An International Response to Site Contamination

Chapter

Abstract

This chapter examines the feasibility of developing an international instrument on site contamination, whether in binding or non-binding form. It discusses the notion of ‘common concern’ and similar concepts, with reference to site contamination and other environmental issues. Particular attention is paid to the reasons why binding global agreements have been achieved for some environmental issues, but not others, and the lessons to be drawn from this. The appropriate form and content of a possible international instrument on site contamination are discussed. The prospects of such an instrument are considered, and recommendations are made as to the most practical approach to be taken at the global level.

References

  1. Andresen S (2007) The effectiveness of UN environmental institutions. Int Environ Agreem 7(4):415–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Biermann F (1996) Common concern of humankind: the emergence of a new concept of international environmental law. Archiv des Völkerrechts 34(4):426–481Google Scholar
  3. Birnie P, Boyle AE (2002) International law and the environment, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  4. Boer B, Hannam I (2003) Legal aspects of sustainable soils: international and national. Rev Eur Commun Int Environ Law 12(2):149–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boer B, Hannam I (2011) A background paper for World Conservation Congress – IUCN Commission on Environmental Law – workshop on a soil convention. Paper presented to the 3rd worldwide conference on environmental law NGOs and lawyers, Limoges, France, 29 September–1 October 2011Google Scholar
  6. Boyle AE (1997) Remedying harm to international common spaces and resources: compensation and other approaches. In: Wetterstein P (ed) Harm to the environment: the right to compensation and the assessment of damages. Clarendon, Oxford, pp 83–100Google Scholar
  7. Boyle AE (1999) Some reflections on the relationship of treaties and soft law. Int Comp Law Q 48:901–913CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brunnée J (2007) Common areas, heritage, concern. In: Bodanksy D, Brunnée J, Hey E (eds) The Oxford handbook of international environmental law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 550–573Google Scholar
  9. Center for International Environmental Law (2006) The Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management. Available at http://www.ciel.org/Chem/Dubai_SAICM_Feb06.html
  10. Common Forum on Contaminated Land in the European Union (2011) Meeting report – Washington, DC, 3 October 2011Google Scholar
  11. Council of the European Union (2002a) Council conclusions on integrated soil protection. Doc. No. 10800/02, 18 July 2002Google Scholar
  12. Council of the European Union (2002b) Informal meeting of European Environment Ministers, Palma de Mallorca, 24–26 May 2002Google Scholar
  13. Council of the European Union (2007) Environment: main results of the 2842nd mtg of the Council. Press release no. 16183/07, 20 December 2007Google Scholar
  14. Council of the European Union (2008) Note from the Presidency to the Delegations. Doc. No. 13011/08, 15 September 2008Google Scholar
  15. Council of the European Union (2009) Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for the protection of soil – Presidency proposal. Doc. No. 5505/09, 19 January 2009Google Scholar
  16. Cullet P (2003) The convention on biological diversity. Briefing paper no. 2003–1, International Environmental Law Research Centre, Geneva, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  17. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Government of the United Kingdom (2007) Stakeholder workshop on the proposed soil framework directive: feedback report for DEFRAGoogle Scholar
  18. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Government of the United Kingdom (2008) Consultation on the proposed EU soil framework directive and initial regulatory impact assessment – summary of responsesGoogle Scholar
  19. Drumbl MA (2007) Actors and law-making in international environmental law. Washington & Lee Public legal studies research paper series, Washington and Lee University, Virginia.Google Scholar
  20. ENDS Europe (2009) Czech presidency admits defeat on soil protection. 17 June 2009. Available at http://www.endseurope.com/21580
  21. EurActiv (2008) Commission urges solution to soil degradation. 23 July 2008. Available at www.euractiv.com
