DOCSLIB.ORG

Detailed Review of Implementation of the Rio Principles, December 2011

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Detailed Review of Implementation of the Rio Principles, December 2011 Sustainable Development in the 21st century (SD21) Review of Implementation of the Rio Principles Detailed review of implementation of the Rio Principles Study prepared by the Stakeholder Forum for a Sustainable Future December 2011 Design by formatoverde.pt All photographs by © United Nations Acknowledgements This study is part of the Sustainable Development in the 21st century (SD21) project. The project is implemented by the Division for Sustainable Development of the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs and funded by the European Commission - Directorate- General for Environment - Thematic Programme for Environment and sustainable management of Natural Resources, including energy (ENRTP). Support from the European Commission is gratefully acknowledged. The study was carried out by Stakeholder Forum for a Sustainable Future (SF), under the supervision of David Le Blanc (UN-DESA). Within SF, Kirsty Schneeberger, Hannah Stoddart and Farooq Ullah participated in the editorial team. Contributors on individual chapters of the report were Nicholas Allen, Margaret Araujo Dantas, Isabel Bottoms, Robert Clews, Amy Cutter, Beth Harrison, Ian Fenn, Paul Heigl, Emma Mullins, Maliha Muzammil, Emma Norris, Nicola Peart, Kirsty Schneeberger, Andrew Shaw, and Sara Svensson. Claire Fellini (UN-DESA) prepared the manuscript. This publication has been produced with the assistance of the European Union. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of the United nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Union. Acknowledgements | Review of Implementation of the Rio Principles PAGE III Contents Acknowledgements .................................................. III Introduction ............................................................ 1 Principle 1 ................................................................. 4 Principle 2 ............................................................... 13 Principle 3 ............................................................... 19 Principle 4 ............................................................... 30 Principle 5 ............................................................... 35 Principle 6 ............................................................... 42 Principle 7 ............................................................... 52 Principle 8 ................................................................. 57 Principle 9 ............................................................... 62 Principle 10 ............................................................. 67 Principle 11 .............................................................. 74 Principle 12 ............................................................... 78 Principle 13 ............................................................. 82 Principle 14 ............................................................... 87 Principle 15 .............................................................. 92 Principle 16 ............................................................. 98 Principle 17 .............................................................. 104 Principle 18 ............................................................... 111 Principle 19 ............................................................. 119 Principle 20 ............................................................. 126 Principle 21 .............................................................. 133 Principle 22 ............................................................. 139 Principle 23 .............................................................. 146 Principle 24 .............................................................. 151 Principle 25 .............................................................. 155 Principle 26 .............................................................. 161 Principle 27 .............................................................. 166 Endnotes ................................................................ 172 PAGE IV Review of Implementation of the Rio Principles | Contents Introduction in the implementation of some of the Rio outcomes, specifically, Agenda 21 and the Rio Principles. This report is one of three companion reports produced under the first study The study comprises of three outputs: of the “Sustainable development • Detailed review of progress in implementation of the in the 21st century” (SD21) project, Rio Principles an undertaking of the Division for • Detailed review of implementation of Agenda 21 • Synthesis report on implementation of Agenda 21 and Sustainable Development of the United the Rio Principles. Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UN DESA). Implementation of the Rio Principles The overarching objective of the SD21 The Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, project is to construct a coherent vision adopted by 178 Member States in 1992 at the Earth Summit, was at the time perceived as a progressive of sustainable development in the 21st statement by all nations that enshrined the recognition century. The project, funded by the of the indivisibility of the fate of mankind from that of European Commission - Directorate- the Earth, and established sustainable development in international law. General for Environment, aims to provide a high quality analytical input The Declaration, a compact set of 27 principles, promoted to the Rio+20 conference. principles such as the centrality of human beings to the concerns of sustainable development (Principle 1); the The United Nations Conference on Sustainable primacy of poverty eradication (Principle 5); the importance Development (UNCSD), which will gather UN member of the environment for current and future generations and states and other stakeholders in Brazil in 2012, is a key its equal footing with development (Principles 3 and 4); occasion to take stock of 20 years of action at all levels the special consideration given to developing countries to promote sustainable development, and to provide (Principle 6); the principle of common but differentiated a clear vision and way forward for the international responsibilities (CBDR, Principle 7). It also enshrined community, national governments, partnerships and the two critical economic principles of polluter pays other stakeholders in implementing the sustainable (Principle 16) and precautionary approach (Principle 15). development agenda in an integrated manner. It introduced principles relating to participation and the importance of specific