Advertisement

Sustainable Development: New Thoughts, New Policy, New Law?

  • Frederik Hendrik KistenkasEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

New thoughts and new policy on sustainable development have been brought forward and widely discussed and accepted, but law is still lagging behind. This paper aims to fill up that gap and tries to put some new light on how legislation and jurisprudence could meet up with modern sustainability insights. Much nature and planning legislation predates our common understandings of sustainability and might be able to obstruct sustainable development. However, sustainable growth, usually seen in terms of development for which assets and impacts for ecology, economy and society are brought in balance, should be facilitated by future law rather than being obstructed. The paper will focus on European and domestic nature and planning law and their shortcomings and possibilities in terms of sustainable development. The concept of ecosystem services will show the likely obstructions of current law and will help to alter these law provisions as some new improvement directions will be presented.

Keywords

Ecosystem services EU law European nature conservation law Policy Spatial planning law Sustainable development 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This paper was funded by the Dutch Statutory Research Tasks Unit for Nature and the Environment (WOt Natuur & Milieu), a division of Wageningen UR, and the EU 7th framework project OpenNESS. The author wishes to thank the contact persons of these institutions for their input.

References

  1. Borgström S, Kistenkas FH (2014) The compatibility of the habitats directive with the novel EU green infrastructure policy. Eur Energy Environ Law Rev 23:36–44Google Scholar
  2. Brundtland GH (1987) Our common future. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  3. Costanza R, d’Arge R, De Groot R, Farberk S, Grasso M, Hannon B, Limburg K, Naeem S, O’Neill RV, Paruelo J, Raskin RG, Suttonkk P, Van den Belt M (1997) The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387:253–260Google Scholar
  4. de Sadeleer N (2002) Environmental principles. From political slogans to legal rules. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ebbesson J (2010) The rule of law in governance of complex socio-ecological changes. Glob Environ Change 20:414–422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. EC (2011) EU biodiversity strategy to 2020. COM (2011) 244Google Scholar
  7. EC (2013) Communication on green infrastructure (GI). Enhancing Europe’s natural capital. COM(2013)249 finalGoogle Scholar
  8. Fisher B, Turner RK, Morling P (2009) Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making. Ecol Econ 68:643–653CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gunningham N, Grabowsky P, Sinclair D (1998) Smart regulation. Designing environmental policy. Clarendon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  10. Hauck J, Schweppe-Kraft B, Albert C, Görg C, Jax K, Jensen R, Fürst C, Maes J, Ring I, Hönigova I, Burkhard V, Mehring M, Tiefenbach M, Grunewald K, Schwarzer M, Meurer J, Sommerhäuser M, Priess J, Schmidt J, Grêt-Regamey A (2013) The promise of the ecosystem services concept for planning and decision making. GAIA 22:232–236Google Scholar
  11. ICJ (1997) Gabcikovo-Nagymaros (Hungary v. Slovakia). ICJ Rep 1997Google Scholar
  12. ICJ (2010) Pulp mills on the river Uruguay (Argentina v. Uruguay). ICJ Rep 2010Google Scholar
  13. Kistenkas FH (2012) Recht voor de groenblauwe ruimte. Wageningen Academic Publishers, WageningenCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kistenkas FH (2013a) Rethinking European nature conservation legislation: towards sustainable development. J Eur Environ Plan Law 10(1):72–84Google Scholar
  15. Kistenkas FH (2013b) Concurring regulation in European forest law. Forest certification and the new EU timber regulation. GAiA 22(3):166–168Google Scholar
  16. Kistenkas FH (2014) Innovating European nature conservation law by introducing ecosystem services. GAiA 23(2):88–92Google Scholar
  17. Mauerhofer V (2008) 3-D sustainability: an approach for priority setting in situation of conflicting interests towards a sustainable development. Ecol Econ 66:496–506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Mauerhofer V (2013) The ‘Governance-Check’: assessing the sustainability of public spatial decision-making structures. Land Use Policy 30:328–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. McGillivray D (2011) Mitigation, compensation and conservation: screening for appropriate assessment under the EU habitats directive. J Eur Environ Plan Law 8(4):329–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mertens K, Cliquet A, Vanheusden B (2012) Ecosystem services. What’s in it for a lawyer?. Eur Energy Environ Law Rev 21:31–40Google Scholar
  21. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA) (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Island Press, Washington/DCGoogle Scholar
  22. Monteduro M (2013) Environmental law and agroecology. Transdisciplinary approach to public ecosystem services as a new challenge for environmental legal doctrine. Eur Energy Environ Law Rev 1:2–11Google Scholar
  23. Natuurvisie (2014) Rijksnatuurvisie 2014 Natuurlijk verder. Sdu, The HagueGoogle Scholar
  24. Nollkaemper A (2011) Kern van het internationaal publiekrecht. Boom Juridische Uitgevers, The HagueGoogle Scholar
  25. Reid CT (2011) The privatisation of biodiversity? Possible new approaches to nature conservation law in the UK. J Environ Law 23(2):203–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ruhl JB, Salzman J (2007) The law and policy beginnings of ecosystem services. J Land Use Environ Law 22(2):157–172Google Scholar
  27. TEEB (2010) The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity (TEEB): ecological and economic foundations. Earthscan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  28. Termorshuizen J, Opdam P (2009) Landscape services as a bridge between landscape ecology and sustainable development. Landscape Ecol 24:1037–1052CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Tiefenthaler V (2011) Spatial planning in Europe. The impact of European Union law on national planning systems and territorial transnational cooperation. J Eur Environ Plan Law 8:115–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. van Rijswick M, Salet W (2012) Enabling the contextualization of legal rules in responsive strategies to climate change. Ecol Soc 17(2):18Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Wageningen University and Alterra Wageningen URWageningenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations