scholarly journals Earth System Law for the Anthropocene

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (23) ◽  
pp. 6796 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kotzé
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Law ◽  
Ecological Crisis ◽  
Final Part ◽  
Earth System ◽  
International Environmental Law ◽  
Fit For Purpose

Law has failed to address the ever-deepening socio-ecological crisis of the Anthropocene. In the light of, and as a response to, law’s failures in this respect, this paper argues in support of developing a new legal paradigm for the Anthropocene epoch called Earth system law. It does so first by briefly describing the Anthropocene trope and the extent and dimensions of its socio-ecological crisis. The paper then specifically focuses on international environmental law as an example of how and why law has become incapable of, and inappropriate for, addressing this crisis, and for being unable to respond to the Anthropocene’s regulatory demands. By drawing on three Earth system-related regulatory implications of the Anthropocene trope (i.e., inclusivity, interdependencies and complexity), the final part of the paper makes out a case in support of reforming law and creating a new Earth system oriented legal paradigm that is fit for purpose in the Anthropocene epoch.

scholarly journals International Environmental Law’s Lack of Normative Ambition: an Opportunity for the Global Pact for the Environment?

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 213-236 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louis J. Kotzé
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Ecological Crisis ◽  
Ecological Sustainability ◽  
Earth System ◽  
International Environmental Law ◽  
System Integrity ◽  
Radical Critique ◽  
Rights Of Nature

This paper argues that international environmental law (iel) is not sufficiently ambitious to confront the Anthropocene’s socio-ecological crisis. The critique specifically focuses on iel’s lack of ambitious and “unmentionable” ecological norms such as rights of nature, Earth system integrity, and ecological sustainability that are not yet considered to be part of the corpus of iel, but that arguably should be in light of the prevailing and ever-deepening socio-ecological crisis. Assuming that the recent Global Pact for the Environment initiative and its accompanying United Nations-mandated report that assesses possible gaps in iel are indicative of the type of reforms we might expect of iel now and in future, the paper determines if and the extent to which the Global Pact initiative embraces ambitious norms and addresses iel’s “unmentionable” normative gaps. A secondary, but related, objective of the paper is to briefly respond to the recent view that any radical critique of the Global Pact initiative is either unfounded, unwarranted or undesirable.

scholarly journals A Global Environmental Constitution for the Anthropocene?

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louis Kotzé
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Regulatory Reform ◽  
Ecological Crisis ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
International Environmental Law ◽  
Global Environmental ◽  
The World ◽  
Un General Assembly

AbstractInternational environmental law (IEL) has been unable to respond effectively to the Anthropocene’s global socio-ecological crisis, which is critically existential and requires radical interventions and regulatory reform. This article explores the potential of the recent United Nations (UN)-backed initiative to adopt a Global Pact for the Environment as an opportunity to reform IEL. It does so by (i) reflecting on the Anthropocene’s demands for a constitutionalized form of IEL through the lens of global environmental constitutionalism; (ii) investigating the extent to which the Global Pact could contribute to such a vision; and (iii) suggesting ways in which to strengthen the constitutional potential of the Global Pact in this endeavour. To this end, the article revisits the World Charter for Nature of 1982, which seems to have slipped off the radar in academic as well as policy circles. A case is made for renewed support of the Charter – which already enjoys the backing of the majority of UN General Assembly member states, and which has constitutional qualities – to serve as a ‘best-practice’ example during the ensuing negotiation of the Global Pact.

Reflections on a decade of change in international environmental law

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 6-31
Author(s):  
Lavanya Rajamani ◽  
Jacqueline Peel
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Global Regulation ◽  
International Environmental Law ◽  
Law And Politics ◽  
Law And Policy ◽  
Emerging Trends ◽  
Fit For Purpose ◽  
Geopolitical Context

This article examines the profound ways in which international environmental law has evolved over the last decade in response to a shifting geopolitical context, as well as a better understanding of the possibilities and limits of global regulation to address complex, polycentric and intractable environmental harms. It identifies as emerging trends in the field the maturation of the customary norms and fundamental principles of international environmental law, in addition to changes in its modes of implementation and the actors involved in those processes. This article also highlights the increasing activity at the interface with other fields of law and policy that has expanded the sites at which international environmental law is made, applied and implemented. It concludes by asking whether this body of international law remains ‘fit for purpose’ as it seeks to adapt to constraints on its nature and operation imposed by the current architecture of international law and politics.

The 2017 Inter-American Court's Advisory Opinion: changing the paradigm for international environmental law in the Anthropocene

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 24-50
Author(s):  
Maria Antonia Tigre ◽  
Natalia Urzola
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Law ◽  
Ecological Crisis ◽  
Environmental Harm ◽  
Environmental Damage ◽  
Advisory Opinion ◽  
International Environmental Law ◽  
Healthy Environment ◽  
Environmental Diplomacy ◽  
Legal Arguments ◽  
Extraterritorial Jurisdiction

The state of our environment is continuously deteriorating, and the frame of the ‘Anthropocene’ calls for transformative laws that respond to the current socio-ecological crisis. Since environmental diplomacy has signally failed to respond to current challenges, courts are being confronted with crucial questions that fundamentally address whether existing legal tools are sufficient to ensure human survival. In 2017, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights issued a landmark Advisory Opinion that goes some way towards answering this question. The Advisory Opinion recognized extraterritorial jurisdiction for transboundary environmental harm; the autonomous right to a healthy environment; and State responsibility for environmental damage within and beyond the State's borders. This article analyzes the legal arguments constructed by the Court, assessing whether, and how, the Opinion changes paradigms of international environmental law.

