CONFRONTING REMOTE OWNERSHIP PROBLEMS WITH ECOLOGICAL LAW

Geoffrey Garver*

ABSTRACT

ThomasBerry’s powerfulappeal foramutually enhancing human- Earthrelationshipfaces many challengesdue to theecological crisis that is co-identifiedwith dominant growth-insistenteconomic,political, andlegal systemsacrossthe world. Thedomains of environmental history, ecological restoration, and eco-culturalrestoration, as well as studies by Elinor Ostrom and othersofsustainableuse of commonpool resources,provide insightsonthe necessary conditions foramutually enhancing human-Earth relationship. Atheme commontothesedomains is theneed forintimate knowledgeofand connectiontoplace that requiresalong-standing commitment of people to theecosystems that sustainthem.Remoteprivate ownership—oftenbylarge and politically powerful multinational corporations financed by investorsseeking thehighest possiblereturns and lacking knowledgeorinterestinthe places and people they harm—is deeplyengrained in theglobal economic system.The historical rootsof remote ownership and controlgoback to territorial extensification associated with thesharpriseofcolonialismand long-distancetradeinthe earlymodernera.Yet remote owners’and investors’ detachment from place poses an enormous challenge in thequest foramutually enhancing human-Earthrelationship. ThisEssaypresents an analysis of how contemporary environmental lawundergirds theremoteownershipproblem and of how limits-insistentecological lawcouldprovide solutions.

ABSTRACT...... 425 INTRODUCTION...... 426 I. AMUTUALLY ENHANCING HUMAN-EARTH RELATIONSHIP:AMORAL GROUNDING FOR ECOLOGICAL LAW ...... 428 II. THE REMOTE OWNERSHIP PROBLEM ...... 436 A. EcologicalDisruptionfromAgriculture...... 437 B. Metabolic Rift andthe Rise of GlobalTrade...... 440

*Dr. GeoffreyGarver,Ph.D.,J.D., L.L.M.,coordinates research on lawand governance for theEconomicsfor theAnthropocene Partnership (e4a-net.org)and teaches environmental coursesat McGill University and ConcordiaUniversity.Heisonthe steeringcommitteeofthe Ecological Law and Governance Association, ELGA(elga.world). 426 Vermont Law Review [Vol.43:425

C. ModernGlobal Trade and Investment...... 443 D. Trade, Investment,and Remote Ownership Problems ...... 449 III. CONFRONTING REMOTE OWNERSHIP UNDER ECOLOGICAL LAW ...... 450 CONCLUSION ...... 453

INTRODUCTION

Thegrowing tensionbetween theglobally dominant socio-political narrative, based on insistence on economic growth,and thealternative limits-based narrative in whichthe emerging field of ecologicallaw is grounded, createsanurgently needed openingfor transformationoflaw.1 Contemporarylegal systems co-evolved with other socially constructed normativesystems that characterizethe growth-insistent narrative.2 Therefore, theradical transformationthatecological lawcalls for necessarily involves concomitant transformationofthe social,political, economic,and cultural systems with whichlaw interactsacross temporal andspatialscales.3

1. KathrynGwiazdon, We Cannot Fail: The Promise and Principles of Ecological Lawand Governance,11MINDING NATURE 36, 36 (2018) (highlightingthe creationofthe Ecological Law and Governance Association (ELGA)asone response to theneedtostructureprinciples of lawand governance around thefoundations of life). 2. PANARCHY:UNDERSTANDING TRANSFORMATIONS IN HUMAN AND NATURAL SYSTEMS 5 (Lance H. Gunderson &C.S.Hollingeds.,2002) (explaining that co-evolutioninvolves aconstant “interplay between change and persistence, between thepredictableand unpredictable”). 3. See id. (“The cross-scale,interdisciplinary,and dynamic natureofthe theoryhas [led] us to coin theterm panarchy for it.”); RICHARD O. BROOKS ET AL., LAW AND ECOLOGY 36 (2002) (suggesting that “bothecologyand environmental laware undergoing transformations to betteradapt to eachother and to theenvironmental problems they areseeking to resolve”);DonaldT.Hornstein, Complexity Theory, Adaptation, and AdministrativeLaw,54DUKE L. REV.913, 932, 944 (2005) (demonstratinghow transformations that transcendour routinepolitical and social systemsmay come from a“republican moment[]”);J.B.Ruhl, Law’s Complexity: APrimer,24GA.ST.U.L.REV.885, 896–97, 901 (2008) (“[I]n social systems, change veryoften is the specificintent of human intervention, in whichcaseknowinghow thesystemresponds to changeshouldbeanimportant factor in thedesign of theinstrumentofchange.”); J.B. Ruhl, Panarchy and theLaw,17ECOLOGY &SOC’Y,no. 3, 2012, art. no. 31, https://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol17/iss3/art31/ (demonstratingthatadaptivesystems theoryhas alreadyspread to economics,ecology, and sociology); RobinKundisCraig, Learning to Think About Complex EnvironmentalSystems inEnvironmental and Natural Resource Lawand Legal Scholarship: ATwenty-Year Retrospective,24FORDHAM ENVTL.L.REV.87, 92 (2013) (“Howdowe transform environmentaland natural resources lawintogovernance systems that can cope with continual change, ever-present uncertainty,and thepotential forcatastrophic...thresholdcrossings in socio-ecological systems?”); AhjondS.Garmestani&Melinda Harm Benson, AFramework for Resilience-BasedGovernance of Social-Ecological Systems,18ECOLOGY &SOC’Y,no. 1, 2013, art. no. 9, http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol18/iss1/art9/(“The primaryproblems with our current framework for environmentallaw are that it does not often account forscale andtends to lock-in‘fixes’ 2019] ConfrontingRemoteOwnershipProblemswithEcological Law 427

Propertyregimes andstate sovereigntyare twoofthe main normative constructsthat will needprofound rethinking and regroundinginany transitionfromcontemporarylaw to ecological law.4 Deeply entrenched protections of privateproperty rightsand strong resistance to stringent supranationallegal regimesfor environmental protectionand othermatters act—often in concert—to impede meaningful,widespread achievement of an ecologically sustainable balance between societal developmentand ecological integrity.5 In particular,remoteprivateownership and absentee landlords associated with land andresource grabbing oftenlodge prevailing power overland usedecisions in decisionmakers whoare geographically farremoved fromthe effected ecological systems andlackinginthe knowledge neededfor managingthem in an ecologically sustainable manner.6 Thomas Berry’s conceptionofamutually enhancing human-Earth relationshipprovidesacompellingcoreobjectivefor ecological lawand the

