scholarly journals Environmental Policy “Outside-In”: How the EU's Engagement with International Environmental Law Curtails National Autonomy

2012 ◽  
Vol 13 (11) ◽  
pp. 1151-1176 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christina Eckes
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Basic Assumption ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
International Environmental Law ◽  
Internal Set ◽  
Set Up ◽  
Complex Architecture ◽  
Organizational Principles ◽  
The Eu

The EU legal system, with its many hands and complex architecture, in which national and European powers are closely interwoven, requires a particular form of cooperation. This delicately developed cooperation may be influenced by the EU's ambition to take a statelike role in international relations. Indeed, the basic assumption underlying this Article is that it is not only the EU's complexity that influences the EU's external actions—usually seen as limiting the EU's capacity to speak with one voice—but also that the EU's external actions influence its internal set-up and cooperation practices. As a result of the EU's participation in international legal regimes, established organizational principles might come under pressure. Furthermore, within the complexity of the European legal order, the potential consequences could be more disturbing for stability than within the—monolithic, in comparison—structure of states.

Part VI Actors, Ch.40 Epistemic Communities

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haas Peter M
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Intellectual History ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Epistemic Community ◽  
Epistemic Communities ◽  
Causal Beliefs ◽  
International Environmental Law ◽  
History Of

This chapter begins with a definition and intellectual history of epistemic communities. ‘Epistemic communities’ is a concept developed by ‘soft’ constructivist scholars of international relations concerned with agency. Soft constructivists in general focus on the role of various types of norms, principled beliefs, causal beliefs, and discourses in establishing roles and rules in international relations: that is, determining the identities, interests, and practices that shape the identification of actors in international relations. The chapter then applies this definition to the study of international environmental law and discusses whether or not international lawyers constitute an epistemic community. It concludes with a discussion of some of the recent challenges to the influence of epistemic communities in world politics more broadly, and thus the future of international environmental law.

Part VI Actors, Ch.37 Regional Organizations the European Union

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maljean-Dubois Sandrine
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Environmental Policy ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
General Question ◽  
The European Union ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
International Environmental Law ◽  
Regional Organizations ◽  
Environmental Negotiations ◽  
The Eu

This chapter addresses the European Union (EU) as a preeminent example of a regional organization and its role in international environmental law. It first examines the progressive affirmation of EU competence in the environmental field and its development of a distinctive environmental policy. The chapter then turns to the external dimension of EU environmental competence, discussing the EU's participation in and enforcement of international environmental law, as well as the general question of whether the EU can be said to have an external environmental policy. The EU internal environmental policy expands on the international stage. Even if it lacks the internal structures and resources fully and effectively to assume a role as a global environmental leader, the EU participates in environmental negotiations, concludes and implements international treaties, and exercises its ‘soft power’ to promote the development and implementation of international environmental law. The chapter concludes with some brief reflections on other regional organizations and their distinctions from the largely sui generis EU example.

Compliance Theory

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronald B. Mitchell
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Environmental Changes ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
International Environmental Agreements ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
Environmental Agreements ◽  
International Environmental Law ◽  
Behavioural Changes ◽  
Induced Compliance ◽  
The Difference

International lawyers and legal scholars often assess the effects of international environmental agreements (IEAs) in terms of the extent to which states comply with their commitments. International relations scholars tend to examine IEA effects through a broader set of questions. They are concerned with any behavioural or environmental changes that can be attributed to an IEA – whether these changes involve compliance or not and regardless of whether these changes were desired, unintended, or even perverse. International relations scholars also focus on the reasons why states change their behaviour and what aspects, if any, of an IEA explain those behavioural changes. To see the difference between these approaches, consider four categories of behaviour: treaty-induced compliance, coincidental compliance, good faith non-compliance, and intentional non-compliance. This article reviews the theoretical terrain and shows that nominally ‘competing’ perspectives have different insights to offer those seeking to improve the practice of international environmental law.

