Managing wetlands sustainably as ecosystems : The contribution of the law (part 1)

The ways in which a society set standards of behaviour and of conduct for its members vary hugely. For example, accepted practices, recognised customs, spiritually or morally inspired norms, judicially declared rules, executively formulated edicts, formal legislative enactments or constitutionally embedded rights and duties. Whatever form they assume, these standards are the artificial construction of the human mind. Accordingly the law - whatever its form - can do no more and no less than regulate or set standards for human behaviour, human conduct, and human decision-making. The law cannot regulate the environment. It can only regulate human activities that impact directly or indirectly upon the environment. This applies as much to wetlands as components of the environment as it does to any other components of the environment or the environment at large. The capacity of the law to protect the environment and therefore wetlands is thus totally dependent upon the capacity of the law to regulate human behaviour, human conduct and human decision-making. At the same time the law needs to reflect the specific nature, functions and locations of wetlands. A wetland is an ecosystem by itself; it comprises a range of ecosystems within it; and it is part of a wider set of ecosystems. Hence, the significant ecological functions performed by wetlands. Then there are the benefits flowing to humans from wetlands. These may be social, economic, cultural, aesthetic, or a combination of some or of all of these. It is a challenge for a society acting through its legal system to find the appropriate balance between these ecological and these human values. But that is what sustainability requires.The ways in which a society set standards of behaviour and of conduct for its members vary hugely. For example, accepted practices, recognised customs, spiritually or morally inspired norms, judicially declared rules, executively formulated edicts, formal legislative enactments or constitutionally embedded rights and duties. Whatever form they assume, these standards are the artificial construction of the human mind. Accordingly the law - whatever its form - can do no more and no less than regulate or set standards for human behaviour, human conduct, and human decision-making. The law cannot regulate the environment. It can only regulate human activities that impact directly or indirectly upon the environment. This applies as much to wetlands as components of the environment as it does to any other components of the environment or the environment at large. The capacity of the law to protect the environment and therefore wetlands is thus totally dependent upon the capacity of the law to regulate human behaviour, human conduct and human decision-making. At the same time the law needs to reflect the specific nature, functions and locations of wetlands. A wetland is an ecosystem by itself; it comprises a range of ecosystems within it; and it is part of a wider set of ecosystems. Hence, the significant ecological functions performed by wetlands. Then there are the benefits flowing to humans from wetlands. These may be social, economic, cultural, aesthetic, or a combination of some or of all of these. It is a challenge for a society acting through its legal system to find the appropriate balance between these ecological and these human values. But that is what sustainability requires.

Managing Wetlands Sustainably as Ecosystems: The Contribution of the Law (Part 2)

In this Part 2 attention is turned towards the legal arrangements in nation states for managing wetlands. These national arrangements have effect within the international arrangements already mentioned and any regional arrangements that are relevant. However, each national system is a reflection of its own historical, cultural, political and constitutional background. It is the purpose of this Part 2 to review and assess the national approaches to wetlands management. This involves an analysis of a range of instruments. These are: constitutional rules; strategic rules; regulatory rules; and management rules. Each of these sets of rules performs different functions, assumes different forms and is differentially capable of enforcement.

An assessment of Georgia's National Integrity System : the GNISA project

Georgia’s ‘National Integrity Systems’ are the institutions, laws, procedures, practices and attitudes that encourage and support integrity in the exercise of power in modern Georgian society. Integrity systems function to ensure that power is exercised in a manner that is true to the values, purposes and duties for which that power is entrusted to, or held by, institutions and individual office-holders. This report presents the results of the Open Society Institute / Open Society – Georgia Foundation funded project Georgian National Integrity Systems Assessment (GNISA), conducted in 2005–2006 by Caucasus Institute for Peace, Democracy and Development, Transparency International Georgia, Georgian Young Lawyers Association, in close cooperation with Griffith University Institute for Ethics, Governance and Law (Australia), and Tiri Group (UK), into how different elements of integrity systems interact, which combinations of institutions and reforms make for a strong integrity system, and how Georgia’s integrity systems should evolve to ensure coherence, not chaos in the way public integrity is maintained. Nevertheless all participants of the research may not share some conclusions given in the GNISA report.