becauseofthe needfor certainty in the legalprocess.”); RakhyunE.Kim &KlausBosselmann, International Environmental Law in the Anthropocene:Towards aPurposive System of Multilateral Environmental Agreements,2TRANSNAT’L ENVTL.L.285, 307 (2013) (“[T]heultimatepurpose of internationalenvironmentallaw should be aboutsafeguardingthe integrityofEarth’s life-support system, or all identified andpotentialplanetary boundaries, as thenon-negotiable biophysical preconditions forhuman existence and development.”); Olivia Odom Greenetal., Barriers and Bridges to the Integration of Social–Ecological Resilience and Law,13FRONTIERS ECOLOGY &ENV’T 332, 332, 335 (2015) (demonstratingthatadaptivegovernancemay be apart of thetransformationto ecologicallaw). 4. See Geoffrey Garver, ASystems-Based Tool forTransitioning to Law foraMutually Enhancing Human-EarthRelationship,157 ECOLOGICAL ECON.165, 166 [hereinafter Garver, A Systems-BasedTool forTransitioningtoLaw](explaining that “the dominant anthropocentric narrative...[is]reinforced by legal systems built around strong notions of statesovereignty and private property rights”); GeoffreyGarver, The Rule of EcologicalLaw:The Legal ComplementtoDegrowth Economics,5SUSTAINABILITY 316, 319, 321 (2013) [hereinafter Garver, The RuleofEcological Law] (contending that aflawofenvironmental lawand economicsisthe favoring of monetization, leading to primaryeconomic rather than ecological constraints on land). 5.See Garver, ASystems-Based Tool for Transitioning to Law, supra note4(“Prevailing legal systems ...assume[] non-human nature is subjecttohuman dominance ....”). 6. See FRED PEARCE,THE LAND GRABBERS:THE NEW FIGHT OVER WHO OWNS THE EARTH viii,5–6 (2012) (explaining thefirst exampleofthe global “landgrabs” he explored, including Al Amoudi, whorecruitedaformer Zenawiminister—Hail Assegdie—who plans to digacanal through villagers’landwithouttheir knowledge);Jampel Dell’Angeloetal., The Tragedy of theGrabbed Commons:Coercion and Dispossession in the Global Land Rush,92WORLD DEV.1,9(2017) (demonstratingthatthe “broaderdynamicsoflandgrabbing cannot be prevented by acting onlyon property regimeswithoutaddressingpower dynamicsand systemsofproduction”); Marc Edelman, CarlosOya &Saturnino M. Borras Jr., Global LandGrabs: Historical Processes, Theoretical and Methodological Implicationand Current Trajectories,34THIRD WORLD Q.,1517,1528 (2013) (connectingchanges in agrarian economy, capitalism,and other driversofdevelopment with solutions in environmental law). 428 Vermont Law Review [Vol.43:425 relatedfield of ecological economics.7 This Essay is asystems-based examinationofhow ecologicallaw that supports an ongoing questfor a mutually enhancing human-Earthrelationshipprovidesecologically sound andsocially just answerstoproblemsofremoteownershipaswellasland andresource grabbing. PartIexplainsand justifies amutually enhancing human-Earth relationshipasafoundationalgoal of ecological law. Part II providesamore detaileddescriptionofremoteownership and absentee landlords andhow they areintricatelytiedtoaglobaleconomic system that gives hierarchical normativepriority to:privateproperty and wealth;strong state sovereignty; and commodificationofnon-market values forthe sake of perpetual economic growth.PartIII explains howthe radical reordering of normativepriorities inherent in ecologicallaw wouldseverely restrict or eliminateremoteownership or absentee landlordism that impedesprogress toward amutually enhancing human-Earth relationship. Although ecological lawremains largelyconceptual and socio-politically elusive, it warrantsdetaileddevelopment now in order to be ready when its time comes.Fortunately, ecologicallaw is gaining ground with theemergence of rightsofnatureand other developmentsinlaw andrelated normative domains that will play adeterminativeroleinthe human prospect in these ecologically periloustimes.8

I. AMUTUALLY ENHANCING HUMAN-EARTH RELATIONSHIP:AMORAL GROUNDINGFOR ECOLOGICAL LAW

Berry described amutually enhancing human-Earth relationshipasone that reflectsthat“[i]nreality thereisasingleintegralcommunity of the Earth that includes allits componentmemberswhether human or other than human ...[each of which] has its ownroletofulfill, its owndignity,its innerspontaneity.”9 It is arelationshipinwhich “[e]very being enters into communion with other beings.”10 Berry aligns thetransitiontoamutually enhancing human-Earth relationshipwith theemergence of theEcozoic

7.See THOMAS BERRY,THE GREAT WORK:OUR WAY INTO THE FUTURE 2–3 (1999) (explaining that EuropeanoccupationofNorth America has been unbroken since colonizationand even with new achievementssuch as science, technology, industry,finance, and commerce, environmental devastationresulted, and consequently, anew transition of human-Earth mutual benefitisnecessary). 8.See Oliver A. Houck, Noah’s Second Voyage: The RightsofNatureasLaw,31TUL. ENVT’L L.J. 1, 2–4 (2017) (listinggrants of natural rights to glaciers,rivers, and animals andstating how these grantshavechangedthe views of other countriesorjurisdictions). 9. BERRY, supra note7,at4. 10. Id. 2019] ConfrontingRemoteOwnershipProblemswithEcological Law 429

Era, “the periodwhen humanswill be present to theplanetasparticipating membersofthe comprehensiveEarth community.”11 With regard to law,Berry wrotethat “[e]cology is not apartoflaw; lawisanextensionofecology.”12 In otherwords,law shouldreflect and maintain ahuman role within thebroader community of life that is life- enhancing andrespectfulofthe ecologicalroles of other membersofthat community.13 He argued that “[t]oachieve aviablehuman-Earth situationa new jurisprudencemustenvisage its primarytaskasthat of articulatingthe conditions forthe integral functioning of theEarth process,with special reference to amutually enhancing human-Earthrelationship.”14 Thelaw he envisioned“wouldprovide forthe legalrightsofgeological andbiological as well as humancomponentsofthe Earth community.”15 Each component of theEarth community wouldhavethe right “for habitatand the opportunity ...tofulfill itsroleinthe naturalsystems to whichit belongs.”16 Humans andall other componentsofthe Earthsystemwouldbe mutually responsible to respecteach other’s rights, and“[j]usticewould consist in carrying outthiscomplex of creative relationships.”17 Several juristshavefurther developed Berry’s proposal forlegal systemswithco-equalrightsamong allmembers of theEarth community with detailedelaborations and argumentsfor “wild law,”18 “Earth jurisprudence,”19 “Earth law,”20 and“ecological law.”21 Theserelated,or

