Freshwater, habitats and ecosystems

While the Ramsar Convention for the Protection of Wetlands of International Importance was the first habitat-based treaty, much of the recent focus of international attention in the area of freshwater has been on the regulation of watercourses. Attention is only beginning to be given to the interconnectedness of freshwater, habitats and ecosystems. This chapter explores and analyses the context, structure and substantive rules for the couservation and managemet of freshwater, habitats and ecosystems across the complex range of multilateral environmental agreements.

Cameron's hot air. Pollution, fraud and the politics of carbon emissions

It is widely recognised that exposure to air pollutants affect pulmonary and lung dysfunction as well as a range of neurological and vascular disorders. The rapid increase of worldwide carbon emissions continues to compromise environmental sustainability whilst contributing to premature death. Moreover, the harms caused by air pollution have a more pernicious reach, such as being the major source of climate change and ‘natural disasters’, which reportedly kills millions of people each year (World Health Organization, 2012). The opening quotations tell a story of the UK government's complacency towards the devastation of toxic and contaminating air emissions. The above headlines greeted the British public earlier this year after its government was taken to the Court of Appeal for an appalling air pollution record that continues to cause the premature deaths of 30,000 British people each year at a health cost estimated at £20 billion per annum. This combined with pending legal proceedings against the UK government for air pollution violations by the European Commission, point to a Cameron government that prioritises hot air and profit margins over human lives. The UK's legal air pollution regimes are an industry dominated process that relies on negotiation and partnership between regulators and polluters. The entire model seeks to assist business compliance rather than punish corporate offenders. There is no language of ‘crime’ in relation to UK air pollution violations but rather a discourse of ‘exceedence’ (Walters, 2010). It is a regulatory system not premised on the ‘polluter pay’ principle but instead the ‘polluter profit’ principle.

Air crimes and atmospheric justice

This chapter explores the political economy of air pollution. It draws on discourses of power, harm and violence to analyse air pollution within emerging frameworks of 'eco-crime' and atmospheric justice' (see Vanderheiden 2008; Walters 2010). In doing so, it identifies how green criminology continues to push new boundaries by engaging with issues of both global and local concern.

Implementing the Clean Development Mechanism in Fiji : opportunities and barriers in the energy sector

The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) has been praised for its ingenuity in mobilising finance to implement sustainable development practices in non-industrialised countries (known as Non-Annex 1 parties under the Kyoto Protocol). During the first commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol (2008-2012), a large number of clean development mechanism projects have been registered with the CDM board. In addition to the large number of registered CDM projects, there are significant numbers of proposed projects stalled in implementation due to the cumbersome and lengthy CDM approval process. Despite this regulatory criticism it is recognised that the role performed by the CDM is essential for achieving a significant reduction in global green house gas emissions. This is because the CDM funds sustainable development in countries that lack capacity to do so on their own. It is anticipated that some form of CDM instrument will continue post the 2012 timeframe and that reform of the mechanism will be focused around making the mechanism’s approval and implementation processes faster and more efficient.

The International regulation of persons displaced by climate change

It is certain that there will be changes in environmental conditions across the globe as a result of climate change. Such changes will require the building of biological, human and infrastructure resilience. In some instances the building of such resilience will be insufficient to deal with extreme changes in environmental conditions and legal frameworks will be required to provide recognition and support for people dislocated because of environmental change. Such dislocation may occur internally within the country of original origin or externally into another State’s territory. International and national legal frameworks do not currently recognise or assist people displaced as a result of environmental factors including displacement occurring as a result of climate change. Legal frameworks developed to deal with this issue will need to consider the legal rights of those people displaced and the legal responsibilities of those countries required to respond to such displacement. The objective of this article is to identify the most suitable international institution to host a program addressing climate displacement. There are a number of areas of international law that are relevant to climate displacement, including refugee law, human rights law and international environmental law. These regimes, however, were not designed to protect people relocating as a result of environmental change. As such, while they indirectly may be of relevance to climate displacement, they currently do nothing to directly address this complex issue. In order to determine the most appropriate institution to address and regulate climate displacement, it is imperative to consider issues of governance. This paper seeks to examine this issue and determine whether it is preferable to place climate displacement programs into existing international legal frameworks or whether it is necessary to regulate this area in an entirely new institution specifically designed to deal with the complex and cross-cutting issues surrounding the topic. Commentators in this area have proposed three different regulatory models for addressing climate displacement. These models include: (a) Expand the definition of refugee under the Refugee Convention to encompass persons displaced by climate change; (b) Implement a new stand alone Climate Displacement Convention; and (c) Implement a Climate Displacement Protocol to the UNFCCC. This article will examine each of these proposed models against a number of criteria to determine the model that is most likely to address the needs and requirements of people displaced by climate change. It will also identify the model that is likely to be most politically acceptable and realistic for those countries likely to attract responsibilities by its implementation. In order to assess whether the rights and needs of the people to be displaced are to be met, theories of procedural, distributive and remedial justice will be used to consider the equity of the proposed schemes. In order to consider the most politically palatable and realistic scheme, reference will be made to previous state practice and compliance with existing obligations in the area. It is suggested that the criteria identified by this article should underpin any future climate displacement instrument.

