Advertisement

The Influence of Environmental Protection on the Fabric of International Law

  • Jorge E. ViñualesEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

The protection of the “environment” as a goal of international law came much later than that of many other goals, which international law set to pursue in the second half of the twentieth century. The two most important attempts at defining the overarching principles of international law guiding the protection of the environment are the 1972 Stockholm Declaration on the Human Environment and, even more importantly, the 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development. These instruments have been very influential in international law, shaping a wide number of treaty-regimes, prompting an important body of jurisprudence, and changing the way in which apparently unrelated instruments must be interpreted. Several principles stated in these instruments are the expression in general international law of two ideas, prevention and balance, which are further fleshed out by other principles grounded, essentially, in treaty law, such as the precautionary approach, the prior informed consent requirement, the polluter-pays principle, the principle of inter-generational equity, the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, the public participation principle, and a number of concepts such as those of sustainable development, common areas, common heritage and common concern of humankind. All these principles have shaped a substantial body of treaties focusing on different environmental problems, but they have also had a wider influence. This is why the international law of environmental protection should not be considered as a mere ‘branch’ of international law that would take its place alongside other “branches”, but as a “perspective” calling for the reconsideration of international law in its entirety in the light of environmental considerations. This is so not only because the “environment” is concerned by all human activities, from trade and investment to transportation and warfare, but also because international environmental law had to compose with the law of development to a degree that they both merged into what came to be called the international law of sustainable development. The current attempts to re-define international law from a sustainability perspective have the advantage of emphasising the importance of environmental protection as a goal but they also have the disadvantage of preserving a smokescreen behind which much has remained the same.

References

  1. Barberis JA (1994) Formación del derecho internacional. Editorial Ábaco de Rodolfo Depalma, Buenos AiresGoogle Scholar
  2. Boisson de Chazournes L, Maljean-Dubois S (2011) Les principes du droit international de l’environnement. Jurisclasseur Environnement et Développement Durable 146-15:1–20Google Scholar
  3. Brown Weiss E (1989) In fairness to future generations: international law, common patrimony, and intergenerational equity. Transnational Pub Inc, ArdsleyGoogle Scholar
  4. Chuffart S, Viñuales JE (2014) From the other shore: economic, social and cultural rights from an international environmental law perspective. In: Reidel E et al (eds) Economic, social and cultural rights: current issues and challenges. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 287–307Google Scholar
  5. De Sadeleer N (1999) Essai sur la genèse et la portée juridique de quelques principes en droit de l’environnement. Bruylant, BruxellesGoogle Scholar
  6. Dupuy P-M (1997) Où en-est le droit de l’environnement à la fin du siècle? RGDIP 101:873–903Google Scholar
  7. Dupuy P-M, Viñuales JE (2018) International environmental law, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  8. Epiney A, Scheyli M (1998) Strukturprinzipien des Umweltvölkerrechts. Nomos, Baden-BadenGoogle Scholar
  9. Francioni F (2007) Sviluppo sostenibile e principi di diritto internazionale dell’ambiente. In: Società Italiana di Diritto Internazionale, Il principio dello sviluppo sostenibile nel diritto internazionale ed europeo dell’ambiente. Editoriale Scientifica, Naples, pp 40–61Google Scholar
  10. Henckaerts J-M, Doswald-Beck L (2009) Customary international humanitarian law. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  11. Kiss A (1953) L’abus de droit en droit international. LGDJ, ParisGoogle Scholar
  12. Macekura SJ (2015) Of limits and growth. The rise of global sustainable development in the twentieth century. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Munro RD, Lammers JG (1987) Environmental protection and sustainable development. Legal principles and recommendations adopted by the experts group on environmental law of the World Commission on environment and development. Graham & Trotman/Martinus Nijhoff, London/DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  14. Sand PH (2001) A century of green lessons: the contribution of nature conservation regimes to global governance. Int Environ Agreements Polit Law Econ 1:33–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Sands P (1994) International law in the field of sustainable development. BYBIL 65:303–381Google Scholar
  16. Sohn LB (1973) The Stockholm Declaration on the human environment. HILJ 14:423–515Google Scholar
  17. Viñuales JE (2013a) Cartographies imaginaires: Observations sur la portée juridique du concept de «régime spécial» en droit international. JDI 140:405–425Google Scholar
  18. Viñuales JE (2013b) The rise and fall of sustainable development. Rev Eur Comp Int Environ Law 22:3–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Viñuales JE (ed) (2015) The Rio Declaration on environment and development. A commentary. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  20. Viñuales JE (2017a) Environmental and energy law as a field of research: a structural overview. In: Viñuales JE, Lees E (eds) Environmental and energy law – Vol I: International dimensions, Vol II: European dimensions, Vol III: Transnational, comparative and domestic dimensions. Edward Elgar, CheltenhamGoogle Scholar
  21. Viñuales JE (2017b) La Protección Ambiental en el Derecho Internacional Consuetudinario. Revista Española de Derecho Internacional 69(2):71–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of CambridgeCambridgeUK

Personalised recommendations