11. Id. at 8. 12. Id. at 84. 13.See id. (explaining that ecology is not just asinglecourse of study, but rather the basis for cross-subject studies, including law). 14. Id. at 61. 15. Id. at 161. 16. Id. at 80. 17. Id. at 61–62. 18. See CORMAC CULLINAN,WILD LAW:AMANIFESTO FOR EARTH JUSTICE 30–31 (2ded. 2011) (explaining that wild lawismoreofan“approach to human governance”than asector of law, and further, that wild lawattempts to encourage ahuman-naturerelationship, withfocusonstrengthening that relationshiptosafeguard wildernessand self-regulation of communities). 19.PETER D. BURDON,EARTH JURISPRUDENCE:PRIVATE PROPERTY AND THE ENVIRONMENT 1(2015) (“[Thomas Berry’s] observationthat lawiscentraltothe present environmental crisis is the motivationbehind agrowing movement in lawcalledEarth jurisprudence.”). 20.Earthlaw wasatermassociated with environmental protectionlawsasfar back as the 1970s, but itsmorerecentuse is more closelyassociated with more radical notions of law,such as rights of nature, that explicitlyorimplicitly containastrongcritique of conventional environmental law. See HomerG.Angelo, Journal Review, ENVTL.CONSERVATION,Winter1975, at 315 (providing areview of EarthLaw Journal:Journal of International and Comparative Environmental Law,anewjournal “[c]ombining interestsincomparativeand international law” highlightingissues of environmental protection);Michelle Maloney, Building an Alternative Jurisprudencefor the Earth: TheInternational Rights of Nature Tribunal,41VT.L.REV.129, 131–35 (2016) (asserting that Earth law’smorerecent use is closelyassociatedwithmoreradical notions of law). 430 Vermont Law Review [Vol.43:425 perhaps equivalent,legal conceptsall make reference to rightsofnon- human components of nature.22 Indeed, theincreasingconstitutional, legislative, or judicial recognitionofrightsofnatureinlegalsystems at local andnationalscales is likely themostconcretetrend in actual adoption of conceptsassociated with thesebroaderlegal framings,which remain largelyconceptual.23 Paramount emphasis on theprimacy of ecologicallimits, not rightsof nature, is nonetheless themostessentialand deep-rooted feature of ecological lawthatseeks to perpetuateamutually enhancing human-Earth relationship.24 Other key conceptual features include:treatment of humans as apartofnature, andnot apartfromit; intergenerational, intragenerational, andinter-species fairness;precautionabout transgressing planetary boundaries and other systemicecological and socio-ecological thresholds;and adaptivenessinthe adoptionand evolutionofnorms over time, based on appropriate monitoring.25 Includinghumans in the understanding of natureembeds ecological lawinahuman-inclusive ecocentric worldview,which is distinctfrombothapurelyanthropocentric worldview that places humanity in aposition superior to nature and apurely ecocentric worldview that maybeindifferent to thehuman prospect.26

21. See Garver, TheRuleofEcologicalLaw, supra note4,at328 (“Under theruleof ecologicallaw,individual humans and artificialentitieslikecorporations wouldbeconsidered interrelationalbeings in ashared ecological context,and not as free agents whosequest to maximize abstract monetarywealth that canbeconvertedintoconsumptiveand waste-producing activities is given priority.”). 22.CULLINAN, supra note18, at 30; BURDON, supra note19; Maloney, supra note 20, at 130; Garver, TheRuleofEcological Law, supra note4,at319. 23.See MIHNEA TANASESCU,ENVIRONMENT,POLITICAL REPRESENTATION, ANDTHE CHALLENGEOFRIGHTS:SPEAKING FOR NATURE 107, 117 (2016) (providing examplesoflegislativeand judicial recognitionofrightsofnature at alocal and national level). 24.See Garver, TheRuleofEcologicalLaw, supra note4,at319 (outlining that ecological law emphasizes thenotion of ecological integrity by stressingthe ecological limits on theeconomyand society in theformofsustainability). 25. Id. at 327, 329; see Johan Rockström et al., ASafe OperatingSpace for Humanity,461 NATURE 472, 472 (2009) (exploringthe idea of “planetary boundaries”that definethe safe operating spacefor humanity, and that some of theEarth-systemprocesses have alreadytransgressed their boundaries: climate change, rate of biodiversity loss, and thenitrogen cycle); Will Steffenetal., PlanetaryBoundaries:GuidingHuman Development on aChanging Planet,SCIENCE,Feb. 13, 2015, at 738 (explaining that applying theprecautionaryprinciplemeans that theplanetary boundary is set at the “safe” end of aspectrumofuncertainty,which means that thefurther society transgresses from the boundary, thehigher the risk of drasticenvironmental changes); KATE RAWORTH,DOUGHNUT ECONOMICS:SEVEN WAYSTOTHINK LIKE A 21ST CENTURY ECONOMIST 95 (2017)(detailing thesocial influences that impact peoples’ consumptive habits). 26. See CAROLYN MERCHANT,REINVENTING EDEN:THE FATE OF NATURE IN WESTERN CULTURE 4(2d ed. 2013) (citinghistorianLynn White Jr.’s article, TheHistorical Roots of our Ecologic Crisis,toexplainthat one can blame“Christianarrogancetoward nature”for environmental disruption, in that Christianity is themost anthropocentricreligion that contributes to aworsening ecological crisis). 2019] ConfrontingRemoteOwnershipProblemswithEcological Law 431

Table1summarizes howthese and otherfeaturesdistinguish ecologicallaw from contemporary environmental law.

Feature Environmental lawEcological law Human-nature Humans areseparatefromand superior Humans areapartofnature; goal is a relationship to nature; goalisperpetual progressin mutually enhancing human-Earth human controlofnature, with strong relationship, with humility as to relianceontechnologicalsolutions prospects fortechnology to solve (e.g.geo-engineeringtomitigate complex ecological challenges climatechange)

Enforceable Enforceable limits on pollution and Ecological limits haveprimacy over environmental or developmentare mostlyreductionist, social andeconomic spheres, andare ecologicallimits end-of-pipe, subordinate to economic based on aholistic, integrated,systems- growth,and subordinatetoproperty based understanding of thehuman-Earth rights relationship; open to de-growth/steady stateeconomics

Useofmaterials Promotes efficiency, with acore faith Promotes sufficiency and drastic and energy in perpetual decouplingofenergy and reductioninmaterialand energy material throughput and consequent throughput to keepeconomywithin impacts from perpetualeconomic ecologicalbounds growth Scale Strong commitmenttostate Corecommitment to subsidiarity sovereignty: weak international/global principle:globalregimewith regimes to address ecological enforceable supranational rulesfor challenges; global and regionaltrade global ecological issues,with preference rules encourage competition and for local regulationand respect for local impede strong domesticregimes for regimes perOstrom’scriteria environmental protection Fairness Corebeliefinfairness of markets,with Strong limits on market mechanismsas someneedfor correction (e.g. polluter needed to respectecologicallimits; pays principle,internalizationof bigger role fornon-market decision- environmental externalities, etc.); making; focus on ensuringinterhuman, tendency to monetize valuesin interspecies andintergenerational decision making, e.g.monetary fairness; multi-criteria valuation valuationof“ecosystemservices” methods preferredfor decisionmaking involving incommensuratevalues Research, Effectsonhuman health paramount; Planetary boundaries and“safe monitoring and environmental effectsstudiedbut not operatingspace” are key basis of adaptation determinative; weakprecautionary research, monitoringand adaptation; approach; fewmechanismstoadjust strong precautionaryapproach rules based on monitoring

Table1.Distinguishing EcologicalLaw from EnvironmentalLaw27

27.LAURA WESTRA ET. AL,ECOLOGICAL INTEGRITY,LAW AND GOVERNANCE 144 (2018) (internal citations omitted). 432 Vermont Law Review [Vol.43:425

