Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
  • Cited by 4
  • Print publication year: 2009
  • Online publication date: August 2010

3 - International environmental law and the evolving concept of ‘common concern of mankind’

from PART I - Climate change mitigation: scientific, political and international and trade law perspectives

Summary

Introduction

Legal and economic problems relating to climate-change mitigation transgress national boundaries and thus are at odds with the Westphalian system of territorially defined allocations of powers and responsibilities of government. This problem, of course, is not new and has significantly shaped the contours and concepts of international environmental law. States and the international community have shown considerable imagination and engaged in innovative legal engineering to cope with transnational issues. They have crafted emerging principles, rules, and monitoring mechanisms designed to strike a balance between two conflicting requirements: on the one hand, there is a pressing need to put an end to, or at least to slow down, the deterioration of the environment as well as forestalling new damage. On the other hand, there is a necessity for a realistic appraisal of the existing structures and the social and economic costs involved in this process both for developed states and even more so for developing countries. In addition, all of the above is undertaken within a framework of fragmented jurisdictions among states, which adds to the complexity of the task. For such reasons, progress at the legal level has been less conspicuous than one would have expected or desired. But progress has been made. The environment is no longer conceived of from a state-sovereignty-oriented perspective, as an asset that may belong to each state and in whose protection only the state concerned may be legally and practically interested.

Related content

Powered by UNSILO
Bibliography
Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, 5 December 1979, 18 I.L.M. 1434.
Baslar, K. 1998. The Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law (The Hague/Boston/London: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers).
Biermann, F.Common concern of humankind: the emergence of a new concept of international environmental law’, Archiv des Volkerrechts 34 (1996), 426–81.
Birnie, P. W.Boyle, A. E. 2002. International Law and the Environment, 2nd edition (Oxford University Press).
Boyle, A. E. ‘International law and the protection of the global atmosphere: concepts categories and principles’, in Churchill, R.Freestone, D. (eds.) 1991. International Law and Global Climate Change (Dordrecht: Graham and Trotman/Martinus Nijhoff).
Cassese, A. 2005. International Law, 2nd edition (Oxford University Press).
,Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, 16 June 1972, 11 I.L.M. 1416, 1420.
Friedmann, W. 1964. The Changing Structure of International Law (New York: Columbia University Press).
Handl, G., ‘Environmental security and global change: the challenge to international law’, Yb.I.E.L 1 (1990).
Harris, P. G.Common but differentiated responsibility: the Kyoto Protocol and United States policy’, NYU Environmental Law Journal, 7 (1999), 27–48.
International Law and Climate Change, reference on file with the author.
Jennings, R., ‘The role of the International Court of Justice in the development of International environmental protection law’, 1/3 R.E.C.I.E.L. (1992), 240–4.
Key Legal Aspects of the Climate Change Convention at www.cs.ntu.edu.au/homepages/jmitroy/sid101/uncc/fs251.html
Kirgis, F. L., ‘Standing challenge human endeavours that could change the climate’, A.J.I.L. 84 (1990), 525–30.
Kiss, A., ‘Nouvelles tendances en droit international de l'environnement’, G.Y.I.L. 32 (1989), 241–63.
Pannatier, S. 1994. L'Antarctique et la Protection Internationale de l'Environnement (Zurich: Schulthess Polygraphischer Verlag), pp. 166–8.
Pannatier, S.La protection du milieu naturel antarctique et le droit international de l'environnement’, European Journal of International Law (1996), 431–46.
Pardo, A., ‘Whose is the bed of the sea?’, Proc. American Soc. Int'l Law 62 (1968) 216–51.
Ramakrishna, K., ‘North-South issues, common heritage of mankind and global climate change’, Millennium Journal of International Studies 19, No. 3 (1990), 429–46.
,Recommendations of the International Meeting of Legal and Policy Experts, Ottawa, Canada, 19 E.P.L. (1989), 78.
,Report of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee for a Framework Convention on Climate Change, May 1992, A/AC.237/18 (Part II) Add.1.
Rest, A., ‘Need for an international court for the environment? — Underdeveloped legal protection for the individual in transnational litigation’, E.P.L. 24 (1994), 173–87.
Sands, P., ‘The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change’, 1 R.E.C.I.E.L. 270 (1992).
Schachter, O. 1991. International Law in Theory and Practice (Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff).
The Convention on Climate Change: What Does it Say? at www.cs.ntu.edu.au/homepages/jmitroy/sid101/uncc/fs250.html
,United Nations Conference on Environment and Development: The Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, 13 June 1992, 31 I.L.M. 874.
,United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, 10 December 1982, 21 I.L.M. 1261.
,Vienna Convention on the Protection of the Ozone Layer, 1985, 26 I.L.M. 1529.
Visscher, P.‘Observations sur les résolutions declaratives de droit adoptées au sein de l'assemblé générale de l'organisation des Nations Unis’ in Diez, Emanuelet al. (eds.) 1980. Festschrift für Rudolf Bindschedler, Botschafter, Professor Dr. iur. zum 65. Geburtstag am 8. Juli 1980 (Bern: Stämpfli), pp. 173–85.