Compliance Procedures

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Klabbers
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Environmental Protection ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
International Agreements ◽  
Ozone Layer ◽  
Montreal Protocol ◽  
International Environmental Law ◽  
Environmental Agreement ◽  
Set Up ◽  
Number Of Parties

The Montreal Protocol on Substances That Deplete the Ozone Layer was among the first international agreements in which a specific non-compliance procedure was envisaged, and it is generally held to be the most developed example to date. Non-compliance procedures have become rather prevalent in international environmental law. Allowing for variations across regimes, most mechanisms have at least one compliance committee, usually composed of representatives of a limited number of parties (eight to fifteen) to the underlying multilateral environmental agreement and reporting back to the plenary body set up by that agreement (often dubbed the conference of the parties or meeting of the parties). Compliance (or non-compliance) procedures are usually said to exist, and be necessary, in international environmental protection because the environment cannot, for a number of reasons, be entrusted to the workings of traditional international law.

The EU and Environmental Multilateralism: The Case of Access and Benefit-Sharing and the Need for a Good-Faith Test

2014 ◽  
Vol 16 ◽  
pp. 109-142
Author(s):  
Elisa Morgera
Keyword(s):  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Convention On Biological Diversity ◽  
International Environmental Law ◽  
Access And Benefit Sharing ◽  
Adoption And Implementation ◽  
Legal Principle ◽  
The Eu

AbstractThis chapter discusses the need for a good-faith test for assessing the legitimacy of ongoing and future EU initiatives aimed at contributing to the development and implementation of international environmental law. A test that is based on the international legal principle of good faith may serve to better understand when the EU is effectively supporting environmental multilateralism to the benefit of the international community, rather than seeking to unduly influence it purely for its own advantage. The test is developed mostly on the basis of EU efforts of contributing to climate change multilateralism, and is applied to a much less studied case: the adoption and implementation of the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and Benefit-sharing under the Convention on Biological Diversity.

Regulation of Nanomaterials in the EU: Proposed Measures to Fill in the Gap

2014 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 228-235 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Azoulay ◽  
Vito Buonsante
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
International Environmental Law ◽  
Eu Legislation ◽  
Hazard Risk ◽  
The Earth ◽  
The Eu

This report discusses a proposal fromthe Center for International Environmental Law(CIEL), ClientEarth and Friends of the Earth Germany (Bund) on the regulation of nanomaterials in the European Union. It discusses in particular, the proposal for a horizontal regulation on nanomaterials (also referred to as a nano-patch for existing legislation) that would fill in the regulatory gap on nanomaterials. The proposal goes beyond a review of the REACH text and encompasses all EU legislation relevant to nanomaterials. The proposed instrument would amend the REACH text with delimitation in scope to all areas relevant to nanomaterials (on the model of Regulation 1272/2008 on the classification, labelling and packaging of chemicals). The main aim of the regulation is to ensure that hazard, risk and exposure assessments for all forms and uses of such materials are adequately carried out and taken into consideration.

scholarly journals Some challenges of treaty regulation of international relations in the field of environmental protection

Lex Russica ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 45-59
Author(s):  
O. I. Ilyinskaya
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Environmental Protection ◽  
Heterogeneous System ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Rapid Progress ◽  
Environmental Standards ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
International Environmental Law ◽  
Framework Agreement ◽  
Spontaneous Formation

International agreements and treaties in the field of environmental protection concluded in the 19th — first half of the 20th century, were, as a rule, the result of forced compromises, they were intended to solve urgent problems that had appeared or, at least, drew attention to limited areas (for example, the threat to a certain species, pollution of a marine area). In such cases, a convention was adopted to protect an endangered species or to limit emissions into the sea. As a result of this fragmented approach to environmental protection, an impressive but very heterogeneous system of conventions has emerged. Understanding of the unity of ecosystems implemented in the development of principles enshrined in the Stockholm Declaration of 1972 and the Rio Declaration of 1992 took place largely due to the rapid progress of science and technology. As a result, there has been a transition from “spontaneous” formation of international environmental standards to their consolidation around special principles of international environmental law. Also, a notable feature of many international treaties in the field of environmental protection — their “framework” character — is further analyzed. The adoption of framework agreements leads to the formation of complex sets of conventional documents consisting of several different, but in a certain way related to each other agreements. Considering the question of the effectiveness of such a legal instrument as a framework agreement, the author concludes that the origins of the problem of insufficient effectiveness of agreements in the field of environmental protection lie in the foundations of the existing economic system.