  22. European Commission (2001) White paper: strategy for a future chemicals policy. COM(2001) 88 finalGoogle Scholar
  23. European Commission (Environment Directorate-General) (2007) REACH in brief. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/chemicals/reach/pdf/2007_02_reach_in_brief.pdf
  24. European Commission (2012) Soil – the decision-making process. Available at http://ec.europa.eu/environment/soil/process_en.htm
  25. Fazio S (2007) The harmonization of international commercial law. Kluwer Law International, The HagueGoogle Scholar
  26. Fitter A (2005) Common ground. Curr Biol 15(6):185–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Fitzmaurice M, Elias OA (2005) Contemporary issues in the law of treaties. Eleven International Publishing, UtrechtGoogle Scholar
  28. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2000) Assessing soil contamination: a reference manual. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, RomeGoogle Scholar
  29. Fowler R (2006) Development of site contamination law and policy in developing countries in the Pacific Rim and Asia: lessons from the experience of developed countries. Paper presented to the Boston College Law School Symposium on smart brownfields redevelopment in the 21st century, Newton, Massachusetts, 16 November 2006Google Scholar
  30. Fowler R (2007) Site contamination law and policy in Europe, North America and Australia – trends and challenges. Paper presented to the 8th meeting of the International Committee on Contaminated Land, Stockholm, 10–11 September 2007Google Scholar
  31. Gísladóttir G, Stocking M (2005) Land degradation control and its global environmental benefits. Land Degrad Dev 16:99–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Greer L (2009) Going right: a global mercury treaty defies the odds. 21 February 2009. Available at http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/lgreer/going_right_a_global_mercury_t.html
  33. Group of the European People’s Party, European Democrats (2008) EU directive on soil protection must remain buried. Press release, 15 July 2008Google Scholar
  34. Guignet D, Alberini A (2008) Voluntary cleanups and redevelopment potential: lessons from Baltimore, Maryland. Working paper no. 87/2008, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei, MilanGoogle Scholar
  35. Guzman AT (2005) The design of international agreements. Eur J Int Law 16(4):579–612CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hannam I, Boer B (2002) Legal and institutional frameworks for sustainable soils – a preliminary report. IUCN Environmental policy and law paper no. 45. International Union for the Conservation of Nature, GlandGoogle Scholar
  37. Hannam I, Boer B (2004) Drafting legislation for sustainable soils: a guide. IUCN Environmental policy and law paper no. 52. International Union for the Conservation of Nature, GlandGoogle Scholar
  38. Held M, Kümmerer K, Odendahl K (1998) Preserving soils for life: the Tutzing project “Time ecology”. In: Proposal for a convention on sustainable use of soils. Ökom Verlag, MunichGoogle Scholar
  39. Hurni H, Giger M, Meyer K (eds) (2006) Soils on the global agenda: developing international mechanisms for sustainable land management. International Union of Soil Scientists, BernGoogle Scholar
  40. Intergovernmental Forum on Chemical Safety (2000) Priorities for action beyond 2000. 3rd sess, IFCS/FORUM III/23w, Annex 6Google Scholar
  41. Intergovernmental Forum on Chemical Safety (2006) Budapest statement on mercury, lead and cadmium. IFCS/FORUM-V/05wGoogle Scholar
  42. International Institute for Sustainable Development (2003) Summary of the first session of the preparatory committee for the development of a strategic approach to international chemicals management: 9–13 November 2003. Earth Negot Bull 15(92):1Google Scholar
  43. International Institute for Sustainable Development (2006) Fifth Session of the Intergovernmental Forum on Chemical Safety: 25–29 September 2006. Earth Negot Bull 127(1):1Google Scholar
  44. International Institute for Sustainable Development (2007) UNEP Governing Council addresses globalization and UN reform, establishes working group on mercury. MEA Bull 21:1Google Scholar
  45. International Institute for Sustainable Development (2009) Summary of the ninth conference of the parties to the UN convention to combat desertification: 21 September–2 October 2009. Earth Negot Bull 4(229):1Google Scholar
  46. International Institute for Sustainable Development (2010a) A brief introduction to the Intergovernmental Forum on Chemical Safety. Available at http://www.iisd.ca/process/chemical_management-ifcsintro.html
