Skip to main content

Consequences of the Recognition of Forest Protection as a Common Concern of Humankind for the Anthropocene

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Charting Environmental Law Futures in the Anthropocene

Abstract

The chapter illustrates the consequences of recognizing forests as a ‘common concern of humankind’ for the Anthropocene. This suggestion stems from the acknowledgment that there is a need to revisit the current understanding of the concept of ‘common concern of humankind’ for the new Anthropocene epoch, especially on the example of forests. Following the initial examination of how international law defines and regulates global commons, it discusses the key international principles which facilitate recognition of forests as a global commons and presents three elements of defining the common concerns of humankind. In the new Anthropocene epoch, where human activities are so greatly affecting and altering the Earth’s structure and ecosystems, appropriate management of natural resources is crucial. Forests, often referred to as the lungs of the planet, play an important role in the Earth system and significantly affect the planet’s climate. With growing CO2 emissions, the importance of forests has become even more significant as the balancer of atmospheric gases and thus a natural tool in mitigating climate change. The chapter concludes by arguing that in the Anthropocene, more than ever, the acknowledgement of forests as a common concern of humankind is essential, as this requires focusing on the principle of multi-stakeholder cooperation. It is necessary that human activities as they relate to global commons and in particularly as they relate to forests are agreed upon and implemented by all the stakeholders. Only through such cooperation we can adopt practices that are most beneficial to the current and future generations and to the conservation of the Earth ecosystem.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bäckstrand K (2006) Multi-stakeholder partnerships for sustainable development: rethinking legitimacy, accountability and effectiveness. Eur Environ 16:290–306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baslar K (1998) The concept of the common heritage of mankind in international law. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, The Hague

    Google Scholar 

  • Biermann F (1996) Common concern of humankind: the emergence of a new concept of environmental law. Archiv des Völkerrecht 34(4):426–481

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown Weiss E (1992) Intergenerational equity: a legal framework for global environmental change. In: Brown Weiss E (eds) Environmental change and international law: new challenges and dimensions (385–401). United Nations University Press, Tokyo

    Google Scholar 

  • Brownlie I (1972) International customary rules of environmental protection. Int Relat 4:240–248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brunnée J (1996) A conceptual framework for an international forest convention: customary law and emerging principles. In: Canadian Council of International Law (eds) Global forests and international environmental law (41–77). Kluwer Law, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Brunnée J (2007) Common areas, common heritage, and common concern. In: Bodansky D, Brunnée J, Hey E (eds) The Oxford handbook of international environmental law (550–573). Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity, Ninth Meeting, Bonn (2008) Decision IX/5, Forest Biodiversity, UN Doc. UNEP/CBD/COP/DEC/IX/5

    Google Scholar 

  • Corfu Channel (United Kingdom v. Albania) (1949) International Court of Justice, ICJ Report, 19 Apr 1949

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox G (2013) Views of the forest: property law and carbon rights. Asia Pac J Environ Law 15:69–94

    Google Scholar 

  • Delbrück J (2012) The international obligation to cooperate—an empty shell or a hard law principle of international law?—a critical look at the much debated paradigm of modern international law. In: Hestermeyer HP, König D, Matz-Lück N, Röben V, Seibert-Fohr A, Stoll P-T, Vöneky S (eds) Coexistence, cooperation and solidarity, Liber Amicorum Rüdiger Wolfrum (3–16). Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Leiden, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Egede E (2014) Common heritage of mankind, Oxford bibliographies. http://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780199796953/obo-9780199796953-0109.xml. Accessed 1 June 2017

  • Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) (2011) Global forest resources assessment 2011: key findings, p 3. http://www.fao.org/forestry/fra2011. Accessed 20 Sept 2017

  • Gabčikovo-Nagymaroš Project (Hungary/Slovakia), ICJ Report (1997). Separate opinion of Judge Weeramanty

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooker A (1994) The international law of forests. Nat Resour J 34:823–877, 833

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacquemont F, Caparros A (2002) The convention on biological diversity and the climate change convention 10 years after rio: towards a synergy of the two regimes? RECEIL 11(2):169–180

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiss A, Shelton D (2007) Guide to international environmental law. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Leiden

