An enduring challenge to international environmental law is to facilitate the resolution of environmental problems faster than they are being caused. Prominent among potential foundations for substantive international environmental law to this end are (a) neoclassical economic theory (NET) and (b) distributive justice and deliberative democratic theories. Building upon existing critique, this paper makes two broad arguments. The first is that despite the influence of NET’s market-based prescriptions, solutions lie not in introducing and extending the privatisation and pricing of nature, but instead in subsuming markets within an expanded and enriched public sphere that is characterised inter alia by decentralised, deliberative democratic decision-making. This contention suggests a need to reform substantive environmental law that is informed by NET. The second argument made is that limitations, in particular, of the deliberative democratic approach to environmental problems (e.g., prospects of achieving consensus on natural resource use and the efficacy of any consensus that might be reached) may be overcome by combining it with common key resource control – to put it crudely, by combining meaningful political with economic democracy. This revised foundation would offer a potentially viable foundation for IEL. It also offers guidance for incipient efforts to democratise environmental regulation.
Which Direction for International Environmental Law?
Anderson, Paul. 2015. Which Direction for International Environmental Law?. Journal of Human Rights and the Environment , 6(1): 98–126.
Just transition prompts us to explore a number of important dimensions of Earth System Governance research, including sustainability transformations, inequality,…
Climate-smart socially innovative tools and approaches for marine pollution science in support of sustainable development
There is a complex interaction between pollution, climate change, the environment and people. This complex interplay of actions and impacts…