  47. International Institute for Sustainable Development (2010) First Meeting of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee to Prepare a Globally Legally Binding Instrument on Mercury: 7–11 June 2010. Earth Negot Bull 28(6):4Google Scholar
  48. International Union for the Conservation of Nature (2005) Draft protocol for the conservation and sustainable use of soil. Gland, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  49. International Union for the Conservation of Nature (2012) Sustainable use of soils and desertification specialist group. Available at http://cms.iucn.org/about/union/commissions/cel/cel_working/cel_wt_sg/cel_sg_soils/index.cfm
  50. International Union of Soil Sciences (2005) Selfoss declaration on the conservation and sustainable use of global soil resources. In: Strategies, science and law for the conservation of the world’s soil resources, international workshop, Selfoss, Iceland, 14–18 September 2005Google Scholar
  51. Ivanova M (2005) Can the anchor hold? Rethinking the United Nations Environment Programme for the 21st century. Report no. 7, Yale F&ES Publication series, Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy, Yale UniversityGoogle Scholar
  52. Kanie N (2007) Governance with multilateral environmental agreements: a healthy or ill-equipped fragmentation? In: Swart L, Perry E (eds) Global environmental governance: perspectives on the current debate. Center for UN Reform Education, New York, pp 67–86Google Scholar
  53. Kiss A, Shelton D (2000) International environmental law, 2nd edn. Transnational Publishers, ArdseyGoogle Scholar
  54. Knowler DJ (2004) The economics of soil productivity: local, national and global perspectives. Land Degrad Dev 15:543–561CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Lallas PL (2000) The role of process and participation in the development of effective international environmental agreements: a study of the global treaty on persistent organic pollutants (POPs). UCLA J Environ Law Policy 19(1):83Google Scholar
  56. Lallas PL (2001) The Stockholm convention on persistent organic pollutants. Am J Int Law 95(3):692–708CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Layard A (2006) The Europeanisation of contaminated land. In: Betlem G, Brans E (eds) Environmental liability in the EU: the 2004 Directive compared with US and Member State law. Cameron May, London, pp 129–147Google Scholar
  58. Matz N (2002) Comment: the common interest in international law: some reflections on its normative content. Heidelbg J Int Law 62, pp 17–19Google Scholar
  59. McGinn AP (2002) State of the world 2002 – reducing our toxic burden. Worldwatch Institute, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  60. Mgbeoji I (2003) Beyond rhetoric: state sovereignty, common concern, and the inapplicability of the common heritage concept to plant genetic resources. Leiden J Int Law 16:821–837CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Najam A, Papa M, Taiyab N (2006) Global environmental governance: a reform agenda. International Institute for Sustainable Development, WinnipegGoogle Scholar
  62. North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Committee on the Challenges of Modern Society (2007) Report of the pilot study meeting: prevention and remediation in selected industrial sectors – sedimentsGoogle Scholar
  63. Papanicolaou C (2007). The proposed new soil framework directive. In: the land remediation yearbook, Environmental industries commission, London, pp 99–100Google Scholar
  64. Pardo A (1967) Agenda item 92: examination of the question of the reservation exclusively for peaceful purposes of the sea-bed and the ocean floor, and the subsoil thereof, underlying the high seas beyond the limits of present national jurisdiction, and the use of their resources in the interests of mankind. UNGA 22nd sess, 1515th mtg, 1st Committee, UN Doc A/C.1/PV.1515 and A/C.1/PV.1516Google Scholar
  65. Park DY, Song MY, Yoon DC, Lee KH, Cong X (2008) REACHing Asia: recent trends in chemical regulations of China, Japan and Korea. Working paper series, Environmental Policy CentreGoogle Scholar
  66. Quick Start Programme Executive Board (2006) Development of the approach of the UNIDO for implementation of the SAICM in the industry sector. 1st mtg, SAICM/EB.1/INF/5 Google Scholar