As noted above, rightsofnature resonate stronglywith coreelements of ecologicallaw.28 However,while promisingfor thoseseekinglaw grounded in amutually enhancinghuman-Earth relationship, rightsof natureraise concernsthat have not yetbeen resolved.29 Resolving conflicts between rightsofnatureand human rights, includingprivate property rights, requirescriteria that inevitablywill reflect ahierarchy of normative principles andvalues.30 Particularly troublingisthe risk that implementing and giving meaning to rightsofnatureinaglobalized worldstill operating according to agrowth-insistent narrative andworldview will lead to their erosionand dilution, rather than to theradical transformationthatrightsof natureadvocateshope for.31 Without fundamental shifts in narrativeaway fromgrowthinsistence, commodification, anthropocentrism,and human exceptionalism—whereever-increasingcreationofwealth in human societies is assumed to provide forthe commongood—conflicts will likely be resolvedsoastogiveprioritytoeconomic interests andprivateproperty rights.32 That has been thecasewith thehuman right to ahealthy environmentenshrined in Pennsylvania’sstate constitution,33 and in several

28.See supra Part I(explaining that theargument forecological lawmakes reference to the rightsofnature, whichistrending through legal systems). 29.See DAVID R. BOYD,THE RIGHTS OF NATURE:ALEGAL REVOLUTION THAT COULD SAVE THE WORLD 104 (Susan Renouf ed.,2017) (suggesting thatecological lawconflicts with differentideas suchasthe “inanimate object[s]”inthe Sierra Club v. Morton (MineralKing) case). 30.See id. at 178 (describingexamples of therights of natureconflicting with property rights suchasshrimpfarming in coastal mangrove foreststhatcauses conflictbetween an ecologicalreserve andthe farm owner’s propertyrights). 31. See id. at 196 (providing evidencethat erosion and dilution exists in bothEcuador and Bolivia); PeterBurdon&Claire Williams, Rights of Nature:AConstructive Analysis, in RESEARCH HANDBOOK ON FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPTS OF ENVIRONMENTAL LAW 196, 210 (Douglas Fisher ed., 2016) (stressing thedifficulty of extending alegal righttonature inthe confines of capitalist economics);Garver, The Rule of Ecological Law, supra note4,at 326(“[E]cologicallaw must permeate legalregimes and other disciplines like economics in asystemic, integrated way, and not be seen as a specialty area of thelaw thatappliestoisolatedproblems.”). 32.See BOYD, supra note29, at 230–31 (arguing that rightsofnaturecannot coexist with issues like economicgrowth, consumerism, andlimitless globalization andthat we cannot continue to prioritize property andcorporaterights if the rights of nature aregoing to persist). 33.InPennsylvania, thestate supreme court has heldthat theState’s constitutional right to a healthy environment (a more anthropocentric right regarding thehuman-Earth relationship),mustbe balanced againstother constitutionaland social andeconomic rights.Payne v. Kassab,312 A.2d 86,94 (Pa. Commw. Ct.1973), aff’d, 361 A.2d 263 (Pa. 1976), abrogated by Pa. Envtl. Def. Found. v. Commonwealth,161 A.3d 911(Pa.2017)).Asaresult,thatstate constitutional righthas had little impactondecisions affectingthe human-Earth relationship in Pennsylvania. Mary EllenCussack, Judicial InterpretationofState Constitutional Rights to aHealthfulEnvironment,20B.C. ENVTL.AFF. L. REV.173, 192–93 (1993).Theseexamples,along with others, suggestthat if rights of natureor similar rights are adopted within the dominant global paradigm of growth insistence,without clear criteria for when ecologicallimits must be accorded primacy,orhow to interpret theminlight of competingsocial objectives, therisk is high that thegrowth-insistent paradigm will overwhelmorat leastdilute thoserights. Id.; see Mary Elizabeth Whittemore, The Problem of EnforcingNature’sRights 2019] ConfrontingRemoteOwnershipProblemswithEcological Law 433 instancesinvolvingthe constitutionalrightsofnatureinBolivia and Ecuador.34 Counterexamplescan be found but arelessprevalent.35 For justice to carry out the“complexofcreativerelationships”thatBerry envisioned,36 simply resortingtoconventionalbalancingtests that subordinateenvironmental concernsand ecologicalintegrity to economic factorswill not do.37 Ecologicallaw requiresecological limits to have primacy throughout thelegal system,and criteria must be identifiedto reflect this primacy in decisionmaking andresolutionofconflicts.38 Another concern is that without clearercriteria,according rightstoall componentsofthe Earthcommunity,orto“nature”generally,riskscreating asysteminwhich nothing andnobodyhas meaningful rights.39 Also,the rightsofnaturemay havedifferentweight at differentscales.For example, buildingahydroelectric dammay appear to violatethe rightsofnature becauseofharmtolocal ecosystems,but favor therightsofnatureatthe global scalebecause it wouldreduce greenhousegas emissions.40 With such vagueness, conflicts might be decidedbypower and forceratherthanby law, or according to interpretations of lawthat enduperoding thelong-term rightsofnatureinviewofconflictingrightsgroundedinshort-term social or economic interests.41 Emphasisonplace, and on theneeds of theintricatelylinked local componentsofsocio-ecological systemsthatmustbemet in order to maintain amutually enhancing human-Earthrelationship, is also part of the

Under Ecuador’s Constitution: Whythe 2008 Environmental AmendmentsHave No Bite,20PAC.RIM L. &POL’Y J. 659, 659–67 (2011) (pointing outthatEcuador’s constitutional provision is unclearand provides no guidance as to which living organism prevails in court). 34.Nathalie Rühs&Aled Jones, The ImplementationofEarth Jurisprudence Through SubstantiveConstitutional Rights of Nature,8SUSTAINABILITY 174, 182 (2016). 35. See PaolaAndreaAcosta Alvarado &Daniel Rivas-Ramirez, AMilestonein Environmental and FutureGenerations’ Rights Protection:Recent LegalDevelopmentsBeforethe Colombian SupremeCourt,30J.ENVTL.L.519, 519–26 (2018) (analyzing theColombian Supreme Court’s historicdecision toprotect the Columbian Rainforestfrom deforestation, specifically that it was arestrictive approach in applying constitutional rights, and that international environmentallaw influenced the Court’sdecision). 36.BERRY, supra note7,at62. 37.Payne,312 A.2d at 94. 38. See Garver, TheRuleofEcological Law, supra note4,at326 (“[L]egal regimesmust be constrained by ecological considerations....”).Developing decision making criteria that reflectthis primacy shouldbeafocus of research in the emergingcommunity of scholars of ecologicallaw and governance and organizations like theELGA. 39.See LYNTON KEITH CALDWELL &KRISTIN SHRADER-FRECHETTE,POLICY FOR LAND:LAW AND ETHICS 224 (1993) (“If everything [is]saidtohave rights, andifthere is no way to adjudicate among conflictingrightsclaims, then(practically speaking)nothing has rights.”). 40.Rühs &Jones, supra note34, at 184. 41.See BURDON, supra note 19, at 79 (demonstrating thepossiblechallenges to using earth jurisprudence as atool for change). 434 Vermont Law Review [Vol.43:425 bedrock of rightsofnature andother conceptsinecologicallaw.42 As appliedinpractice, rightsofnaturewill onlymake senseiftheyare defined, recognized, and enforced with referencetothe specificecosystemsand historical trajectories in whichthey areembedded.43 Theoryand experience relatedtoecological restoration, eco-culturalrestoration, and sustainable management of commonpool resources(CPRs)will be particularly relevantasthisemphasis on placeisincorporated into themeaning and applicationofecological law.44 Ecologicaland eco-culturalrestoration involve a“process of assisting therecoveryofanecosystemthathas been degraded, damaged,or destroyed,”45 taking into accountcriteria such as ecological integrity, historical fidelity, and community engagement.46 Of thetwo,eco-cultural restorationplaces more emphasisonrecoveryofmutually supportive culturalpractices and ecosystemstructure and functioning.47 Perhaps the most appealingexpression that capturesthe mutually enhancinginterplay betweenhuman societiesand theecosystemsthatsupportthemisthe notion of reciprocalrestoration.48 Reciprocal restorationis“themutually reinforcingrestorationofland and culture such that repair of ecosystem servicescontributes to culturalrevitalization, andrenewal of culture promotes restoration of ecologicalintegrity.”49 In otherwords,any notion of ecosystemservices to humansmustbecounterbalanced with anotionof human services to ecosystems.50 Forecological,eco-cultural, or reciprocal restoration, human inclusion and intentionare key.51 Thesehuman dimensions encapsulatenot onlythe reality of historical human impactsonecosystemsfromthe local to the