Organizational Principles Under External Pressure

2019 ◽  
pp. 81-112
Author(s):  
Christina Eckes
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
External Pressure ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Democratic Legitimacy ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Economic Concept ◽  
External Relations ◽  
Union Action ◽  
Organizational Principles ◽  
The Eu

Chapter 3 identifies how the organizational principles of subsidiarity, primacy, and consistency are interpreted in the context of external relations. When Union action gives effect to international law, for example, this is portrayed by the EU institutions as amounting in certain circumstances to an assumption that the requirements of subsidiarity are met. Yet subsidiarity is regularly reduced to an economic concept focused on increasing ability to achieve a certain objective, that is, effectiveness. The chapter highlights the democratic legitimacy dimension of subsidiarity. It argues that, in particular, the principle of subsidiarity forms part of the bonding structures because it offers a formal legal opportunity to justify Union action and explicate that the Union is better placed to represent its citizens externally. With regard to primacy, Chapter 3 demonstrates that this principle is the necessary precondition for both the autonomy and effectiveness of the EU legal order. It explains how EU external relations may put primacy under pressure. It gives a glimpse of why national courts may rebel against the primacy of EU law because of this external pressure. Chapter 3 then turns to the principle of coherence. It argues that the Lisbon Treaty made a choice for coherence through ambiguity, which empowers the Court and contributes to the opaqueness of decision-making in the context of external relations. It argues that (perceived) coherence is a necessary precondition for bonding structures between the Union and EU citizens to realize their potential. Moreover, justifiability and hence legitimacy require a certain level of coherence and predictability.

scholarly journals The CETA ICS and the Autonomy of the EU Legal Order in Opinion 1/17 – A Compass for the Future

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-27
Author(s):  
Maria FANOU
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Green Light ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Court System ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Legal Context ◽  
The Eu

Abstract In April 2019, the Court of Justice of the EU (‘CJEU’) handed down its Opinion (C-1/17) on the compatibility of the Investment Court System (‘ICS’), that is the Investor-State Dispute Settlement (‘ISDS’) mechanism under the EU-Canada Comprehensive and Economic Trade Agreement (‘CETA’), with EU law. This article puts Opinion 1/17 in its broader (policy and legal) context, focusing on the salient issue of compatibility with the principle of autonomy of the EU legal order. It argues that the Court's openness to this judicial competitor was an acknowledgment of the need to maintain the powers of the Union in international relations. However, Opinion 1/17 should not be perceived as an automatic green light for any future investment court (such as the Multilateral Investment Court) as the autonomy test it introduces is a rather difficult one to pass.

Part IX International Environmental Law in National/Regional Courts, Ch.63 European Union/United Kingdom

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scotford Eloise
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Court System ◽  
The European Union ◽  
International Environmental Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

This chapter evaluates international environmental law (IEL) in the courts of the European Union (EU) and the United Kingdom. This topic potentially covers many different kinds of courts, considering that the EU comprises many member states, each with its own court system, and the United Kingdom itself is a system of devolved government with different court systems. To draw out some key themes, the chapter focuses on decisions of the EU courts and the UK courts in England and Wales, as well as particularly notable decisions of other EU member state courts (available in English). The different experiences of IEL in these three sets of courts demonstrate that the doctrines of different legal systems and their legal cultures are critical to the experiences of their courts in implementing IEL. The chapter examines the reception and application of IEL in these different courts in two steps. It first looks at cases in which IEL has been directly applied by courts, considering the complex EU law in this area, and the EU's special role in implementing IEL in member states. The chapter then addresses cases where IEL applies indirectly in judicial reasoning.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document