The Relevance of International Law in the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Disasters

This chapter investigates why accidents are rarely construed as matters of security and considers the case for giving greater recognition to accidental insecurity in international law and politics. Accidents are far removed from the conventional conceptualization of security politics and yet represent a much bigger threat to most people’s lives than those most typical security concerns: war and terrorism. The average citizen of the world is actually far less threatened by military action from another State or a foreign non-State actor than they are in ways rarely labelled as matters of security. The chapter looks at transport accidents, structural accidents, workplace accidents, and personal accidents. Since the 1990s, both academic and ‘real world’ political discourse has increasingly granted security status to non-military issues in ‘widening’ and ‘deepening’ the agenda of international political priorities. However, security ‘wideners’ and even many human security advocates, while acknowledging that diseases, crime, environmental change, and natural disasters can sometimes be matters of security, are often still reluctant to grant this status to accidents. This reluctance seems to boil down to two objections: (i) there are no military or power politics dimensions inherent in accidents; (ii) accidents are not deliberate attacks on countries or people.

Download Full-text

Natural Disasters, Environment and Health: The Role Played by International Law and European Union Law in this Field

Environmental Health in International and EU Law ◽

10.4324/9780429354694-21 ◽

2019 ◽

pp. 335-347

Author(s):

María Isabel Torres Cazorla

Keyword(s):

European Union ◽

Natural Disasters ◽

International Law ◽

European Union Law ◽

Environment And Health

Download Full-text

Root Causes and International Law: Refugee Flows in the 1990's

Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights ◽

10.1177/016934419301100403 ◽

1993 ◽

Vol 11 (4) ◽

pp. 413-436

Author(s):

Geoff Gilbert

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Natural Disasters ◽

International Law ◽

Early Warning ◽

Human Rights Violations ◽

Legal Action ◽

Geneva Conventions ◽

Arms Trade ◽

Source State ◽

State Experience

This article calls for a change of approach with regard to dealing with the refugee flows seen in the 1980s and 1990s and focuses on tackling the root causes of such flows. As such, it represents a move away from considering refugees merely in relation to rights s/he might be accorded in the receiving state. Experience tells us that there are three major causes of refugee flows: gross human rights violations, wars and natural disasters. The paper seeks to examine ways to mitigate / prevent the gross human rights violations, wars and the effects of natural disasters which are the root causes of refugee flows. Some of this involves enforcement of pertinent laws ( e.g. Geneva Conventions of 1949), but may require non-legal action, such as trade penalties for violating states and a reduction in the arms trade. Furthermore, other steps include greater use of intervention and early warning mechanisms and imposing responsibility on the source state for causing the flow.

Download Full-text