scholarly journals The Anthropocentric Ontology of International Environmental Law and the Sustainable Development Goals: Towards an Ecocentric Rule of Law in the Anthropocene

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louis J. Kotzé ◽  
Duncan French
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Sustainable Development Goals ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Ecological Crisis ◽  
International Environmental Law ◽  
Human Environment ◽  
The Sustainable Development ◽  
Human Rights Abuses ◽  
Development Goals

In this article we argue that the Anthropocene’s deepening socio-ecological crisis amplifies demands on, and exposes the deficiencies of, our ailing regulatory institutions, including that of international environmental law (iel). Many of the perceived failures of iel have been attributed to the anthropocentric, as opposed to the ecocentric, ontology of this body of law. As a result of its anthropocentric orientation and the resultant deficiencies, iel is unable to halt the type of human behaviour that is causing the Anthropocene, while it exacerbates environmental destruction, gender and class inequalities, growing inter- and intra-species hierarchies, human rights abuses, and socio-economic and ecological injustices. These are the same types of concerns that the recently proclaimed Sustainable Development Goals (sdgs) set out to address. The sdgs are, however, themselves anthropocentric; an unfortunate situation which reinforces the anthropocentrism of iel and vice versa. Considering the anthropocentric genesis of iel and the broader sdgs framework, this article sets out to argue that the anthropocentrism inherent in the ontological orientation of iel and the sdgs risks exacerbating Anthropocene-like events, and a more ecocentric orientation for both is urgently required to enable a more ecocentric rule of law to better mediate the human-environment interface in the Anthropocene. Our point of departure is that respect for ecological limits is the only way in which humankind, acting as principal global agents of care, will be able to ensure a sustainable future for human and non-human constituents of the Earth community. Correspondingly, the rule of law must also come to reflect such imperatives.

New Dimensions of the Earth System Law

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
Louis J. Kotzé ◽  
Rakhyun E. Kim
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Law ◽  
Present Form ◽  
Earth System ◽  
New Paradigm ◽  
International Environmental Law ◽  
The Earth ◽  
Ecological Justice ◽  
Governance Challenges

It seems international environmental law cannot continue to exist in its present form for the purpose of the Anthropocene. Analytically, international environmental law and its lawyers appear not to fully understand and respond to the complex governance challenges arising from a complex Earth system. Thus, normatively, international environmental law seems to have failed to provide appropriate norms to prevent humans from encroaching on Earth system limits. In a transformative sense, international environmental law has not been sufficiently ambitious to achieve the type of radical transformations that may be necessary to ensure planetary integrity and socio-ecological justice. It calls for a new legal paradigm suitable for the purpose of the Anthropocene and could address international environmental law’s analytical, normative and transformative concerns. This new paradigm may be called the ‘Earth system law’. This chapter seeks to provide some preliminary thoughts about the analytical, normative, and transformative dimensions of earth system law could entail. Why they would be more appropriate for the purpose of governing a complex Earth system in the Anthropocene?

Exploring the Analytical, Normative and Transformative Dimensions of Earth System Law

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louis J. Kotzé ◽  
Rakhyun E. Kim
Keyword(s):  
Recent Work ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Present Form ◽  
Earth System ◽  
New Paradigm ◽  
International Environmental Law ◽  
Ecological Justice ◽  
Governance Challenges

In this article we argue that international environmental law cannot continue to exist in its present form for the purpose of the Anthropocene. We show that analytically, international environmental law and its lawyers are unable to fully understand and respond to the complex governance challenges arising from a complex Earth system. Normatively, international environmental law has failed to provide appropriate norms to prevent humans from encroaching on Earth system limits. In a transformative sense, international environmental law has not been sufficiently ambitious to achieve the type of radical transformations necessary to ensure planetary integrity and socio-ecological justice. We need a new legal paradigm that is better suited for the purpose of the Anthropocene that must address international environmental law’s analytical, normative and transformative concerns. We call this new paradigm earth system law. Building on our recent work, we offer here some preliminary thoughts about what we think the analytical, normative, and transformative dimensions of earth system law could and should entail, and why they would be more appropriate for the purpose of governing a complex Earth system in the Anthropocene.

scholarly journals Taming Gaia 2.0: Earth system law in the ruptured Anthropocene

2021 ◽  
pp. 205301962110267
Author(s):  
Rakhyun E Kim
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Law ◽  
Self Regulation ◽  
Active Role ◽  
Tipping Points ◽  
Self Awareness ◽  
Earth System ◽  
International Environmental Law ◽  
Planetary Scale ◽  
Earth System Governance ◽  
The Earth

If the Anthropocene is a rupture in planetary history, what does it mean for international environmental law? When the Earth System crosses irreversible tipping points and begins a forceful, nonlinear transformation into a hostile state which I call the ruptured Anthropocene, the concept of protecting the global environment from humans would lose its meaning. Not only the dichotomy between humans and nature becomes irrelevant, but the environment itself will no longer exist as an object for protection. I argue that, for international environmental law to stay relevant in the ruptured Anthropocene, it needs to shift away from its traditional focus on restoring the planetary past, and instead play an active role in the making of planetary futures. Its new purpose will need to be active planetary stewardship, whereby humans add self-awareness for deliberate self-regulation of the Earth System. Such an attempt at ‘taming’ the so-called Gaia 2.0 will, however, create winners and losers, and the new form of law will have to address fundamental questions of justice on a planetary scale. Building on the concept of earth system law emerging in the earth system governance literature, I draw the contours of international environmental law 2.0 for the ruptured Anthropocene and discuss the challenges of instituting active planetary stewardship.

International Environmental Law

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pierre-Marie Dupuy ◽  
Jorge E. Viñuales
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Law ◽  
International Environmental Law
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document