The legal nature of justice in REDD+

Formation of Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD+) policy within the international climate regime has raised a number of discussions about ‘justice’. REDD+ aims to provide an incentive for developing countries to preserve or increase the amount of carbon stored in their forested areas. Governance of REDD+ is multi-layered: at the international level, a guiding framework must be determined; at the national level, strong legal frameworks are a pre-requisite to ensure both public and private investor confidence and at the sub-national level, forest-dependent peoples need to agree to participate as stewards of forest carbon project areas. At the international level the overall objective of REDD+ is yet to be determined, with competing mitigation, biological and justice agendas. Existing international law pertaining to the environment (international environmental principles and law, IEL) and human rights (international human rights law, IHRL) should inform the development of international and national REDD+ policy especially in relation to ensuring the environmental integrity of projects and participation and benefit-sharing rights for forest dependent communities. National laws applicable to REDD+ must accommodate the needs of all stakeholders and articulate boundaries which define their interactions, paying particular attention to ensuring that vulnerable groups are protected. This paper i) examines justice theories and IEL and IHRL to inform our understanding of what ‘justice’ means in the context of REDD+, and ii) applies international law to create a reference tool for policy-makers dealing with the complex sub-debates within this emerging climate policy. We achieve this by: 1) Briefly outlining theories of justice (for example – perspectives offered by anthropogenic and ecocentric approaches, and views from ‘green economics’). 2) Commenting on what ‘climate justice’ means in the context of REDD+. 3) Outlining a selection of IEL and IHRL principles and laws to inform our understanding of ‘justice’ in this policy realm (for example – common but differentiated responsibilities, the precautionary principle, sovereignty and prevention drawn from the principles of IEL, the UNFCCC and CBD as relevant conventions of international environmental law; and UNDRIP and the Declaration on the Right to Development as applicable international human rights instruments) 4) Noting how this informs what ‘justice’ is for different REDD+ stakeholders 5) Considering how current law-making (at both the international and national levels) reflects these principles and rules drawn from international law 6) Presenting how international law can inform policy-making by providing a reference tool of applicable international law and how it could be applied to different issues linked to REDD+. As such, this paper will help scholars and policy-makers to understand how international law can assist us to both conceptualise and embody ‘justice’ within frameworks for REDD+ at both the international and national levels.

The Future of the World's Forests

Forest regulation is never far from the headlines. The recent COP 18 negotiations held in Doha towards the end of 2012 were criticized by observers for slowing the development of the ‘REDD+’ initiative and for marking the end of ‘Forest Day’, whilst in the last month controversy has arisen following reports that the World Bank’s investment in forestry-related projects has failed to address poverty or benefit local communities. Dr Rowena Maguire’s research focuses on international climate and forest regulation and indigenous and community groups rights and responsibilities in connection with environmental management. Her new book, Global Forest Governance, identifies the fundamental legal principles and governance requirements of Sustainable Forest Management, an introduction to which is provided in her article below.

Interjurisdictional water issues in Australia : Challenges for the future

For more than a hundred years water rights were granted in accordance with the legislation of the states and territories. Until recently, this legislation conferred a relatively unlimited discretion on the relevant regulatory institutions. Over the past 15 years, the Commonwealth has taken a greater interest in how water resources should be managed: first by formulating and funding policies and strategies through COAG, and then by enacting the Water Act 2007. This Act has created a much more prescriptive regime for planning and managing Australia’s water resources while at the same time entrusting its operational implementation to the states and territories. This has the potential to create tensions between the legal regimes of the Commonwealth and those of the states and territories. This article seeks to examine some of these issues.

The diversity of interests in environmental governance : a challenge for the rule of law

The function of environmental governance and the principle of the rule of law are both controversial and challenging. To apply the principle of the rule of law to the function of environmental governance is perhaps even more controversial and challenging. A system of environmental governance seeks to bring together the range of competitive and potentially conflicting interests in how the environment and its resources are managed. Increasingly it is the need for economic, social and ecological sustainability that brings these interests – both public and private – together. Then there is the relevance of the principle of the rule of law. Economic, social and ecological sustainability will be achieved – if at all – by a complex series of rules of law that are capable of enforcement so as to ensure compliance with them. To what extent do these rules of law reflect the principle of the rule of law? Is the principle of the rule of law the formally unstated value that is expected to underpin the legal system or is it the normative predicate that directs the legal system both vertically and horizontally? Is sustainability an aspirational value or a normative predicate according to which the environment and its resources are managed? Let us deal sequentially with these issues by reviewing a number of examples that demonstrate the relationship between environmental governance and the rule of law.