  67. Selin NE, Selin H (2006) Global politics of mercury pollution: the need for multi-scale governance. Rev Eur Commun Int Environ Law 15(3):258–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Shelton DL (2008) Soft law. Public law and legal theory working paper no. 322. George Washington University Law School, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  69. Skjærseth JB, Stokke OS, Wettestad J (2006) Soft law, hard law and effective implementation of international environmental norms. Global Environ Politics 6(3):104–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Smith G (2008). Contributions of brownfield development to urban internal expansion and urban renewal in practice. Paper presented to 44th International Society of City and Regional Planners Congress, Dalian, China, 19–23 September 2008Google Scholar
  71. Specialist Group on Sustainable Soils and Desertification (2011) Common statement – protecting soils for our common future. In: Workshop – towards a global agreement on sustainable soil management, Berlin, 26 September 2011Google Scholar
  72. Stringer L (2008) Can the UN Convention to Combat Desertification guide sustainable use of the world’s soils? Front Ecol Environ 6(3):138–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Thomas Z (2005) Common heritage to common concern: preserving a heritage and sharing knowledge. J World Intellect Prop 8(3):241–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. United Nations (2004) Options for enhanced cooperation among the three Rio Conventions. 21st sess, UN Doc FCCC/SBSTA/2004/INF.19Google Scholar
  75. United Nations (2007) Promotion and strengthening of relationships with other relevant conventions and international organizations, institutions and agencies. 8th sess, conference of the parties, UN Doc ICCD/COP(8)/4Google Scholar
  76. United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (Secretariat) (2012) About the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification. Available at http://www.unccd.int/en/about-the-convention/Pages/About-the-Convention.aspx
  77. United Nations Environment Programme (2006) Study on improving cooperation and synergies between the secretariats of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions. Basel Convention COP Decision VIII/28, UN Doc UNEP/CHW.8/INF/28Google Scholar
  78. United Nations Environment Programme (2007) Study on options for global control of mercury. UN Doc UNEP(DTIE)/Hg/OEWG.1/2Google Scholar
  79. United Nations Environment Programme (2008) Financial resources and the financial mechanism. UN Doc UNEP/CBD/COP/9/16Google Scholar
  80. United Nations Environment Programme/French Environment and Energy Management Agency (ADEME) (2005) Identification and management of contaminated sites: a methodological guide, 2nd edn ADEME Editions, ParisGoogle Scholar
  81. van Calster G (2004) Will the EC get a finger in each pie? EC law and policy developments in soil protection and brownfields redevelopment. J Environ Law 16(1):3–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Wirth DA (2007) Hazardous substances and activities. In: Bodansky D, Brunnée J, Hey E (eds) The Oxford handbook of international environmental law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 394–424Google Scholar
  83. Wiser GM, Magraw DB (2005) Principles and approaches of sustainable development and chemicals management for a strategic approach to international chemicals management (SAICM). Background paper for the 7th session of the Global Civil Society Forum. UNEP/GCSF/3, 2005Google Scholar
  84. World Conservation Congress (2004) Resolution 3.072 on legal aspects of the sustainable use of soils. In: 3rd World Conservation Congress, Bangkok, Thailand, 17–25 November 2004Google Scholar
  85. World Conservation Congress (2008). Resolution 4.093 on legal aspects of the sustainable use of soils. In: 4th World Conservation Congress, Barcelona, Spain, 5–14 October 2008Google Scholar
  86. World Health Organization (2008) IFCS – brief history and overview. Available at http://www.who.int/ifcs/page2/en/index.html
  87. 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
  88. Wynen E (2002) A UN convention on soil health, or what are the alternatives? Danish Association for Organic AgricultureGoogle Scholar
  89. Yoder AJ (2003) Lessons from Stockholm: evaluating the global convention on persistent organic pollutants. Indiana J Global Legal Stud 10:113–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Zovko I (2005) International law-making for the environment: a question of effectiveness. United Nations Environment Programme course on international environmental law-making and diplomacy, University of Joensuu, NorwayGoogle Scholar