groups for sustainable development The SD21 project is built around a series of studies (Principles 10, 20, 21, 22). Lastly, it requested Member that will inform a synthesis report, “Sustainable states to put in place adequate legislative instruments to development in the 21st century” (SD21). The SD21 body address environmental issues. of studies is expected to become an important analytical contribution in its own right. Studies under the SD21 A review of the Rio principles was conducted by the UN project will cover the following topics: assessment of Division for Sustainable Development for the 5th session progress since the Earth Summit; emerging issues; of CSD in 1997 (“Rio+5”). Some of the principles have long-term sustainable development scenarios; tools given rise to considerable amount of literature. While the for managing sustainable economies; national and underlying causes for the success of specific principles international institutions for sustainable development; may be understood by experts in various fields of and sector assessments. international law and sustainable development, a short and simple but all-encompassing summary seems to be Implementation of Agenda 21 and progress missing. Yet, understanding why some of the principles in implementation of the Rio principles have not succeeded in passing the test of inclusion in international and national law, or at least become Twenty years after the Rio summit, this first study aims the basis for accepted normal practices is critical to to provide an assessment of the progress and gaps made furthering sustainable development. Introduction | Review of Implementation of the Rio Principles PAGE 1 This study provides a systematic assessment of the state AGENDA 21 AND RIO PRINCIPLES DRAFTING of implementation of the 27 Rio Principles; based on TEMPLATE this individual assessment, it will also provide a general assessment and distil some lessons for further progress. Introduction This section should set the context, why the principle The reader is invited to access the two other reports is important, what factors gave rise to it. produced under this study, namely the detailed review of implementation of Agenda 21 and the synthesis report Implementation on implementation of Agenda 21 and the Rio Principles. This section should analyze the status of implementation of the principle globally, including the following: Methodology • A broad and brief analysis of global implementation i.e. how prevalent the principle is in global and national decision-making, policy and law, the main drivers The Division for Sustainable Development commissioned • Examples of regional and national implementation Stakeholder Forum for a Sustainable Future (SF) to (specific case studies only, a full-scale analysis of undertake this review to provide an assessment of the national implementation will not be possible) progress and gaps made in the implementation of two • Examples of global, regional and national
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 1 Coalition Appears Before Ecuador's Constitutional Court in Possible
    Coalition Appears Before Ecuador’s Constitutional Court in Possible Historic Rights of Nature Case FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: October 19, 2020 QUITO, ECUADOR—Today, a coalition of environmental organizations appeared as amicus curiae before Ecuador's Constitutional Court to seek a robust application of the "Rights of Nature" in order to save the Los Cedros protected forest. Los Cedros is an immensely biodiverse Andean cloud forest that is under threat from recent mining concessions to state mining company ENAMI and its Canadian partners, Cornerstone Capital Group and BHP. These mining concessions now cover two-thirds of the reserve, threatening several imperiled species with extinction. In 2008, Ecuador became the first country in the world to constitutionally recognize the Rights of Nature, thereby establishing that Nature possesses certain basic rights, just as humans do. The Los Cedros case is the first time the Constitutional Court will address the Rights of Nature head on, making it a possible landmark ruling. “Ecuador has inspired a global movement to recognize Nature’s rights, but now it must become effective in practice to protect and restore ecosystems,” said Carla Cardenas, an Ecuadorian lawyer and Law and Policy Associate at Earth Law Center. “Today, our coalition presented a blueprint for Ecuador to enforce the Rights of Nature in a strong and practical manner.” "The Constitutional Court has a responsibility to represent the voice of Nature in the Los Cedros case," said Natalia Green, co-founder and Executive Committee member of
    [Show full text]
  • WWF Contribution to the Thematic Report of the UN Special Rapporteur on Healthy Ecosystems and Human Rights : Sustaining the Foundations of Life
    WWF Contribution to the Thematic Report of the UN Special Rapporteur on Healthy Ecosystems and Human Rights : Sustaining the foundations of life Introduction The report of the Special Rapporteur on Human rights and associated obligations related to healthy ​ biodiversity and ecosystems comes at a critical juncture. The COVID19 pandemic has more clearly than ever revealed the deep faults in our global economies and societies: both our staggering inequities and our dangerously unbalanced relationship with nature. We have an opportunity to build a green and just recovery. Ensuring global recognition of the tight bond between human rights and environmental health can leverage the sustainable decisions and actions we need to achieve that. This WWF contribution to the Special Rapporteur’s report aims to support that ambition, one we are equally committed to. It includes contributions from multiple offices across the WWF network.1 Responses to the Special Rapporteur’s questions on healthy ecosystems and human rights. Q.1: Please provide examples of ways in which declining biodiversity and degraded ecosystems are already having adverse impacts on human rights. Declining biodiversity and degraded ecosystems have far reaching and diverse impacts on human rights across the world. Nature degradation, declining natural spaces and degradation of water catchment areas greatly impact the right to a clean and healthy environment and the right to clean water ​ ​ (Examples in Annex: Kenya, Australia, Brazil, Argentina). Declining wildlife populations and destructive fishing practices threaten the right to food and food security for communities whose livelihoods depend ​ on biodiversity (Example in Annex: Malaysia); poaching and unrest can have severe impacts on the security of communities and indigenous populations (Example in Annex: DRC).
    [Show full text]
  • Seeking a New Jurisprudence … for Earth Matters
    1 The Long View Summer 2012 Oregon State Bar Sustainable Future Section Photo: J. Michael Mattingly The Long View Seeking a New Jurisprudence...for Earth Matters By Pat Siemen, JD, OP What is Earth Jurisprudence? Earth jurisprudence is an emerging field of law that encompasses both environmental ethics and legal practices. It builds on the pioneering work of Christopher Stonei, Aldo Leopoldii, and Thomas Berryiii, as well as indigenous traditionsiv. Thomas Berry, a priest, cultural his- torian, scholar, and self-described “geologian” first used the term “Earth jurisprudence.” In April 2001, Berry presented his outline of “The Origin, Differentiation and Role of Rights,” an articulation of the quantitative rights of nature that has been foundational in shaping the field of Earth jurisprudence. This document, later revised as “Ten Principles for Jurisprudence Revision,”v continues to provide critical conceptual foundation for the advancement of a “rights-of-nature” movement. In it, Berry sets forth his assertion that the rights to exist, flourish and fulfill one’s purpose in the Universe are not only innate to humans, but also apply to the nonhu- man world because the rights are grounded in the Universe, rather than any of human law. Earth jurisprudence examines the “wisdom or philosophy of law” for the sake of the viable functioning of the Earth community. Recognizing that we face unprecedented ecological challenges that impact the physical and spiritual health of both humans and the larger natural world, Earth jurisprudence calls for a major shift in consciousness. It requires an understanding of humanity’s integral relationship with larger, interdependent natural systems, and therefore, the recognition that laws, policies and economics need to be designed to protect the natural systems, species and entities that sustain life.
    [Show full text]
  • Earth Jurisprudence: the Moral Value of Nature, 25 Pace Envtl
    Pace Environmental Law Review Volume 25 Article 1 Issue 2 Summer 2008 June 2008 Earth Jurisprudence: The orM al Value of Nature Judith E. Koons Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.pace.edu/pelr Recommended Citation Judith E. Koons, Earth Jurisprudence: The Moral Value of Nature, 25 Pace Envtl. L. Rev. 263 (2008) Available at: http://digitalcommons.pace.edu/pelr/vol25/iss2/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Law at DigitalCommons@Pace. It has been accepted for inclusion in Pace Environmental Law Review by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@Pace. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PACE ENVIRONMENTAL LAW REVIEW Volume 25 Summer 2008 Number 2 ARTICLES Earth Jurisprudence: The Moral Value of Nature JUDITH E. KOONS* There are times in our lives, particularlyas we grow older, when the long arm of the horizon becomes our teacher.1 I. INTRODUCTION Earth Jurisprudence is an emerging field of law that calls us to pause as we enter the twenty-first century to consider the ground under our feet and the teachings bearing down on us from the horizon. 2 As planetary environmental crises advance toward * Associate Professor of Law, Barry University School of Law, Orlando, Florida. B.A., J.D., University of Florida, M.T.S., Harvard Divinity School. Copyright, Judith E. Koons, 2007. I offer my gratitude to Thomas Berry for his long life of soulful work and natural wisdom; to Sr. Pat Siemen, O.P., J.D., for her devotion to the call to "wear out rather than rust out"; to Julie Perry for her passionate and talented research assistance; to Pat Tolan and Eric Hull for their helpful comments; to the many ear- nest thinkers whose work graces this article; and to Earth for continuing to count us among her own.
    [Show full text]
  • Study Guide for the Rights of Nature Proposal Prepared by Rev
    Study Guide for The Rights of Nature Proposal Prepared by Rev. Dr. Bob Shore-Goss [email protected] "We are talking only to ourselves. We are not talking to the rivers, we are not listening to the wind and stars. We have broken the great conversation. By breaking that conversation we have shattered the universe. All the disasters that are happening now are a consequence of that spiritual 'autism.'" ~ Thomas Berry Summary: Pope Francis claims, “A true ‘right of the environment’ does exist.” There has been an international movement for the Rights of Nature in the last several decades. For the proposal before you, this serves as a brief study guide of the background. The proposal attempts to link the UCC with this movement that includes environmentalists, environmental Christian ethicists, indigenous peoples worldwide, international organizations that produced the Earth Charter, the Charter of Compassion, and the Parliament of World Religions. No Christian denomination (no world religion, outside indigenous spiritualities) have adopted a statement of faith and prophetic witness that explicitly claims Rights for Nature. There have lists of such rights by Stillheart Declaration and individual Christian ethicists. That is the last section of this study guide. Individual Christian liberation theologians such as the Brazilian Leonardo Boff, Sallie McFague, Thomas Berry, and others have recognize our human responsibility to notion of distributive justice (a fair share of Earth resources and goods for humanity, the more than human life, and bio-regions, and the Earth herself) to nature, living in a wholesome environment, eating well, enjoying a living space, sharing equitably and co-living with Nature, and ultimately respecting the intimate connection of human and the Earth community of life.
    [Show full text]
  • The Importance of the Rio Conventions to the Cooperative Republic of Guyana
    Target: Tertiary Educational Institutions The Importance of the Rio Conventions to the Cooperative Republic of Guyana What are the Rio Conventions? The Rio Conventions are three international agreements initiated in 1992 at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) or Earth Summit held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. These Conventions, United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (UNCBD), United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD), help Governments rethink economic development and find ways to prevent the destruction of irreplaceable natural resources and avoid global pollution. As follow-up to the Summit and to declare its readiness to participate in the process to ensure that environmental considerations are factored into social and economic decisions, Guyana signed on to the Rio Conventions in 1992. The Government of Guyana ratified the UNCBD and the UNFCCC on August 29, 1994 and almost three years later, on June 26, 1997, endorsed the UNCCD. United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (UNCBD) The United Nations Convention of Biological Diversity (UNCBD) is a framework convention that has three goals for the conservation and sustainably use of biodiversity, while promoting economic development. The goals are: • conservation of biological diversity for future generations; • exploitation of biological diversity in a sustainable way; and • sharing the benefits from the use of genetic resources in a fair and equitable manner. The UNCBD is essential for food security, medicines, fresh air, water, shelter, and a clean and healthy environment in which to live. It supports efforts to provide knowledge and fill information gaps on the management of biodiversity.
    [Show full text]
  • Breaking Free from Mining: a 2050 Blueprint for a World Without Mining – on Land and in the Deep Sea
    © Seas at Risk, 2021 Project management and contact: Ann Dom, [email protected] Authors: Joám Evans Pim and Ann Dom, with contributions by Nick Meynen, Diego Francesco Marin and Piotr Barczak (European Environmental Bureau) and Leida Rijnhout (LeapFrog2SD). Please reference as follows: Seas at Risk (2021). Breaking free from mining: A 2050 blueprint for a world without mining – on land and in the deep sea. Brussels. In collaboration Design by Blush Design Agency with the European Environmental Acknowledgements: The authors appreciate Bureau. the kind comments and feedback from Benjamin Hitchcock Auciello (Earthworks), Cecilia Mattea (Transport and Environment), Seas At Risk gratefully Charlotte Christiaens (CATAPA), Iñigo acknowledges EU funding Capellán-Pérez (GEEDS, University of support. The content of Valladolid), Iolanda Mato (Fundação this paper is the sole Montescola/Centro de Saberes para a responsibility of Seas Sustentabilidade), Laura Sullivan (WeMove At Risk. It should not be Europe), Manuel Casal (Instituto Resiliencia), regarded as reflecting the Marie-Luise Abshagen and Josephine Koch position of the funders. (Forum Umwelt & Entwicklung), Marisa Guerra, Melissa Terán and Ruth Lipphardt (SOS Suído-Seixo/Mina Alberta Non), Mirko Nikoli´c (Linköping University), Nik Völker and With the support of Corinna Lawrenz (Mining Watch Portugal), MAVA and the Levine Sabine Christiansen (Institute for Advanced Family Foundation. Sustainability Studies Potsdam) and Susanna This publication Myllylä (Kansalaisten kaivosvaltuuskunta). reflects the authors’ Acknowledgement of reviewers does not imply views and does not their endorsement of the views expressed in commit the donors. this paper. 1 Setting the scene 4 Metals – the fossil fuels of the 21st century 5 Objective of this paper: rethinking metals and mining 6 2 Story of a 2050 post-mining world and how we got here 8 We are in 2050, November 23rd – Chuquicamata, Chile.
    [Show full text]
  • Can Nature Have Rights? Legal and Political Insights
    E CAN NATURE HAVE RIGHTS? Legal and Political Insights Edited by Anna Leah Tabios Hillebrecht María Valeria Berros Transformations in Environment and Society 2017 / 6 RCC Perspectives: Transformations in Environment and Society is an open-access publication that exists to record and reflect the activities of the Rachel Carson Center for Environment and Society. The journal provides a forum for examining the interrelationship between environmen- tal and social changes and is designed to inspire new perspectives on humanity and the wider world. RCC Perspectives aims to bridge the gap between scholarly and non-scholarly audiences and encourage international dialogue. All issues of RCC Perspectives are available online. To view past issues, please visit www.environmentandsociety.org/perspectives. This issue: doi.org/10.5282/rcc/8164issues of RCC Perspectives are available online. To view past issues, please visit www.environmentandsociety.org/perspectives. Can Nature Have Rights? Legal and Political Insights edited by Anna Leah Tabios Hillebrecht María Valeria Berro s RCC Perspectives Transformations in Environment and Society 2017 / 6 Can Nature Have Rights? 3 Contents 5 Introduction Anna Leah Tabios Hillebrecht and María Valeria Berros Towards a Non-Anthropocentric Understanding of Nature 9 Who Needs Rights of Nature? Jens Kersten 15 Disrobing Rights: The Privilege of Being Human in the Rights of Nature Discourse Anna Leah Tabios Hillebrecht 21 Rights of Nature and the Precautionary Principle Atus Mariqueo-Russell Rights of Nature in Present-Day
    [Show full text]
  • “Rights for the Earth” Towards New International Standards
    “RIGHTS FOR THE EARTH” TOWARDS NEW INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS From November 30th to December 11th, during the COP21 (UN Convention on Climate Change Conference of Parties of 2015) in Paris, the world’s nations will reach new agreements on climate change. The major challenge with these negotiations rounds would be the achievement of sufficiently binding commitment to ensure a sustainable living planet. Addressing the global climate complexity requires a moral and legal responsibility that should go beyond the mere “declaration of intentions”. It is necessary to construct a social pact for coexistence of a global governance regime and an international legal framework whose pillars are safeguarding biodiversity and respecting ecosystems’ dynamics, on which humanity depends for survival and well-being. All over the world, initiatives presenting a systemic solution to climate change and the current state of the planet by adapting public international law and criminal law are growing. Whatever may be the approaches or legal tools (Earth Laws, Rights of Nature, Rights of Future generations, fundamental human right to live in a healthy environment, criminal recognition of environmental crimes, ecocides crimes, Global Commons) they all seem to agree in a new socio-ecosystemic perspective, acknowledging that humans are inalienable parts of Nature and their actions not only have consequences over their environment, but also for their own well-being. This growing convergence of initiatives is an historic expression of public will at supranational level to control the way of how norms are defined in the case of major damage to the environment. The meeting of two international stakeholders: the coalition “The Global Alliance for the Rights of Nature” (GARN) and the citizens’ movement “End Ecocide on Earth” (EEE) for the COP21, coming from different fields of law, having both accomplished amazing results on their continents, will be the symbol of this convergence; Seeking to implement a range of actions whose aim is to show the complementarity and necessity of their approaches.