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kovič Dine M (2012) Forests: does state sovereignty hinder their protection at the international level. In: Sancin V (ed) International environmental law: contemporary concerns and challenges (109–128). GV Založba, Ljubljana

    Google Scholar 

  • Kovič Dine M (2014) Regulation of forest ecosystem services: Slovenian Act on forests as an example of good practices. In: Sancin V, Kovic Dine M (eds) International environmental law: contemporary concerns and challenges in 2014 (401–408). IUS Software, GV Zalozba, Ljubljana

    Google Scholar 

  • Noyes JE (2011–2012) The common heritage of mankind: past, present, and future. Denver J Int Law Policy 40(1–3):447–471

    Google Scholar 

  • Pan Y, Birdsey RA, Fang J, Houghton R, Kauppi PE, Kurz WA, Phillips OL, Shvidenko A, Lewis SL, Canadell JG, Ciais P, Jackson RB, Pacala SW, David McGuire A, Piao S, Rautiainen A, Sitch S, Hayes D (2011) A large and persistent carbon sink in world’s forests. Science 333(6045):988–993

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peel J (2001) State responsibility rules and compliance with multilateral environmental obligations: some case studies of how the new rules might apply in the international environmental context. Rev Eur Community Int Environ Law (RECEIL) 10(1):82–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v. Uruguay), International Court of Justice, ICJ Report (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanchez Castillo-Winckels N (2016) Why “Common Concern of Humankind” should return to the work of the international law commission on the atmosphere. Georg Environ Law Rev 29:131–151

    Google Scholar 

  • Scholtz W (2013) Greening permanent sovereignty through the common concern in the climate change regime: awake custodial sovereignty! In: Ruppel OC, Roschmann C, Ruppel-Schlichting K (eds) Climate change: international law and global governance (201–214). Nomos, Baden

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Shelton DL (2009) Common concern of humanity. Iustum Aequum Salut 1:33–40

    Google Scholar 

  • Soltau F (2016) Common concern of humankind. In: Gray KR, Tarasofsky R, Carlarne CP (eds) The Oxford handbook of international climate change law (202–212). Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Steffen W, Crutzen PJ, McNeill JR (2007) The anthropocene: are humans now overwhelming the great forces of nature? Ambio 36(8):614–621

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tarlock AD (1991) Exclusive sovereignty versus sustainable development of a shared resource: the dilemma of Latin American rainforest management. Tex Int Law J 32:37–66

    Google Scholar 

  • Territorial Jurisdiction of the International Commission of the River Oder, Permanent Court of International Justice, PCIJ, Series A 23 (1929)

    Google Scholar 

  • Trail Smelter (United States of America v. Canada), 3 R.I.A.A.1907, 1965 (1941), 11 Mar 1941

    Google Scholar 

  • Valvasor JV (2009–2014) Čast in slava vojvodine Kranjske. Zavod Dežela Kranjska, Ljubljana

    Google Scholar 

  • van Asselt H (2012) Managing the fragmentation of international environmental law: forests at the intersection of the climate and biodiversity regimes. Int Law Polit 44:1205–1278

    Google Scholar 

  • Voigt C (2014) Delineating the common interest in international law. In: Benedek W, De Feyter K, Kettemann MC, Voigt C (eds) The common interests in international law (9–27). Intersentia Publishing Nv, Mortsel

    Google Scholar 

  • Waters CN, Zalasiewicz J, Summerhayes C, Barnosky AD, Poirier C, Galuszka A, Cearreta A, Edgeworth M, Ellis EC, Ellis M, Jeandel C, Leinfleder R, McNeill JR, Richter DB, Steffen W, Syvitski J, Vidas D, Wagreich M, Williams M, Zhisheng A, Grineald J, Odada E, Oreskes N, Wolfe AP (2016) The Anthropocene is functionally and stratigraphically distinct from the Holocene. Science 351(6269):137–148

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maša Kovič Dine .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Kovič Dine, M. (2019). Consequences of the Recognition of Forest Protection as a Common Concern of Humankind for the Anthropocene. In: Lim, M. (eds) Charting Environmental Law Futures in the Anthropocene. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-9065-4_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-9065-4_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-13-9064-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-13-9065-4

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics