". Environmental Protection Agency. Retrieved 23 October 2012.
  21. ^ "INECE Regions - Asia and the Pacific". Archived from the original on December 17, 2002. Retrieved October 18, 2012.
  22. ^ Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environmental Programme (SPREP)
  23. ^ "Agreement Establishing SPREP". Archived from the original on 2012-10-25. Retrieved October 18, 2012.
  24. ^ Taylor, Prue; Stroud, Lucy; Peteru, Clark (2013). Multilateral Environmental Agreement Negotiator's Handbook: Pacific Region 2013 (PDF). Samoa / New Zealand: Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme / New Zealand Centre for Environmental Law, University of Auckland. ISBN 978-982-04-0475-5.
  25. ^ a b "EPBC Act". Retrieved October 18, 2012.
  26. ^ Commonwealth v Tasmania (1983) 158 CLR 1 (1 July 1983)
  27. ^ "Apresentação". Retrieved 23 October 2012.
  28. ^ "Department of the Environment Act". 31 December 2002. Retrieved 23 October 2012.
  29. ^ "Environment Canada". 2007-01-09. Retrieved 23 October 2012.
  30. ^ See Canada's Legal System Overview Archived 2017-08-22 at the Wayback Machine.
  31. ^ EPA, China Environmental Law Initiative.
  32. ^ Vermont Law School, China Partnership for Environmental Law Archived 2012-07-20 at the Wayback Machine; C. McElwee, Environmental Law in China: Mitigating Risk and Ensuring Compliance.
  33. ^ NRDC, Environmental Law in China.
  34. ^ Wang, Alex (2013). "The Search for Sustainable Legitimacy: Environmental Law and Bureaucracy in China". Harvard Environmental Law Review. 37: 365. SSRN 2128167.
  35. ^ Rachel E. Stern, Environmental Litigation in China: A Study in Political Ambivalence (Cambridge University Press 2013)
  36. ^ "CELDF | Community Rights Pioneers | Protecting Nature and Communities". CELDF. Retrieved 2019-10-23.
  37. ^ Gudynas, Eduardo. 2011. Buen Vivir: Today's Tomorrow Development 54(4):441-447.
  38. ^ Becker, Marc. 2011 Correa, Indigenous Movements, and the Writing of a New Constitution in Ecuador. Latin American Perspectives 38(1):47-62.
  39. ^ "Law 4". Retrieved 23 October 2012.
  40. ^ "THE ENVIRONMENT (PROTECTION) ACT, 1986". envfor.nic.in. Archived from the original on 2002-06-13. Retrieved 2015-08-27.
  41. ^ "Archived copy" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2013-08-10. Retrieved 2014-05-27.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  42. ^ "THE INDIAN WILDLIFE (PROTECTION) ACT, 1972". envfor.nic.in. Retrieved 2015-08-27.
  43. ^ Rhuks Temitope, "THE JUDICIAL RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT OF THE RIGHT TO ENVIRONMENT:DIFFERING PERSPECTIVES FROM NIGERIA AND INDIA", NUJS LAW REVIEW,March 11, 2020
  44. ^ Surendra Malik, Sudeep Malik. Supreme Court on Environment Law (2015 ed.). India: EBC. ISBN 9789351451914.
  45. ^ a b c "The Basic Environment Law". Retrieved 23 October 2012.
  46. ^ "Ministry for the Environment". Archived from the original on 30 November 2012. Retrieved 23 October 2012.
  47. ^ "Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment of the Russian Federation". Retrieved 27 June 2015.
  48. ^ "Vietnam International Programs". Environmental Protection Agency. Retrieved October 18, 2012.

References

  • Akhatov, Aydar (1996). Ecology & International Law. Moscow: АST-PRESS. 512 pp. ISBN 5-214-00225-4 (in English and Russian)
  • Bimal N. Patel, ed. (2015). MCQ on Environmental Law. ISBN 9789351452454
  • Farber & Carlson, eds. (2013). Cases and Materials on Environmental Law, 9th. West Academic Publishing. 1008 pp. ISBN 978-0314283986.
  • Faure, Michael, and Niels Philipsen, eds. (2014). Environmental Law & European Law. The Hague: Eleven International Publishing. 142 pp. ISBN 9789462360754 (in English)
  • Malik, Surender & Sudeep Malik, eds. (2015). Supreme Court on Environment Law. ISBN 9789351451914
  • Martin, Paul & Amanda Kennedy, eds. (2015). Implementing Environmental Law. Edward Elgar Publishing

Further reading

External links

International
United States
Canada
European Union
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Environmental_law&oldid=962157448"