    [Show full text]
  • Foundations for Sustainable Development: Harmonizing Islam, Nature and Law
    Pace University DigitalCommons@Pace Dissertations & Theses School of Law 7-2017 Foundations for Sustainable Development: Harmonizing Islam, Nature and Law Norah bin Hamad Elisabeth Haub School of Law at Pace University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/lawdissertations Part of the Comparative and Foreign Law Commons, Environmental Law Commons, International Law Commons, and the Natural Resources Law Commons Recommended Citation Norah bin Hamad, Foundations for Sustainable Development: Harmonizing Islam, Nature and Law (July 2017) (SJD dissertation, Elisabeth Haub School of Law at Pace University), http://digitalcommons.pace.edu/lawdissertations/20/. This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Law at DigitalCommons@Pace. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations & Theses by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@Pace. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FOUNDATIONS FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: HARMONIZING ISLAM, NATURE AND LAW A dissertation submitted to the Faculty in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctorate in Judicial Studies (S.J.D.) in environmental law at the Elisabeth Haub School of Law at Pace University By Norah bin Hamad Under the supervision of Nicholas A. Robinson, University Professor on the Environment and Gilbert and Sarah Kerlin Distinguished Professor of Environmental Law Emeritus Draft Date: July 19, 17 i ABSTRACT Human society is weakening Earth’s environment, its only home. In 2015, nations agreed on a new set of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to guide restoring and sustaining the wellbeing of peoples everywhere. If the SDGs are to succeed, all cultural and religious communities will need to urgently implement them.
    [Show full text]
  • An Intergenerational Ecological Jurisprudence: the Supreme Court of Colombia and the Rights of the Amazon Rainforest
    https://lthj.qut.edu.au/ LAW, TECHNOLOGY AND HUMANS Volume 2 (1) 2020 https://doi.org/10.5204/lthj.v2i1.1476 An Intergenerational Ecological Jurisprudence: The Supreme Court of Colombia and the Rights of the Amazon Rainforest Alessandro Pelizzon1 Southern Cross University, Australia Abstract In 2017, 25 young Colombians, aged 15 to 25, filed the first climate change and future generations lawsuit in Latin America (the Amazon case). Assisted by the organisation Dejusticia, the young plaintiffs filed an accion de tutela—a special mechanism under the Colombian Constitution that allows individuals to demand the protection of their fundamental rights. The plaintiffs argued that the current deforestation rates and their destructive consequences were violating their future right to a healthy environment. Remarkably, the Supreme Court of Colombia, in which the action was filed, ruled in favour of the plaintiffs, granting their petition and guaranteeing their right to enjoy a healthy environment, as well as their future rights to life, health, food and water. To enforce its judgment, the Court ordered that the Colombian Government formulate an action plan and an intergenerational pact to protect the Amazon. Most importantly, the court went beyond the grounds raised by the plaintiffs and recognised the Amazon rainforest as a subject of rights. Located within a growing network of constitutional, legislative and judicial initiatives in a growing number of jurisdictions, the Amazon case is but one example of the emergence of a novel ecological jurisprudence that is emerging around the globe. The Amazon case is particularly emblematic, as it reveals a profound ontological shift among younger generations, for whom a purely anthropocentric worldview appears to be increasingly representative of an untenable sense of alienation.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Testing Ecuador's Rights of Nature
    Testing Ecuador’s Rights of Nature: Why Some Lawsuits Succeed and Others Fail Craig M. Kauffman and Pamela L. Martin Paper Presented at the International Studies Association Annual Convention Atlanta, GA, March 18, 2016 For eight years, scholars have celebrated Ecuador’s auspicious move to include rights of Nature (RoN) in its 2008 Constitution. The constitution pledges to build a new form of sustainable development based on the Andean Indigenous concept of sumak kawsay (buen vivir in Spanish), which is rooted in the idea of living in harmony with Nature. The Preamble “celebrates” Nature (Pachamama) and presents a guiding principle for the new development approach: that humans are part of Nature, and thus Nature is a vital part of human existence.1 Ecuador’s constitution presents buen vivir as a set of rights for humans, communities, and Nature, and thus portrays RoN as a tool for achieving sustainable development. While much is written on the ethical arguments regarding RoN (and buen vivir), very few studies analyze how RoN might be implemented. This paper begins to fill the gap by analyzing the application of RoN in Ecuador, the world’s first country to grant Nature constitutional rights. These rights immediately conflicted with the Ecuadorian government’s plans to expand large- scale mining and oil extraction to finance development projects. Numerous lawsuits were filed to protect Nature’s rights, including from economic development projects. Given the State’s plan to fuel economic growth through increased extractivism, including in fragile and protected ecological areas, Ecuador constitutes a “hard case” for implementing RoN. This paper presents a conceptual framework for understanding the tools and pathways through which Ecuador’s RoN are applied in practice and the reasons why these rights are upheld in some cases and not others.
    [Show full text]