Crime and the commodification of carbon

Carbon will be the world's biggest market. Barclays was the first UK bank to set up a dedicated carbon trading desk to help clients, and Barclays Capital is the most active player in the emissions trading market having traded 300 million tonnes as at February 2007. (Barclays, 2007: 1)

Legal activism for ensuring environmental justice

This article reviews some of the roles environmental lawyers have played in ensuring environmental justice in Bangladesh. It leans on law and social movement theories to explicate the choice (and ensuing success) of litigation as a movement strategy in Bangladesh. The activists successfully moved the courts to read the right to a decent environment into the fundamental right to life, and this has had the far-reaching effect of constituting a basis for standing for the activists and other civil society organisations. The activists have also sought to introduce emerging international law principles into the jurisprudence of the courts. These achievements notwithstanding, the paper notes that litigation is not a sustainable way to institute enduring environmental protection in any jurisdiction and recommends the utilisation of the reputation and recognition gained through litigation to deploy or encourage more sustainable strategies.

Climate change and IMO technical and operational measures for reduction of emissions of greenhouse gas from ships

According to a study conducted by the International Maritime organisation (IMO) shipping sector is responsible for 3.3% of the global Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions. The 1997 Kyoto Protocol calls upon states to pursue limitation or reduction of emissions of GHG from marine bunker fuels working through the IMO. In 2011, 14 years after the adoption of the Kyoto Protocol, the Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) of the IMO has adopted mandatory energy efficiency measures for international shipping which can be treated as the first ever mandatory global GHG reduction instrument for an international industry. The MEPC approved an amendment of Annex VI of the 1973 International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL 73/78) to introduce a mandatory Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) for new ships and the Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan (SEEMP) for all ships. Considering the growth projections of human population and world trade the technical and operational measures may not be able to reduce the amount of GHG emissions from international shipping in a satisfactory level. Therefore, the IMO is considering to introduce market-based mechanisms that may serve two purposes including providing a fiscal incentive for the maritime industry to invest in more energy efficient manner and off-setting of growing ship emissions. Some leading developing countries already voiced their serious reservations on the newly adopted IMO regulations stating that by imposing the same obligation on all countries, irrespective of their economic status, this amendment has rejected the Principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibility (the CBDR Principle), which has always been the cornerstone of international climate change law discourses. They also claimed that negotiation for a market based mechanism should not be continued without a clear commitment from the developed counters for promotion of technical co-operation and transfer of technology relating to the improvement of energy efficiency of ships. Against this backdrop, this article explores the challenges for the developing counters in the implementation of already adopted technical and operational measures.

IMO technical and operational measures for reduction of emissions of greenhouse gas from ships : perspectives of Asian countries

International shipping is responsible for about 2.7% of the global emissions of CO2. In the absence of proper action, emissions from the maritime sector may grow by 150% to 250% by 2050, in comparison with the level of emissions in 2007. Against this backdrop, the International Maritime Organisation has introduced a mandatory Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) for new ships and the Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan (SEEMP) for all ships. Some Asian countries have voiced serious reservations about the newly adopted IMO regulations. They have suggested that imposing the same obligations on all countries, irrespective of their economic status, is a serious departure from the Principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibility, which has always been the cornerstone of international climate change law discourse. Against this backdrop, this article presents a brief overview of the technical and operational measures from the perspective of Asian countries.

Designing REDD+ to be just : considerations for a legally binding instrument

The international climate regime is in the process of negotiating a legally binding instrument concerning Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD+). The paper starts by exploring the complex web of decisions and advices that currently regulate REDD+ initiatives within the international climate regime. This is followed by an analysis of justice issues raised by non-state actors in the REDD+ international negotiations. The paper concludes by building on this analysis to identify some relevant considerations when seeking to design a just and legally binding REDD+ instrument. These considerations include: the impact of market- versus fund-based investment channels, the importance of defining a clear objective; the inclusion and role of international principles such as sovereignty, preventative action, common but differentiated responsibility, sustainable development, and Free, Prior, and Informed Consent; the appropriate design of REDD+ safeguards and the inclusion of grievance mechanisms within the instrument which provide guidance on resolving disputes associated with REDD+ investment.

A jurisprudential model for sustainable water resources governance

The legal arrangements for the management of water resources are currently a complex matrix of rules of various kinds. These rules perform a diverse range of functions. Some are part of what may be described as the macro-legal system for the governance of water resources. This includes paralegal rules in the form of statements of value, objective, outcome or principles . Others are part of the micro-legal system for the governance of water resources. This includes traditional legal rules in the form of statements of standards in relation to individual conduct, behaviour or decision making. These legal arrangements may be international, regional, national or local. Accordingly some apply to nation states within the international community. Others apply to the regulatory agencies making decisions about water resources within nation states. Ultimately most of these legal arrangements apply to those who use and develop water resources for particular purposes and in particular locations. In accordance with this framework, rules explain how water resources should be used in particular circumstances and how decisions should be made to ensure the effective planning and regulation of water resources.