Cases

  1. Pakootas, others v Teck Cominco Metals Ltd 2006, 452 F.3d 1066 (9th Cir 2006) (United States)Google Scholar
  2. Trail Smelter Arbitration (United States v Canada) (1938 and 1941) 3 RIAA 1905Google Scholar

Other Legal Materials

  1. Agenda 21: The United Nations Programme of Action from Rio (1992) UN GAOR, 46th sess, agenda Item 21, UN Doc A/Conf.151/26. Chapter 19 (Environmentally sound management of toxic chemicals, including prevention of illegal international traffic in toxic and dangerous products)Google Scholar
  2. Conference of the Parties to the Convention to Combat Desertification (2007) The 10-year strategic plan and framework to enhance the implementation of the convention (2008–2018), COP decision 3/COP.8, UN Doc ICCD/COP(8)/16/Add.1Google Scholar
  3. Consolidated Version of the Treaty on European Union (2008) OJ C 115/13 (European Union)Google Scholar
  4. Convention on Biological Diversity (1992) Opened for signature 5 June 1992, 1993 UNTS 143 (entry into force 29 December 1993)Google Scholar
  5. Convention on Wetlands of International Importance, especially as Waterfowl Habitat (1971) Opened for signature 2 February 1971, 996 UNTS 245 (entry into force 21 December 1975)Google Scholar
  6. Council of Europe (2003) Revised European charter for the protection and sustainable management of soil, CO-DBPGoogle Scholar
  7. European Commission (2006) Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for the protection of soil, COM (2006) 232 finalGoogle Scholar
  8. Framework Convention on Climate Change (1992). Opened for signature 9 May 1992, 1771 UNTS 107 (entry into force 21 March 1994)Google Scholar
  9. Heavy metals protocol to the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe Convention on long range transboundary air pollution, opened for signature 24 June 1998, Doc ECE/EB.AIR/1998/2 (entry into force 29 December 2003)Google Scholar
  10. Intergovernmental Forum on Chemical Safety (2000) Bahia Declaration on chemical safety. 3rd sess, IFCS/FORUM III/23w (2000)Google Scholar
  11. International Law Association (2002) New Delhi declaration of principles of international law on sustainable development. UN Doc A/CONF.199/8Google Scholar
  12. Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 on the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) (2006) OJ L 396/ 1 (entry into force 1 June 2007) (European Union)Google Scholar
  13. Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (2001) opened for signature 22 May 2001, 40 ILM 532 (entry into force 17 May 2004)Google Scholar
  14. Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management, international conference on chemicals management, 1st sess, res I/1, UN Doc SAICM/ICCM.1/7 (2006)Google Scholar
  15. United Nations (1977). Plan of action on combating desertification. GA Res 32/172, UN GAOR, UN Doc A/RES/32/172Google Scholar
  16. United Nations (2002) Johannesburg plan of implementation of the world summit on sustainable development. Report of the world summit on sustainable development, Johannesburg , South Africa, 26 August–4 September 2002, UN Sales No E.03.II.A.1, ch I, res 2Google Scholar
  17. United Nations (1984) Plan of action on combating desertification. GA Res 39/168, UN GAOR, UN Doc A/RES/39/168Google Scholar
  18. United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification in Those Countries Experiencing Serious Drought and/or Desertification, Particularly in Africa (1994), opened for signature 17 June 1994, 1954 UNTS 3 (entry into force 26 December 1996)Google Scholar
  19. United Nations Environment Programme (2006a) Dubai declaration on international chemicals management. Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management. UN Doc SAICM/ICCM.1/7Google Scholar
  20. United Nations Environment Programme (2006b). Global plan of action. Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management. UN Doc SAICM/ICCM.1/7Google Scholar
  21. United Nations Environment Programme (2006c) Overarching policy strategy. Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management. UN Doc SAICM/ICCM.1/7Google Scholar
  22. United Nations Environment Programme Governing Council (1995) Persistent organic pollutants. Decision 18/32, 18th sess, 10th mtg, UN Doc UNEP/GC.18/40Google Scholar
  23. United Nations Environment Programme Governing Council (1997a) International action to protect human health and the environment through measures which will reduce and/or eliminate emissions and discharges of persistent organic pollutants, including the development of an international legally binding instrument. Decision 19/13C, 19th sess, 8th mtg, UN Doc UNEP/GC.19/13CGoogle Scholar
  24. United Nations Environment Programme Governing Council (1997b). Nairobi declaration on the role and mandate of the United Nations Environment Programme. Decision 19/1, 19th sess, 7th mtg, UN Doc UNEP/GC.19/34Google Scholar
  25. United Nations Environment Programme Governing Council (2003) Mercury programme. Decision 22/4 Part V, 22nd sess, UN Doc UNEP/GC.22/11Google Scholar
  26. United Nations Environment Programme Governing Council, Global Ministerial Environment Forum (2005) Chemicals management. Decision 23/9V, 23rd sess, UN Doc UNEP/GC.23/11Google Scholar
  27. United Nations Environment Programme Governing Council, Global Ministerial Environment Forum (2007) Chemicals management. Decision 24/3 Part IV, 24th sess, UN Doc UNEP/GC/24/12Google Scholar
  28. United Nations Environment Programme Governing Council, Global Ministerial Environment Forum (2009) Chemicals management, including mercury. Decision 25/5, 25th sess, UN Doc. UNEP/GC.25/5Google Scholar
  29. United Nations General Assembly (1988) Resolution 43/53 on the protection of the global climate for present and future generations of mankind. UN GAOR, 7th plen mtg, UN Doc A/RES/43/53Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.TanundaAustralia

Personalised recommendations