International Forest Regulation: Model for International Soil Governance

Chapter
Part of the International Yearbook of Soil Law and Policy book series (IYSLP, volume 2017)

Abstract

This chapter wants to introduce an additional perspective to the discussion on how to regulate soils by an international treaty. Well comparable to the concern of forests and international forest governance, the discussions within the framework of international soil governance largely center around the creation of a single stand-alone international instrument—may it be legally binding or not, within or outside the framework of an existing convention. Against the background of the developments within international forest governance over the last four decades and the evolution of what has been referred to as the international forest regime, a change of the approach to the international regulation of concerns like forests and soils seems appropriate. The example of forests in international law and policy indicates that options for more concerted—coordinated—approaches of the existing regime infrastructure need to be realized to achieve the sustainability goals required for human well-being today and for future generations.

References

  1. Alter KJ, Meunier S (2009) The politics of international regime complexity. Perspect Polit 7:13–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Birnie PW et al (2009) International law and the environment. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  3. Bodansky D (2010) The art and craft of international environmental law. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  4. Boer BW, Ginzky H, Heuser IL (2016) International soil protection law: history, concepts and latest developments. In: Ginzky H, Heuser IL, Qin T, Ruppel OC, Wegerdt P (eds) International yearbook of soil law and policy. Springer, ChamGoogle Scholar
  5. Boyd W (2010) Ways of seeing in environmental law: how deforestation became an object of climate governance. Ecol Law Q 37:843–916Google Scholar
  6. Brown Weiss E, Jacobson HK (eds) (1998) Engaging countries: strengthening compliance with international environmental accords. MIT Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  7. Brunnée J (1996) A conceptual framework for an international forest convention: customary law and emerging principles. In: Canadian Council on International Law, global forests & international environmental law. Kluwer Law International, London, pp 41–78Google Scholar
  8. Brunnée J (2002) COPing with consent: law-making under multilateral environmental agreements. Leiden J Int Law 15:1–52Google Scholar
  9. Brunnée J (2007) Common areas, common heritage, and common concern. In: Bodansky D et al (eds) The Oxford handbook of international environmental law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 550–573Google Scholar
  10. Brunneé J, Nollkaemper A (1996) Between the forests and the trees – an emerging international forest law. Environ Conserv 23:307–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chambers WB (2008) Interlinkages and the effectiveness of multilateral environmental agreements. United Nations University Press, TokyoGoogle Scholar
  12. Davenport DS (2005) An alternative explanation for the failure of the UNCED forest negotiations. Global Environ Polit 5:105–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Desai BH (2011) Forests, international protection. In: Wolfrum R (ed) Max Planck encyclopedia of public international law, online edition. www.mpepil.com. Accessed 14 April 2017
  14. Eikermann A (2015) Forests in international law – is there really a need for an international forest convention? Springer, ChamGoogle Scholar
  15. Etter H, Gerhartsreiter T, Stewart N (2016) Economics of land degradation: achievements and next steps. In: Ginzky H, Heuser IL, Qin T, Ruppel OC, Wegerdt P (eds) International yearbook of soil law and policy. Springer, ChamGoogle Scholar
  16. FAO (2015) Status of the World’s Soil Resources Main report. http://www.fao.org/3/a-i5199e.pdf. Accessed 14 April 2017
  17. Giessen L (2013) Reviewing the main characteristics of the international forest regime complex and partial explanations for its fragmentation. Int For Rev 15:60–70Google Scholar
  18. Ginzky H, Heuser IL, Qin T, Ruppel OC, Wegerdt P (eds) (2016) International yearbook of soil law and policy. Springer, ChamGoogle Scholar
  19. Hannam I, Boer B (2002) Legal and institutional frameworks for sustainable soils: a preliminary report. IUCN Environmental Policy and Law Paper No. 45. https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/files/documents/EPLP-045.pdf. Accessed 14 April 2017
  20. Hannam I, Boer B (2004) Drafting legislation for sustainable soils: a guide. IUCN Environmental Policy and Law Paper No. 52. https://portals.iucn.org/lbrary/sites/library/files/documents/EPLP-052.pdf. Accessed 14 April 2017
  21. Hassan R et al (eds) (2009) Ecosystems and human well-being: current state and trends: findings of the condition and trends working group, The millennium ecosystem assessment series, vol 1. Island Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  22. Hönerbach F (1996) Verhandlung einer Waldkonvention Ihr Ansatz und Scheitern, Discussion paper FS-II 96-404. Wissenschaftszentrum, Berlin. http://bibliothek.wz-berlin.de/pdf/1996/ii96-404.pdf. Accessed 14 April 2017
  23. Hooker A (1994) The international law of forests. Nat Resour J 34:823–877Google Scholar
  24. Humphreys D (2005) The elusive quest for a global forests convention. Rev Eur Community Int Environ Law 14:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Humphreys D (2006) Logjam: deforestation and the crisis of global governance. Earthscan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  26. Jürging J, Giessen L (2013) Ein “Rechtsverbindliches Abkommen über die Wälder in Europa”: Stand und Perspektiven aus rechts- und umweltpolitikwissenschaftlicher Sicht. Natur und Recht 35:317–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kasimbazi EB (1995) An international legal framework for forest management and sustainable development. Annu Surv Int Comp Law 2:67–97Google Scholar
  28. Levin K et al (2008) The climate regime as global forest governance: can reduced emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD) initiatives pass a ‘dual effectiveness’ test? Int For Rev 10:538–549Google Scholar
  29. Lipschutz RD (2000) Why is there no international forestry law: an examination of international forestry regulation, both public and private. UCLA J Environ Law Policy 19:153–180Google Scholar
  30. Mackenzie CP (2012) Future prospects for international forest law. Int For Rev 14:249–257Google Scholar
  31. Markus T (2015) Verbindlicher internationaler Bodenschutz im Rahmen der Alpenkonvention. ZUR 4:214–221Google Scholar
  32. Matz N (2006) Wege zur Koordinierung völkerrechtlicher Verträge: völkervertragsrechtliche und institutionelle Ansätze. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  33. Matz-Lück N (2008) Biological diversity, international protection. In: Wolfrum R (ed) Max Planck encyclopedia of public international law, online edition. www.mpepil.com. Accessed 26 May 2017
  34. Miles EL et al (2001) Environmental regime effectiveness: confronting theory with evidence. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  35. Montgomery DR (2007) Dirt: the erosion of civilizations. University of California Press, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  36. Oberthür S (2009) Interplay management: enhancing environmental policy integration among international institutions. Int Environ Agreements Polit Law Econ 9:371–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pauwelyn J (2008) Fragmentation of international law. In: Wolfrum R (ed) Max Planck encyclopedia of public international law, online edition. www.mpepil.com. Accessed 14 April 2017
  38. Raustiala K, Victor DG (2004) The regime complex for plant genetic resources. Int Organ 58:277–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rayner J et al (eds) (2010) Embracing complexity: meeting the challenges of international forest governance. A global assessment report, prepared by the global forest expert panel on the international forest regime, IUFRO world series, vol 28. ViennaGoogle Scholar
  40. Schulte zu Sodingen B (2002) Der völkerrechtliche Schutz der Wälder: nationale Souveränität, multilaterale Schutzkonzepte und unilaterale Regelungsansätze. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Srivastava N (2011) Changing dynamics of forest regulation: coming full circle? Rev Eur Community Int Environ Law 20:113–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Tarasofsky R (1996) The global regime for the conservation and sustainable use of forests: an assessment of progress to date. Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht 56:668–684Google Scholar
  43. van Asselt H (2011) Integrating biodiversity in the climate regime’s forest rules: options and tradeoffs in greening REDD design. Rev Eur Community Int Environ Law 20:139–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. van Asselt H (2012) Managing the fragmentation of international environmental law: forests at the intersection of the climate and biodiversity regimes. J Int Law Polit 44:1205–1279Google Scholar
  45. von Moltke K (2001) On clustering international environmental agreements, IISD. http://www.iisd.org/sites/default/files/publications/trade_clustering_meas.pdf. Accessed 14 April 2017
  46. Weigelt J, Müller A, Beckh C, Töpfer K (eds) (2014) Soils in the nexus – a crucial resource for water, energy and food security. MünchenGoogle Scholar
  47. Wolff F, Kaphengst T (2016) The UN Convention on biological diversity and soils: status and future options. In: Ginzky H, Heuser IL, Qin T, Ruppel OC, Wegerdt P (eds) International yearbook of soil law and policy. Springer, ChamGoogle Scholar
  48. Wolfrum R (2011) International law of cooperation. In: Wolfrum R (ed) Max Planck encyclopedia of public international law, online edition. www.mpepil.com. Accessed 14 April 2017
  49. Wolfrum R, Matz N (2003) Conflicts in intersnational environmental law. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wyatt AM (2008) The dirt on international environmental law regarding soils: is the existing regime adequate? Duke Environ Law Policy Forum 19:165–207Google Scholar
  51. Young OR (ed) (1999) The effectiveness of international environmental regimes – causal connections and behavioral mechanisms. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.German Federal Hydrographic and Maritime AgencyHamburgGermany

Personalised recommendations