UNGA as the Anchor: Global Environmental Conferencing

The global environmental conferences convened by the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) during the last fifty years have contributed to the development of international environmental law and institution-building. Yet, given the deteriorating state of the global environment they are but one element of international environmental governance. While they were important to bring environmental issues to the attention of states, the time for agenda-setting seems over. Rather the international community must move on to the implementation of existing binding and non-binding rules and principles. While the UNGA continues to play an important role in the context of sustainable development and the Agenda 2030 process and is, indeed a stable platform for international cooperation on environmental issues, it seems that the time for comprehensive global environmental conferences may have come to an end, unless more innovative mechanisms for the implementation of international environmental law and policy are brought forward.

Looking Through Palme’s Vision for the Global Environment

Olof Palme, the former Prime Minister of Sweden, underlined the importance of a firm global response to the growing environmental crisis in his 06 June 1972 address to the first UN Conference on the Human Environment (UNCHE) held in Stockholm. He prophetically observed: “it is absolutely necessary that concerted, international action is undertaken … solutions will require far-reaching changes in attitudes and social structures”. Almost 50 years later, it is painfully clear that the necessary changes have not taken place and that time is now even more limited to make the necessary, far-reaching changes. How can the conclusions from the Stockholm Conference and ideas envisioned by Olof Palme can guide us into a better common greener future?

International Environmental Law-Making1

The article seeks to make a modest effort in making sense of the international environmental law-making process. It comprises the subtle normative process currently at work, including ‘global conferencing’ technique resorted to by the UN General Assembly, how it draws upon the basic legal underpinnings of international law, the unique treaty-making enterprise at work, and what this enormous legal churning process portends for the protection of the global environment at this critical time of perplexity in the Anthropocene epoch. It calls for taking serious cognizance of mass destruction of plant and animal species, heavy pollution of fresh water resources, choking of the oceans with plastic and other litter, and alteration of the atmosphere, among other lasting impacts that imperil our only abode Earth. International environmental law-making process is ad hoc and piecemeal and is generally understood to be the product of a lack of a single, central specialized institution having expertise on the subject, scientific uncertainty on many environmental issues, and the hard-headed economic interests of sovereign states. Still, the international environmental law-making process with its inherent resilience could possibly be able to adapt to the vagaries of scientific assessments and the political realities of in the future.

Soil Protection and the Right to Food for a Better Common Future

This article examines – from an international law perspective – the interface between soil protection, land degradation neutrality, food security, climate governance and trade in agriculture. Although these different spheres are most often viewed in isolation, an attempt is made to analyse them more holistically with the aim of identifying the connectedness for the purpose of finding some strategies for a better common future.

Protecting the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict

Armed conflicts have direct and indirect impacts on the natural environment, and climate risks now magnify this harm for dependent communities. Too often, the natural environment is directly attacked or suffers incidental damage as a result of the use of certain methods or means of warfare. It is also at risk from damage and destruction to the built environment, across urban and rural areas. To reduce this harm, parties to armed conflict can integrate legal protections for the environment into their armed forces’ doctrine to reduce damage as they fight. Humanitarians in turn must commit sufficient resources and expertise to respond to the needs of those coping with the environmental consequences of conflict, and limit their own climate and environmental footprint. In order to address this challenge, in November 2020 the ICRC released the Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict which aim to contribute in a practical way to promoting respect for and protection of this precious asset during armed conflicts.

Time for a Protocol on Transnational Environmental Crime?

Environmental law became global through the adoption of environmental treaties in the last quarter decade of the 20th century. Similarly, globalisation of criminal law accelerated when the Convention on Transnational Organised Crime 2000 (CTOC) deepened international legal cooperation between States to combat transnational crime. A protocol to the CTOC, complemented by voluntary guidelines and model legislation, could promote international harmonisation of laws against environmental crimes. This article argues that the time is right to bring together certain elements of international environmental and transnational criminal law.

A UN Specialized Agency for the Environment

The issue, international organization for the protection of the environment perhaps more than those in any other area of international law, is characterized by the contestation of the policies and aspirations of developing and industrialized countries. The discussions which preceded the 1972 Stockholm Conference concerned partly the type of international institutional arrangement required for addressing the environmental problems. As regards the institutional reforms with respect to international environmental governance (IEG), the main question is whether to focus on the existing global institution, i.e. UNEP, or to create a new functional international organization. After almost five decades of existence, turning UNEP into a ‘specialized agency’ within the UN system is a reasonable move. It would meet the long-felt need to elevate its status and equip it with the necessary competence and financial stability for the demanding task it should have as an efficient global environmental organization.

Climate Law and Its Skeptics: Whither Protection of the Atmosphere?

‘Climate change law’ is considered by a number of legal scholars as an emergent novel discipline. The question, then, is whether the advent (and future prospect) of climate change has resulted in a coherent autonomous new body of law, be it a nascent one; or is it nothing more or less than the application of existing national and international environmental law to climatic problems? It is perhaps worth recalling that international environmental law itself only ascended to the rank of a recognized discipline of its own in the 1990s, over considerable academic scepticism at the time. Not un-similarly, the ongoing new project of the UN International Law Commission (ILC) for the drafting of guidelines on “protection of the atmosphere” has met with resistance from a few powerful States claiming that there is no need for further codification of international law in this field. Yet, considering our common interest in conserving the quality of the Earth’s atmosphere and climate, the ILC project may indeed encourage further development of a concept of inter-generational “planetary trusteeship”, owed by States as public trustees to present and future citizens as the beneficiaries.

The Framework of Ecological Law

Environmental law has always been hampered by its reductionist approach to the natural environment or more precisely, to the human-nature relationship. In contrast, ecological law would encourage us to think about the law from an Earth-centered perspective. But even more than thinking about the legal issues, ecological law reflects and advocates a changed mindset. We need to develop a mindset that is conscious of what has worked in the past and what promises to work in the future. This could be addressed through development of eco-centric law, inclusion of eco-centric grundnorm, transforming law and governance, and institutionalizing trusteeship governance. At the end, it is proposed that ecological law would frame our thinking in a way that reflects not only the traditional values of connectedness with nature, but equally leading cutting-edge sciences of today such as ecology, earth system science and health sciences.

State Sovereignty in the Planetary Management of Natural Resources

Protagonists of global environmental governance often view the sovereign State as well as the principle of sovereignty as major stumbling blocks for effective environmental conservation and sustainable development. Some even herald the demise of the idea of the sovereign State. However, reality has it differently. Sovereignty is no longer an unqualified concept. Manifold new duties have been imposed upon the sovereign State as a result of the progressive development of international law. Much of the modern international law movement vests States with the responsibility to adopt regulations, to monitor and secure compliance and exercise justice in order to achieve its implementation, whereas supranational global environmental governance has remained notoriously weak. This article examines this proposition by reference to the environmental and developmental role of states in three landmark multilateral treaties: The United Nations Law of the Sea Convention (1982), the Convention on the Conservation of Biological Diversity (1992) and the Paris Agreement on climate change (2015). They demonstrate that sovereignty serves as a key organisational principle for the realization of global values, such as environmental conservation and sustainable development.