Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of contributors
- Preface and acknowledgments
- 1 Introduction: dimensions of justice in environmental law
- Part I The notion of justice in environmental law
- Part II Public participation and access to the judiciary
- Part III State sovereignty and state borders
- 12 Environmental justice in situations of armed conflict
- 13 Sovereignty and environmental justice in international law
- 14 Piercing the state veil in pursuit of environmental justice
- Part IV North–South concerns in global contexts
- Part V Access to natural resources
- Part VI Corporate activities and trade
- Index
- References
13 - Sovereignty and environmental justice in international law
from Part III - State sovereignty and state borders
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 June 2009
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of contributors
- Preface and acknowledgments
- 1 Introduction: dimensions of justice in environmental law
- Part I The notion of justice in environmental law
- Part II Public participation and access to the judiciary
- Part III State sovereignty and state borders
- 12 Environmental justice in situations of armed conflict
- 13 Sovereignty and environmental justice in international law
- 14 Piercing the state veil in pursuit of environmental justice
- Part IV North–South concerns in global contexts
- Part V Access to natural resources
- Part VI Corporate activities and trade
- Index
- References
Summary
Introduction
In this chapter, I will examine one narrow aspect of the potential contribution of the notion of ‘environmental justice’ to the body of international law aiming to protect the environment. I will address the question of to what extent ‘environmental justice’ may qualify or limit states’ sovereign powers under international law to use and destroy their environment as they see fit, as long as it does not cause damage to other states.
For two reasons, this focus may strike the reader as counter-intuitive. First, it might be said that this focus is of limited practical relevance since, if one takes into account transboundary effects as well as the effects on the commons of many activities, not much would be left of states’ sovereign rights to exploit their own resources pursuant to their own environmental and developmental policies. Is not everything connected to everything? However, this can easily be exaggerated. The argument would neglect the critical role of thresholds such as ‘significant harm’ in the definition of states’ rights and obligations in regard to environmental harm. It also would understate the degree to which environmental degradation continues largely to be of a local nature.
A second reason why the focus on domestic effects may strike the reader as counter-intuitive is that environmental justice originated as a concept of domestic law, and was used to criticise the domestic environmental policies and laws of some states, notably the United States. It responded to particular specific, local concerns over environmental degradation.
Information
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Environmental Law and Justice in Context , pp. 253 - 269Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2009
References
, 2000. ‘Cross-National Environmental Injustice and Human Rights Issues’. 43 American Behavioral Scientist688.Google Scholar
, 2004. International Environmental Justice: A North South Dimension. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing.Google Scholar
, 1999. ‘Sustainability and Intergenerational Justice’, in (ed.), Fairness and Futurity: Essays on Environmental Sustainability and Social Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
, 1997. ‘Debate: Intergenerational Equity and the Environment’. 5 Journal of Political Philosophy392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and , 2005. Transboundary Harm in International Law: Lessons from Trail Smelter. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
, 1989. In Fairness to Future Generations: International Law, Common Patrimony, and Intergenerational Equity. New York: Transnational Publishers.Google Scholar
, 1996. ‘International Justice and International Law’. 98 West Virginia Law Review 611.Google Scholar
, and , 1996. ‘Between the Forests and the Trees – An Emerging International Forest Law’. 23 Environmental Conservation307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, 2005. Environmental Justice: Human Rights and the Politics of Pollution. San Francisco: Sierra Club.Google Scholar
, 2005a. ‘Cosmopolitan Justice, Responsibility, and Global Climate Change’. 18 Leiden Journal of International Law749.Google Scholar
, 2005b. Justice Beyond Borders: A Global Political Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and , 2000. From the Ground up: Environmental Racism and the Rise of the Environmental Justice Movement. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
, 1999. Justice and the Environment: Conceptions of Environmental Sustainability and Dimensions of Social Justice. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
, 1989. ‘Is Justice Relevant to the International Legal System?’ 64 Notre Dame Law Review945.Google Scholar
, 2003. ‘Animals, Politics and Justice: Rawlsian Liberalism and the Plight of Non-Humans’. 12 Environmental Politics3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, 2002. ‘The Right to a Healthy Environment, Human Rights and Sustainable Development’. 2 International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, 1996. ‘From the Landfill to the Other Side of the Tracks: Developing Empowerment Strategies to Alleviate Environmental Justice’. 22 Ohio Northern University Law Review1227.Google Scholar
, 2006. ‘The Theory of Legal Relativity: Environmental Justice in the Context of Doctrinal Durability’. 32 University of Toledo Law Review180.Google Scholar
, and , 1972. ‘Environmental Valuation under Sustainable Development’. 2 American Economic Review, Papers and Proceeding473.Google Scholar
, 2005. ‘The Conceptual History of Social Justice’. 3 Political Studies Review356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, 2001. ‘Global Commons: The Oceans, Antarctica, the Atmosphere, and Outer Space’, in and (eds.), Managing Global Issues: Lessons Learned. Washington DC: Carnegie Endowment.Google Scholar
, 2004. The Dark Sides of Virtue: Reassessing International Humanitarianism. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, 1998. ‘Sovereignty and Inequality’. 9 European Journal of International Law601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, 2004. ‘International Law and Hegemony: A Reconfiguration’. 17 Cambridge Review of International Affairs211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, 1999. ‘Sustainable Development and Unsustainable Arguments’, in and (eds.), International Environmental Law and Sustainable Development: Past Achievements and Future Challenges. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
, 1999. ‘Intergenerational Justice and Climate Change’. 47 Political Studies53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, 2001. ‘The Influence of the Global Order on the Prospects for Genuine Democracy in the Developing Countries’. 14 Ratio Juris334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, 1973. A Theory of Justice. 6th edn, Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
, 1990. ‘The Definition of Thresholds of Tolerance for Transboundary Environmental Injury under International Law: Development and Present Status’. 37 Netherlands International Law Review193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, 2004. ‘Common but Differentiated Responsibilities in International Law’. 98 American Journal of International Law276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, 2002. Evolution and Status of the Precautionary Principle in International Law. The Hague, Boston and London: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar
, , and (eds.), 1998. International Economic Law with a Human Face. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff.
Accessibility standard: Unknown
Why this information is here
This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.Accessibility Information
Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this chapter is currently unknown
and may be updated in the future.
- 3
- Cited by