42.Garver, ASystems-BasedTool forTransitioningtoLaw, supra note 4. 43.Garver, The RuleofEcological Law, supra note4,at326. 44.ERIC HIGGS,NATURE BY DESIGN:PEOPLE,NATURAL PROCESS, AND ECOLOGICAL RESTORATION 1, 4(2003). 45.SOC’YFOR ECOLOGICAL RESTORATION,THE SER INTERNATIONAL PRIMERON ECOLOGICAL RESTORATION 3(Oct. 2004),https://www.ctahr.hawaii.edu/littonC/PDFs/ 682_SERPrimer.pdf. 46.HIGGS, supra note44, at 4. 47.See id. at 236–37 (explaining that ecoculturalrestoration combinesbothcommunity activismand therestoration of ecologicalintegrity). 48. See Cathy Geist &Susan M. Galatowitsch, Reciprocal Model forMeeting Ecological and HumanNeeds in RestorationProjects,13CONSERVATION BIOLOGY 970, 974–75 (1999) (diagraming the reciprocal restoration model). 49.SOC’YFOR ECOLOGICAL RESTORATION,HUMAN DIMENSION OF ECOLOGICAL RESTORATION:INTEGRATING SCIENCE,NATURE, AND CULTURE 255 (Dave Egan et al.eds., 2011) [hereinafter HUMAN DIMENSION]. 50.Garver, ASystems-BasedTool forTransitioningtoLaw, supra note 4, at 165–74. 51.HUMAN DIMENSION, supra note49, at 73. 2019] ConfrontingRemoteOwnershipProblemswithEcological Law 435 global level,but also thedeliberatechoice involvedinpursuing“avisionof abetterrelationshipbetween humansand therestofthe world.”52 Flexibility in therange of possible choicesthatwill fosterormaintaina mutually enhancing human-Earthrelationshipcan be incorporatedintothe selectionofreference ecosystems that areused to establishobjectives for restoration.53 Themostappropriate are“locally-tailored historical references, usingall theavailableand appropriate conceptual tools, so as to integratebothlatent and on-going ecologicaland socioculturalprocesses and values.”54 Theelement of intentional choice renders ecologicaland eco- culturalrestoration “inherently (1)value laden, (2)context driven, (3)prone to be immersed in disagreement and compromise,and (4)experiential.”55 Theessentialroleofchoice and intentionprovides afoundationfor incorporatingprinciples fromrestorationtheoryand practiceintothe legal domain.56 Akey challenge will be to scaleuptheseprinciples from the mostly local or landscape scalesatwhich restorationtakes place to broader regional, national, or transnational scales.57 Thenotionofamutually enhancing human-Earth relationshipalso resonateswith studies of social systemsthat havemaintained sustainable, enduringuse of at least some CPRs in supportingecosystems.58 Basedon numerous case studies,Elinor Ostrom identifiedeight essentialfeatures of sustainableuse of CPRs:59 (1)clear boundariesinregardstothe limits of theCPRs and whocan access them; (2)locally-tailored rulesregarding use and management of theCPRs; (3)participatoryrulemakingprocessesthat includethoseaffected by therules;(4) monitoringsystems that are accountabletothe community of CPRusers; (5)graduatedand effective sanctions appropriate forlocal conditions;(6) lost-cost mechanisms to resolveconflicts;(7) non-interference with government authorities external to theCPR; and (8)governance organized in “multiplelayersofnested

52. Id. at 1. 53.Id. at 156. 54.LuisBalaguer et al., TheHistorical ReferenceinRestoration Ecology:Re-Defininga Cornerstone Concept,176 BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION 12, 13 (2014). 55.HUMAN DIMENSION, supra note49, at 1–2. 56.See id. at 139–40 (explaining that ecologicalrestoration, especiallybecause it is value- laden, requires questioning political power relations). 57.See id. at 142 (describing thatrestoration takes place in communities, or fields of interaction betweendifferent investments, andspecificallythat“communitiesofinterest”involve shared concerns, but mayneedtoconverge or dissipateasissuesappear). 58. See ELINOR OSTROM,GOVERNING THE COMMONS 89 (James E. Alt&Douglas C. North eds.,1990) (notingthatthe resource systemsinlong-enduring CPRs“clearlymeet thecriterion of sustainability”). 59. Id. at 90. 436 Vermont Law Review [Vol.43:425 enterprises.”60 Acommonthemeinthesefeatures of sustainablegovernance of CPRs is theimportance of astrong communal attachment to placeand thelocal community,and to intergenerational continuity.61 Theseplace- based and intergenerational commitmentsimply aneedtoadapt legal and governancestructures and rules forsustainableand shared human useof supportiveecosystems in responsetoinformationfrommonitoringof relevantsocial andecological indicators at alocal scale.62 Ostrom’s conclusions about sustainableuse of CPRs can be expanded to thebroader notionofcommons in general.63 Although it is generally agreed that thecommons “are neither privatenor public,”64 definingthe commons in general termsiselusivebecause theconcept of thecommons incorporates thenotionthatthey aredefined by thecommunitiesinwhich they arerecognized.65 Yetthe commons canbejuxtaposed broadly to both privateproperty,where rightstoexclusionand controlare paramount,and to government forces,which imposerules fromafar.66 In acommons,the community places limits on “[excessiveproperty]accumulationand [excessive] concentrationofpower.”67 Theroleofthe commons in resolvingremoteownership problemsunder ecological lawwill be revisited in Part III.

II. THE REMOTE OWNERSHIP PROBLEM

Remote ownership problemsarise when people, corporations,or governments exercise property rightsover places with whichtheyhave

60. Id. By nestedenterprises, Ostrommeans different levelsofgovernance within alayered systemofgovernance, at which rulesare tailored to the conditions at each level. Id. at 101–02. 61. Id. 62. See id. at 92 (stressingthe needfor local rulesthatsatisfy the unique issues presented in different communities or geographical regions); Dell’Angeloetal., supra note6(expressing the need for policies to “take into account themultiple anddiverging values of differentsocieties”). 63.See OSTROM, supra note58, at 90 (listing theeight design principles illustrated by long- enduringCPR institutions); FRITJOF CAPRA &UGO MATTEI,THE ECOLOGYOFLAW:TOWARD A LEGAL SYSTEM IN TUNE WITH NATUREAND COMMUNITY 46 (2015) (explaining theAncient Greek contribution to the notionofthe commons in thatthey are“things belonging to nobody,” but also belongingto everyone). 64. See CAPRA &MATTEI, supra note63, at 46, 106 (explaining theRoman principleofres communisomnium,which stands for “thingsbelonging to everyone”). 65. See id. at 52 (“Life in suchcommon-based organiccommunitieswas difficult for an outsideauthority to organize,discipline, or rationalize.”). 66. See id. at 44 (contrastingthe commons with privateownership, which “divid[es]the whole into individualistic components”). 67. See id. at 52 (explainingthe goalsofthe commons “wereinclusion and community rather than exclusionand individualization;and traditional[ly] promotedthe diffusionof responsibility ...rather than theaccumulationand concentrationofpower”). 2019] ConfrontingRemoteOwnershipProblemswithEcological Law 437 little or no attachment and aboutwhich they have little or no ecological knowledge.68 Although remote ownership,orabsentee landlordism,can arise in awidevarietyofsituations andtake myriadforms,the focus here is on remote ownership in thecontext of land andresourcegrabbingfor agriculturalpurposes.69 Land andresourcegrabbing occurs when remote owners or investors driveconversionofland and resourcesfromgenerally small-scale, traditional,locally controlled uses or relativelyundeveloped wildernesstomassive holdings devoted to industrialagriculture or resource extractionserving global marketsoffinance, goods, and services.70 Afocus on land andresource grabbingfor agriculture shines aspotlight on most,if not all, of themainproblemsassociated with remote ownership.71

A. Ecological DisruptionfromAgriculture

Sincethe Neolithic transition, agriculture has been theroot of many formsofecologically disruptivehuman behavior that strainsscarce resources(renewable and non-renewable) or overwhelms thecapacity of ecosystems to handlethe outputs of humantransformations of material and energy.72 Agriculture is aformofsimplificationand intensificationofland use73 that,even in itsmostprimitiveforms,alters theecosystems it

68.See PEARCE, supra note6,atvii–x (explainingthe purpose forthe author’s global travel andthat differentpeopleand corporations areacquiring large-scale landrights, while simultaneously staying disconnected to thegrabbedland andcontributingtoworld starvation,water scarcity, andover exploitationofresources in thegrabbed lands areas). 69.See id. at 3–16, 29–42 (describing differentexamples of land grabs foragriculturalreasons such as aSaudi billionaire grabbing land in Ethiopia foragricultural reasons,the TabukAgriculture Development Companyover-irrigatinginSaudiArabia, andPhilippe Heilberg’stiestoamega land deal with notoriouswarlords, General Paulino Matip andhis son). 70.See Agriculture at aCrossroads:Findings andRecommendations forFutureFarming: Land Grabbing,GLOB.AGRIC., https://www.globalagriculture.org/report-topics/land-grabbing.html (last visited Apr. 14, 2019) (explainingthat international investors engage in large-scale landacquisitions for agriculture production). 71.See Mercedes Stickler &Alisa Zomer, Agricultral Land GrabsThreaten Local Property Rightsand SustainableDevelopment,WORLD RES.INST., https://www.wri.org/blog/2011/04/ agricultural-land-grabs-threaten-local-property-rights-and-sustainable-development (last visited Apr. 14, 2019) (explaining that landgrabs have intensenegativeeffects on theenvironment and ruralliving, specifically that it affects customary andtraditional lands rights and impactslocal ecosystemsthat natives rely on fortheirlivelihood). 72.See VACLAV SMIL,ENERGYINNATURE AND SOCIETY:GENERAL ENERGETICSOF COMPLEX 148, 308 (2008) (noting thatpreindustrial agriculture caused greatenvironmental consequences). 73. See JAMES C. SCOTT,SEEING LIKE A STATE:HOW CERTAIN SCHEMES TO IMPROVE THE HUMAN CONDITION HAVE FAILED 165, 262, 264 (1998) (discussingdetailed studies showing that industrialization resulted in less economic returns than intensificationofagriculture did,which focusses on manuringand attentive breeding,and further,that “high-modernist agriculture” succeedsinfarm 438 Vermont Law Review [Vol.43:425 occupies.74 Forexample, farmingtends inherently to reduce biodiversity because, typically,its aimistofocus on asmallerrange of species than wouldotherwise be presentand harvest reduces theoverallamount of energy availablefor life support.75 Furthermore, strategiesfor meeting the basic challenge of finding, creating, or maintainingsuitablesoiland moisture conditions foragriculture include: swidden agriculture,fallow periods,croprotation, multi-cropping, no-tillcultivation, irrigation, and nutrient addition.76 Allhaveecologicalimplications,which mayinclude: loss or degradationofhabitatfor terrestrial andfreshwaterspecies; reduced capacity forcarbonstorage;erosionand salinizationofsoil; desertification; and waterand airpollutionfromnutrientand pesticide run-offand drift, alongwith climateand other ecologicalimpactsassociated with theenergy source used.77 Theenvironmental historyofagriculture duringthe early modern period(roughly1400–1800 C.E.)indifferent parts of theworld is replete with accounts of its significantecological impacts.78 Relianceonenergy frombiomass, wind, andwater placed astrong demand on agriculture,not onlyfor food and fiber forhuman survival,but also theenergyneeded to extractworkfromhumans andanimals that poweredmuch of theever-

simplification, which is the“process of simplifying thefloral profusion of nature” to coaxspecific species of florainsteadofothers). 74.SMIL, supra note 72, at 308. 75.HelmutHaberl et al., ASocio-Metabolic TransitionTowards Sustainability?Challenges forAnother Great Transformation,19SUSTAINABLE DEV.4,5–7 (2009) (detailing thegrowing use of natural resources, suchasland andwater,and itseffect on biodiversity lossand energyreductions). 76.See JOHN F. RICHARDS,THE UNENDING FRONTIER:AN ENVIRONMENTAL HISTORY OF THE EARLY MODERN WORLD 152 (2003)(demonstrating that Japan intensified cultivationthrough theuse of crop rotation, multi-cropping, and fallow periods); see also SMIL, supra note 72, at 162, 164,292 (detailingdifferentagriculture strategies). 77. See ThorkildJacobsen &RobertM.Adams, Salt and Silt in AncientMesopotamian Agriculture: Progressive Changes in Soil Salinity and Sedimentation Contributed to theBreakupofPast Civilizations,SCIENCE,Nov. 21, 1958, at 1251 (explaining that Iraq’s semi-arid climate andlow permeabilityofthe soils subjected land to saltaccumulationthat was likelydue to irrigation); J.R. MCNEILL,AN ENVIRONMENTAL HISTORY OF THE TWENTIETH-CENTURY WORLD 35 (2000) (asserting thatagriculture has caused soil erosion sinceits inception, and that soilerosionfirst occurred with new agriculture practices in theMiddleEast,China,and Indiaand continued as thepopulationgrew); Pichu Rengasamy, World Salinizationwith Emphasis on Australia,57J.EXPERIMENTAL BOTANY 1017, 1019 (2006) (discussinghow irrigation causesthe salinization of soil); SMIL, supra note72, at 308 (considering theimplications of differentagriculturalstratagies). 78. See KennethPomeranz, Political Economy and Ecology on theEve of Industrialization: Europe, China,and theGlobal Conjuncture,AM.HIST.REV.425, 440, 445 (2002) (stating that from around 1400 to 1800C.E., Europeansalmostexperienced similarenvironmental ruintothat which Chinaexperienced in theYangtzeDelta). 2019] ConfrontingRemoteOwnershipProblemswithEcological Law 439 expandingeconomy.79 Thebasic strategiesweretointensify agricultural productionlocally with increased inputsoflabor or othertypes of energy, irrigation, or modified productionmethods;ortoaugment production extensivelybymoving to or relyingon(through trade or conquest) external areas,either nearby (e.g., drainedwetlands)orremote(e.g.,the Baltics, Eastern Europe,Scandinavia, theAmericas,NorthernChina, Taiwan,and South Africa).80 Modernagriculture contributes significantly to climatechange, disruptionofglobal nutrientcycles, biodiversity loss, land usechange,and other pressures on planetary boundaries.81 Since 1800, cropland has tripled; it now takesupabout 12% of theEarth’s ice-freeland surface,and pastures another 22%—a vast transformationsince theNeolithic transition.82 Irrigatedland increased from75millionhectares at theend of World WarII to over275 millionhectares in 2000, mostly in Asia.83 Agriculture globally places significant pressure on accessiblefreshwatersupplies.84 Crop farminguses about 5% of totalprimary energy supplyglobally,requiring fossil-fuel inputs at every stage.85 Methanefromricepaddies andlivestock, nitrous oxide emissions fromnitrogen fertilizationand nitrification