Towards a global carbon integrity system : learning from the GFC and avoiding a GCC

This paper examines some of the central global ethical and governance challenges of climate change and carbon emis-sions reduction in relation to globalization, the “global financial crisis” (GFC), and unsustainable conceptions of the “good life”, and argues in favour of the development of a global carbon “integrity system”. It is argued that a funda-mental driver of our climate problems is the incipient spread of an unsustainable Western version of the “good life”, where resource-intensive, high-carbon western lifestyles, although frequently criticized as unsustainable and deeply unsatisfying, appear to have established an unearned ethical legitimacy. While the ultimate solution to climate change is the development of low carbon lifestyles, the paper argues that it is also important that economic incentives support and stimulate that search: the sustainable versions of the good life provide an ethical pull, whilst the incentives provide an economic push. Yet, if we are going to secure sustainable low carbon lifestyles, it is argued, we need more than the ethical pull and the economic push. Each needs to be institutionalized—built into the governance of global, regional, national, sub-regional, corporate and professional institutions. Where currently weakness in each exacerbates the weaknesses in others, it is argued that governance reform is required in all areas supporting sustainable, low carbon versions of the good life.

International law and the regulation of violence : shifting perceptions of the legitimacy of the jus ad bellum?

International law’s capacity to influence state behaviour by regulating recourse to violence has been a longstanding source of debate among international lawyers and political scientists. On the one hand, sceptics assert that frequent violations of the prohibition on the use of force have rendered article 2(4) of the UN Charter redundant. They contend that national self-interest, rather than international law, is the key determinant of state behaviour regarding the use of force. On the other hand, defenders of article 2(4) argue first, that most states comply with the Charter framework, and second, that state rhetoric continues to acknowledge the existence of the jus ad bellum. In particular, the fact that violators go to considerable lengths to offer legal or factual justifications for their conduct – typically by relying on the right of self-defence – is advanced as evidence that the prohibition on the use of force retains legitimacy in the eyes of states. This paper identifies two potentially significant features of state practice since 2006 which may signal a shift in states’ perceptions of the normative authority of article 2(4). The first aspect is the recent failure by several states to offer explicit legal justifications for their use or force, or to report action taken in self-defence to the Security Council in accordance with Article 51. Four incidents linked to the global “war on terror” are examined here: Israeli airstrikes in Syria in 2007 and in Sudan in 2009, Turkey’s 2006-2008 incursions into northern Iraq, and Ethiopia’s 2006 intervention in Somalia. The second, more troubling feature is the international community’s apparent lack of concern over the legality of these incidents. Each use of force is difficult to reconcile with the strict requirements of the jus ad bellum; yet none attracted genuine legal scrutiny or debate among other states. While it is too early to conclude that these relatively minor incidents presage long term shifts in state practice, viewed together the two developments identified here suggest a possible downgrading of the role of international law in discussions over the use of force, at least in conflicts linked to the “war on terror”. This, in turn, may represent a declining perception of the normative authority of the jus ad bellum, and a concomitant admission of the limits of international law in regulating violence.

Human rights and environmental wrongs : achieving environmental justice through human rights law

The links between the environment and human rights are well established internationally. It is accepted that environmental problems impact on individuals’ and communities’ enjoyment of rights which are guaranteed to them under international human rights law. Environmental issues also impact on governments’ capacity to protect and fulfil the rights of their citizens. In addition to these links between the environment and human rights, it is argued that human rights principles offer a strategy for addressing environmental injustice. The justice implications of environmental problems are well documented, with many examples where pollution, deforestation or other degradation disproportionately impacts upon poorer neighbourhoods or areas populated by minority groups. On the international level, there are environmental injustices which exist between developed and developing states. Further, there are also potential injustices for future generations. This paper investigates the role of human rights principles in addressing these instances of environmental injustice, and argues that the framework of human rights norms provides an approach to environmental governance which can help to minimise injustice and promote the interests of those groups who are most adversely affected. Further, it suggests that the human rights enforcement mechanisms which exist at international law could be utilised to lend more weight to claims for more equitable environmental policies.

