Global Environmental Harm, Internal Frontiers and Indigenous Protective Ontologies

2018 ◽  
pp. 302-317 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ajay Parasram ◽  
Lisa Tilley
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Harm ◽  
Global Environmental

scholarly journals The Governance of Transnational Environmental Harm: Addressing New Modes of Accountability/Responsibility

2008 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 8-24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Mason
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Degradation ◽  
Environmental Governance ◽  
Environmental Politics ◽  
Environmental Harm ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
Global Environmental Politics ◽  
Private Authority ◽  
Global Environmental ◽  
Introductory Paper

Transboundary and global environmental harm present substantial challenges to state-centered (territorial) modalities of accountability and responsibility. The globalization of environmental degradation has triggered regulatory responses at various jurisdictional scales. These governance efforts, featuring various articulations of state and/or private authority, have struggled to address so-called “accountability deficits” in global environmental politics. Yet, it has also become clear that accountability and responsibility norms forged in domestic regulatory contexts cannot simply be transposed across borders. This special issue explores various conceptual perspectives on accountability and responsibility for transnational harm, and examines their application to different actor groups and environmental governance regimes. This introductory paper provides an overview of the major theoretical positions and examines some of the analytical challenges raised by the transnational (re)scaling of accountability and responsibility norms.

Part III Conceptual Pillars, Ch.18 Precaution

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peel Jacqueline
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Environmental Harm ◽  
Environmental Damage ◽  
International Environmental Law ◽  
Global Environmental ◽  
Anticipatory Action ◽  
International Environmental Treaties

This chapter describes the concept of precaution in international environmental law, which concerns anticipatory action in response to scientifically uncertain threats of environmental harm. Its most frequently referenced formulation can be found in Principle 15 of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development. The Rio Declaration's endorsement of precaution in Principle 15 introduced to international environmental law a new discourse over the appropriate evidentiary foundations of global environmental regulation. The chapter then focuses on four key questions (and attendant debates) regarding precaution that have been critical in understanding its role in international environmental law. These questions concern the meaning of precaution as a conceptual pillar of international environmental law; the legal status of precaution as a principle of international environmental law; the formulation and understanding of precaution evident from international environmental treaties and case law; and the consequences of applying precaution in decision-making concerning threats of environmental damage.

scholarly journals Global Environmental Warfare

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 411-422
Author(s):  
J. Marvin Herndon ◽  
Mark Whiteside
Keyword(s):  
Outer Space ◽  
Environmental Harm ◽  
Environmental Damage ◽  
Environmental Modification ◽  
International Treaty ◽  
Natural Processes ◽  
The Earth ◽  
Global Environmental ◽  
Sovereign Nations ◽  
Speak Up

Unlike traditional forms of warfare that cause environmental harm as collateral damage, today vast segments of biota-populations, including humans, are at risk from undeclared global environmental warfare, undertaken through deception and deceit, orchestrated by undisclosed perpetrators for undisclosed purposes. As we reveal here, the purported goal of preventing environmental warfare was the key to developing a means to co-opt sovereign nations into waging covert, highly destructive environmental warfare against their own citizens. The means involved deceiving leaders of sovereign nations into signing onto a deceptively-worded “Trojan horse” international treaty ostensibly to prohibit environmental warfare, but which specifically does not prohibit “peaceful” environmental modification where “environmental modification techniques” refers to any technique for changing – through the deliberate manipulation of natural processes – the dynamics, composition or structure of the Earth, including its biota, lithosphere, hydrosphere and atmosphere, or of outer space.” Moreover, that international treaty mandates contribution and co-operation in unspecified environmental modification, by unspecified entities, without specificity of risks to human and environmental health. Although “environmental modification techniques” are applied and conducted with secrecy and deception, the horrific environmental damage, ascertained by scientific forensic investigations and reviewed here, cannot possibly be considered “peaceful” but instead constitute global environmental warfare. Citizens everywhere must wake up, look up, speak up, and demand an end to this environmental warfare.

Global Environmental Constitutionalism

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
James R. May ◽  
Erin Daly
Keyword(s):  
Global Environmental
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document