79. See ROLF PETER SIEFERLE,THE SUBTERRANEAN FOREST:ENERGY SYSTEMS IN THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION 23–26 (2001) (arguing that advancesinagrarian technology result in human intensiveenergy centers);SMIL, supra note72, at 155, 164 (notingthat humans and animals expended enormous energy forirrigation); CLIVE PONTING,ANEW GREEN HISTORY OF THE WORLD:THE ENVIRONMENT ANDTHE COLLAPSE OF GREAT CIVILIZATIONS 40 (2007)(providing reasoning for the evolutionand proliferationofagriculture). 80.RichardC.Hoffmann, FrontierFoods forLate Medieval Consumers: Culture, Economy, Ecology,7ENV’T &HIST.131, 136–37 (2001); see Pomeranz, supra note78, at 441–43 (providing examples of how Europegreatly benefitedfromimportsfrom America); ERIC LIONEL JONES,THE EUROPEAN MIRACLE:ENVIRONMENTS,ECONOMIES, AND GEOPOLITICS IN THE HISTORY OF EUROPE AND ASIA 81–82 (2003) (discussing how widespread extraction economiescreated an advantageous position for Europeancolonialpowers);RICHARDS, supra note76, at 106 (2003)(stating that China expanded into Taiwan to cultivateits “unused” land); SMIL, supra note72, at 164, 166(showing that many countries adopted crop rotationtoincreaseagriculturalproductivity). 81.SMIL, supra note72, at 308. 82. See MCNEILL, supra note77, at 212–14 (describing how theworld’s cropland hasgrown, paralleling that of population growth,and that this growthcontinued throughout thecenturies due to colonization, theinternational grainmarket,and chemicalfertilizers);NavinRamankutty et al., Farming the Planet:1.Geographic DistributionofGlobal AgriculturalLands in theYear 2000,22GLOBAL BIOGEOCHEMICAL CYCLES 1, 14 (2008); Rockström et al., supra note25, at 473 (showingthat“change in land use” is one of theEarth-system processes that has converted11.7% of totallandcoverto cropland use). 83.SMIL, supra note72, at 294. 84. See Ramankutty et al., supra note 82, at 1(expressing that “[h]uman land useactivities are aforce of global significance,”and affectfreshwater resources); Rockströmetal., supra note25, at 473 (stating that humanity is likely to soon approach theboundariesoffreshwater use). 85. See SMIL, supra note72, at 291–92, 303 (showingthat thetotal energy cost of farmingis less than 5% and that farmersaround theworld have mechanizedtheirfarming practices). 440 Vermont Law Review [Vol.43:425 processes, and basiclossofcarbon storage capacity also contributeto climatechange.86 Anthropogenicconversions of atmospheric nitrogen to reactiveforms that enter ecosystemswerevirtually non-existent beforethe industrialera,but arenow equal to naturalconversions,doublingthe global load.87 Phosphorus,which (unlikenitrogen)derives fromexhaustible fossil minerals, is also heavily used as an agriculturalfertilizer.88 Anthropogenic phosphorus and nitrogen loadscontributetoeutrophicationoffreshwater ecosystems and oxygen-depleteddead zones wheresurface run-offenters ocean waters.89

B. Metabolic Rift and theRise of Global Trade

Around 4,000 years ago, domesticationofanimals capable of transportingheavyloads over long distances(especially camels) led to the developmentofextensivenetworksinAsiafor trading salt, spices, silk, gems, and other valued goods.90 Regional trade networks gradually expanded in similarpatternsinother parts of theworld.91 In Europe, for example, regional trade of grains,fur,stockfish, and other goods in the12th and 13th centuriessolidifiedintothe Hanseatic League.92 TheHanseatic League wasasophisticated network forfacilitatingtrade and protectingthe

