Prinsip Common But Differentiated Responsibility Dalam Pengelolaan Lingkungan Hidup, Sumber Daya Alam Dan  Hutan Tropis

AbstractThe common but differentiated responsibility is or will become an important principle of international environmental law, specifically related to the management of tropical rain forest. The issue at hand is how this principle is understood by developing states, which by its geographical position, is entrusted with the responbility to manage tropical rain forest. In this article the author traces the reason justifying the differentiation of (international) responsibilities and attempts to relate this (mis-) understanding of the principle to Indonesia’ s unwillingness or inability to manage its tropical rain forest.

Download Full-text

Cosmopolitan Justice, Responsibility, and Global Climate Change

Climate Ethics ◽

10.1093/oso/9780195399622.003.0016 ◽

2010 ◽

Author(s):

Simon Caney

Keyword(s):

Climate Change ◽

Global Climate Change ◽

Global Climate ◽

Environmental Law ◽

Human Life ◽

Political Life ◽

International Environmental Law ◽

Theory Of Justice ◽

Common But Differentiated Responsibility

. . . It’s exciting to have a real crisis on your hands when you have spent half your political life dealing with humdrum things like the environment. . . . The world’s climate is undergoing dramatic and rapid changes. Most notably, the earth has been becoming markedly warmer, and its weather has, in addition to this, become increasingly unpredictable. These changes have had, and continue to have, important consequences for human life. In this chapter, I wish to examine what is the fairest way of dealing with the burdens created by global climate change. Who should bear the burdens? Should it be those who caused the problem? Should it be those best able to deal with the problem? Or should it be someone else? I defend a distinctive cosmopolitan theory of justice, criticize a key principle of international environmental law, and, moreover, challenge the “common but differentiated responsibility” approach that is affirmed in current international environmental law. Before considering different answers to the question of who should pay for the costs of global climate change, it is essential to be aware of both the distinct kind of theoretical challenge that global climate change raises and also the effects that climate change is having on people’s lives. Section 1 thus introduces some preliminary methodological observations on normative theorizing about global climate change. In addition, it outlines some basic background scientific claims about the impacts of climate change. Section 2 examines one common way of thinking about the duty to bear the burdens caused by climate change, namely the doctrine that those who have caused the problem are responsible for bearing the burden. It argues that this doctrine, while in many ways appealing, is more problematic than might first appear and is also incomplete in a number of different ways (sections 3 through 8). In particular, it needs to be grounded in a more general theory of justice and rights.

Download Full-text

Formality and Informality

The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law ◽

10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199552153.013.0006 ◽

2008 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Stephen J. Toope

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

Common Core ◽

Environmental Law ◽

Soft Law ◽

International Environmental Law ◽

Central Focus ◽

Law And Politics ◽

The Common ◽

Contested Terrain ◽

No Man's Land

This article explores contested terrain in the no-man's land between international law and politics – the work of ‘norms’ in social, including legal, change. International environmental law has served as the crucible for much of the theoretical debate, and a central focus of this debate has been on the effectiveness of various types of formal norms and informal norms. The common core of the concept of ‘norm’ is that the desideratum contained in the norm is intended to influence human behaviour. Since norms operate in many different ways, they relate to the concepts of formality and informality differentially as well. Norms can be formal rules of law, but they can also be informal social guides to proper conduct. More surprisingly, they can be informal and precise as well as informal and vague; formal and precise as well as formal and vague. This article concludes by tying together the theoretical insights traced out earlier in the light of ‘soft law’ discourse in international environmental law.

Download Full-text

22. International Environmental Law

International Law ◽

10.1093/he/9780198791836.003.0022 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Catherine Redgwell

Keyword(s):

Environmental Law ◽

Pollution Abatement ◽

Significant Rise ◽

Environmental Benefits ◽

International Environmental Law ◽

Precautionary Approach ◽

Global Problems ◽

Climate Change Concern ◽

The Common ◽

Environmental Focus

The development of international environmental law is typically divided into three periods. The first demonstrates little genuine environmental awareness but rather views environmental benefits as incidental to largely economic concerns such as the exploitation of living natural resources. The second demonstrates a significant rise in the number of treaties directed to pollution abatement and to species and habitat conservation. Here an overt environmental focus is evident, yet the approach is still largely reactive and piecemeal. The final phase, which characterizes current international environmental law, demonstrates a precautionary approach to environmental problems of global magnitude such as biodiversity conservation and climate change. Concern transcends individual States, with certain global problems now considered the common concern of humankind. This chapter defines international environmental law, its key sources and actors, and difficulties of enforcement, before embarking on a sectoral examination of the extensive treaty law applicable in this field.

Download Full-text

International Relations Theory

The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law ◽

10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199552153.013.0010 ◽

2008 ◽

Author(s):

Kyle W. Danish

Keyword(s):

International Relations ◽

International Law ◽

Global Climate ◽

Environmental Law ◽

International Relations Theory ◽

Environmental Agreements ◽

Regime Theory ◽

International Environmental Law ◽

The Common ◽

Overall Effectiveness

Since the early 1990s, international rules and institutions related to international environmental law (IEL) have multiplied at an exponential rate. Yet there is little evidence that this escalation of law-making activity has had a proportional impact on the behaviour of states and other international actors. Environmental problems continue to grow more acute, and the challenge of establishing effective international responses to issues such as biodiversity and global climate change seem more difficult than ever. Environmental agreements appear to vary substantially in their rates of participation, compliance, and overall effectiveness. To gain new perspectives and insights into these and other questions, many in the IEL community have joined other international law scholars and practitioners in turning to international relations theory. This article reviews the major international relations theories and their relevance to, and impact upon, IEL. First, it examines realism and neo-realism, the rise of neo-liberal institutionalism and regime theory, neo-liberal institutionalism as a response to realism, liberalism and constructivism, legalisation and international relations theories, and the common IEL and international relations agenda (participation, form of commitment, compliance).

Download Full-text

International Environmental Law

10.1093/acrefore/9780190846626.013.229 ◽

2017 ◽

Author(s):

Chenaz B. Seelarbokus

Keyword(s):

Environmental Law ◽

International Environmental Agreements ◽

First Century ◽

Environmental Agreements ◽

International Treaties ◽

Environmental Cooperation ◽

International Environmental Law ◽

The Subject ◽

International Laws ◽

The Common

Over the course of the twenty-first century, international environmental cooperation has been spurred through various new international environmental institutions and programs, and a dramatic strengthening of international environmental law-making. With the burst of environmental treaty-making the corpus of international environmental law (IEL) has expanded to include significant international environmental agreements (IEAs) in the sphere of climate change, ozone layer depletion, biodiversity, and so on; as well as the recognition of important principles such as good neighborliness and the common heritage. IEAs function similarly to international treaties—indeed, the only difference between an IEA and other international treaties lies in the subject matter. IEAs function as the instrument for laying down the principles of international laws binding upon states was established by the 1815 Congress of Vienna. Over the years, IEAs have not simply increased in number, but have also undergone an evolution in their structural design. In the early 1930s, IEAs tended to be simple in terms of their requirements, vague in terms of their objectives, and utilitarian in their ethos for protecting the environment. With time, however, as environmental sciences evolved to incorporate new principles and concepts, the structure of IEAs has followed in tandem to incorporate the new understandings and the new concerns.

Download Full-text