Physicality in Australian Patent Law

It is generally understood that the patent system exists to encourage the conception and disclosure of new and useful inventions embodied in machines and other physical devices, along with new methods that physically transform matter from one state to another. What is not well understood is whether, and to what extent, the patent system is to encourage and protect the conception and disclosure of inventions that are non-physical methods – namely those that do not result in a physical transformation of matter. This issue was considered in Grant v Commissioner of Patents. In that case the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia held that an invention must involve a physical effect or transformation to be patentable subject matter. In doing so, it introduced a physicality requirement into Australian law. What this article seeks to establish is whether the court’s decision is consistent with the case law on point. It does so by examining the key common law cases that followed the High Court’s watershed decision in National Research Development Corporation v Commissioner of Patents, the undisputed authoritative statement of principle in regard to the patentable subject matter standard in Australia. This is done with a view to determining whether there is anything in those cases that supports the view that the Australian patentable subject matter test contains a physicality requirement.

The Australian domain name registration system : a more efficient system for the promotion of liberalisation, consumer protection and growth

This thesis is about the Australian domain name system and, in particular, the principles governing the registration of domain names in the '.au' country code domain space. It examines the different types of registration systems adopted in country code domain spaces and categorises them according to the extent to which they impose restrictions on registration, ranging from restrictive to unrestrictive. A comparative analysis is made of the restrictive registration system in Australia and the United Kingdom‘s unrestrictive system.

Group law computations on Jacobians of hyperelliptic Curves

We derive an explicit method of computing the composition step in Cantor’s algorithm for group operations on Jacobians of hyperelliptic curves. Our technique is inspired by the geometric description of the group law and applies to hyperelliptic curves of arbitrary genus. While Cantor’s general composition involves arithmetic in the polynomial ring F_q[x], the algorithm we propose solves a linear system over the base field which can be written down directly from the Mumford coordinates of the group elements. We apply this method to give more efficient formulas for group operations in both affine and projective coordinates for cryptographic systems based on Jacobians of genus 2 hyperelliptic curves in general form.

Murray-Darling basin governance : the focus of the law

The legal arrangements for the management of the Murray-Darling Basin in Australia have changed significantly over the years. The Constitution of the Commonwealth has led to the legal arrangements for the management of the Murray-Darling Basin. The Water Act 2000 of Queensland aimed at advancing sustainable management and efficient use of water and other resources by establishing a system for the planning, allocation and use of water. The Water Management Act 2000 of New South Wales ensures the sustainable and integrated management of the water resources of the state benefiting the present and future generations. The Natural Resources Management Act 2004 of South Australia applies to water resources and to other natural resources. The Act aimed at assisting the achievement of ecologically sustainable development in the state.

Principles of taxation law (4th Edition)

Taxation law can be an incredibly complex subject to absorb, particularly when time is limited. Written specifically for students, Principles of Taxation Law 2011 brings much needed clarity to this area of law. Utilising many methods to make this often daunting subject achievable, particular features of the 2011 edition include: • seven parts: overview and structure, principles of income, deductions and offsets, timing issues, investment and business entities, tax avoidance and administration, and indirect taxes; • clearly structured chapters within those parts grouped under helpful headings; • flowcharts, diagrams and tables, end of chapter practice questions, and case summaries; • an appendix containing all of the up to date and relevant rates; and • the online self-testing component mentor, which provides questions for students of both business and law. Every major aspect of the Australian tax system is covered, with chapters on topics such as goods and services tax, superannuation, offsets, partnerships, capital gains tax, trusts, company tax and tax administration. All chapters have been thoroughly revised. Principles of Taxation Law 2011 is the perfect tool to guide the reader from their initial exposure to the subject to success in taxation law exams. [from publisher's website]

Principles of taxation law 2012

Taxation law can be an incredibly complex subject to absorb, particularly when time is limited. Written specifically for students, Principles of Taxation Law 2012 brings much needed clarity to this area of law. Utilising many methods to make this often daunting subject achievable, particular features of the 2012 edition include: * seven parts: overview and structure, principles of income, deductions and offsets, timing issues, investment and business entities, tax avoidance and administration, and indirect taxes; * clearly structured chapters within those parts grouped under helpful headings; * flowcharts, diagrams and tables, end of chapter practice questions, and case summaries; * an appendix containing all of the up to date and relevant rates; and * the online self-testing component mentor, which provides questions for students of both business and law. Every major aspect of the Australian tax system is covered, with chapters on topics such as goods and services tax, superannuation, offsets, partnerships, capital gains tax, trusts, company tax and tax administration. All chapters have been thoroughly revised. Principles of Taxation Law 2012 is the perfect tool to guide the reader from their initial exposure to the subject to success in taxation law exams.