86. See Ramankuttyetal., supra note82, at 1(finding agriculture at leastpartially responsible forthe emissions of greenhouse gasesand changing regional climates); Rockströmetal., supra note25, at 474 (explaining that modernagriculture,specifically manufacturingfertilizer,results in additional nitrous oxide in theatmosphere, which causes environmentalchanges). 87. See Rockström et al., supra note25, at 473 (comparingthe pre-industrial levels of nitrogen “removed from theatmospherefor humanuse” at zerotonnes per year,with thecurrent status at 121 milliontonnes per year and theproposed boundaryof35milliontonnes);Steffenetal., supra note25 (arguing that it is important to place boundariesonchangesinbiochemical flows, such as nitrogen, because thesechanges affect the Earth’s capacity for resilience). 88.See SMIL, supra note 72, at 294 (providing thatphosphorus is found in potash, whichwhen dilutedwithH2SO4 createsasuperphosphatefertilizer). 89. See Rockström et al., supra note25, at 474 (emphasizingthatanthropogenicchanges in the nitrogen and phosphorus flowshavealtered marineecosystems, which justifies the needfor planetary boundariesfor nitrogen and phosphorous flows); StephenCarpenter &Elena Bennett, Reconsideration of thePlanetary Boundaryfor Phosphorus,6ENVT’L RES.LETTERS 1, 8(2011) (“Human release of [phosphorus]tothe environment is causing widespread eutrophication of surface freshwaters.”); Steffen et al., supra note25, at 742 (notingthatthere is increasing evidence thatbiochemical flows, such as nitrogen and phosphorous, mayhaveimpacts on sea biodiversity, andfurtherthatthe analysis revealed a needfor another boundarytoavert eutrophicationoffreshwater). 90.Eric C. Ellisetal., Used Plant:AGlobal History,110 PROC.NAT’L ACAD.SCI.U.S.7978, 7981–82 (2013). 91. See DonaldWorster, The VulnerableEarth: TowardaPlanetary History,11ENVTL.REV. 87, 94 (1987) (“[M]arketsand trade had existed in pre-modern times....”). 92.See Hoffmann, supra note80, at 148 (narrating how theherring industry createdatrade revolutionestablishing the Hanseatic League). 2019] ConfrontingRemoteOwnershipProblemswithEcological Law 441 interestsofmerchants in NorthernEurope fromthe 13th to the17th century.93 Beginninginthe late 15thcentury,the long-distance oceanicvoyages of Europeans to East Asia,Africa, and theAmericas initiatedaperiodof significantexpansionintrade.94 European countriesbrought new formsof intensiveagriculturalland usetothe Americas and elsewhere.95 For example, export-oriented Caribbeansugar plantations in the17thand 18th centuriesstood out as anew agriculturalform, with massive local ecosystemicconsequences,aswellasthe social consequencesassociated with theAfrican slavetrade.96 Europeans brought OldWorld domesticated plantsand animalstothe Americas(e.g.,wheat,sheep, horses, and cattle) and introduced NewWorld domesticated plants(e.g., maize, tomatoes,and potatoes)tothe OldWorld.97 They also brought OldWorld diseases, most notablysmallpox, whichkilledoff 50% or more of indigenous populations, thereby temporarily reducing theecosystemic impactsofindigenous agriculture.98 Another feature of this era is theprivateers actingonbehalf of Europeanmonarchs through official charters that evolved into thefirst corporations—essentially,legally recognized artificialentities that allowed investors to reap vastmaterialreturns fromconquest of newterritory and resourcesinAsia, Africa, andthe Americas.99 Theimprimaturofdivinely- rootedroyalright infusedthe violent Europeaninvasions and conquestsof theearly modern erawith moraland legalauthority.Thisauthority implicitlypersistsinthe modern societiesthat emergedfromconquered lands in theAmericas and elsewhere—in thesense that thelegitimacy of

93.GEORGE CAWSTON,THE EARLY CHARTERED COMPANIES 4(W.S. Hein 2008) (1896). 94. See Hoffmann, supra note80, at 135–39(discussingtradeexpansion such as thegrain trade expansion of the1460s and linecattle trades). 95.See id. at 131 (“Acontinual western history of feeding beyond theboundsofnatural local ecosystemsgoes backtoEurope’shigh andlater MiddleAges.”). 96. See Richards, supra note76, at 460(statingthatsugar plantingcaused ecological and social stresses in the Caribbean). 97. Id. at 311–12; see ALFRED W. CROSBY,THE COLUMBIAN VOYAGES, THE COLUMBIAN EXCHANGE, AND THEIR HISTORIANS 8(MichaelAdas ed.,1987) (discussing theexchange of agriculturaland livestock species between the Oldand NewWorld). 98. See CROSBY, supra note97(“The decisive advantage of thehuman invadersofAmerica wasnot theirplantsoranimals—and certainly not theirmusketsand rifles, which Amerindians eventually obtained in quantity—but their diseases.”); Richards, supra note76, at 314 (reviewinghow thesudden onset of new diseases, like smallpox, devastatedindigenous peoples); PONTING, supra note 79, at 215 (describingthe varietyofdiseases brought from theOld World to theNew World). 99.DAVID C. KORTEN,THE GREAT TURNING:FROM EMPIRE TO EARTH COMMUNITY 129–30 (1st ed. 2006) (“Over time, therulingmonarchs turned from swashbucklingadventurersand chartered piratestocharteredcorporations as theirfavored instrumentsofcolonial expansion, administration, and pillage.”). 442 Vermont Law Review [Vol.43:425 thosecolonial conquests rarely has been comprehensivelyoreffectively questionedorredressed on thebasisofcontemporary notions of theruleof law, human rights, andjustice.100 This is truenot onlyinregardtothose societies domestically, but also in regardtoglobal patternsofmaterialand energy flowsthrough trade channels that have rootsinthe power imbalances andlegal ordersofthe early modernera.101 Notably, the privateersofthe earlymodernera evolved into modern corporations. Corporations continue to play aroleinland and resource grabbingthat transfers wealth from relativelypowerless indigenous peoples and smallholders to remoteowners—often, investors in corporateschemes package land andresources into financial instruments that reap high returns on investment.102 Thus,the earlymodern period beganaglobaltrade and investment regime,inwhich increasinglywealthypopulationcentersinEurope,103 and eventually elsewhere, becameincreasinglydependent on provisioning from remote parts of theworld—inother words, aperiodofrisingmetabolic rift (i.e., theremoval of someportionofbioregionalmetabolismtoremote areas)and reliance on “ghostacre[s]”(i.e.,the amount of land spared from agriculturalorother uses by usingremotelandsornew energy regimes).104 Ever since, through expanding trade,people—especially in wealthy industrialsocieties—have becomeincreasingly detached fromthe ecosystems that maintain them;based on consumption, individual

100.MichaelM’Goningle, Green Legal Theory: ANew Approach to theConcept of Environmental Law,4NEUE KONZEPTE 34, 36 (2008). 101. See JUAN MARTINEZ-ALIER,ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS:ENERGY,ENVIRONMENT AND SOCIETY 102 (1987) (explaining that thestudy of theflowofmaterial andenergy shows that energyhas not reached a“subsistence limit”); Arturo Escobar, Latin America at aCrossroads:Alternative Modernizations,Post-Liberalism, or Post-Development?,24CULTURAL STUD.1,1(examining the socio-economic changes occurring in Latin America); PONTING, supra note79, at 171–72 (showing how colonialism created aworldeconomy). 102. See PEARCE, supra note6,at41–42 (speakingofPhilippe Heilberg’s tieswithSouth Sudan’sUnity Province, through amega land deal with notorious warlords, GeneralPaulinoMatip and hisson). 103. See Joshua K. Leon, TheRoleofGlobal CitiesinLand Grabs,36THIRD WORLD Q. 257, 258 (2015) (stressing that theconcentration of powerincities continues,with more than half of the world’s populationnow in urbanareas, andcitiesare increasingly the power centersunderlyingland grabs). 104. See Hoffmann, supra note80, at 139, 149 (showcasingthatEuropebecamedependent on long distance trading of cattleand fish from remote locations); Pomeranz, supra note78, at 438 (providing examples of different countriesrelying on imports from remote locations);JONES, supra note 80, at 83 (defining the conceptof“ghostacreage”); Brett Clark&John B. Foster, Ecological Imperialismand theGlobal Metabolic Rift: Unequal Exchange andthe Guano/Nitrates Trade,50INT’L J. COMP.SOC.311, 311, 313, 316 (2009) [hereinafter Clark &Foster](asserting that ecological imperialismcreates ametabolic rift, specifically highlightingthe international guano trade in the19th century that created ametabolicrift from international soiltransfers). 2019] ConfrontingRemoteOwnershipProblemswithEcological Law 443 ecological footprints globally arelessand less local.105 Ongoing patternsof land andresource grabbing exacerbatethesetrends in thecurrent era.106

C. ModernGlobal Trade and Investment

By theend of theearly modernera andatthe onset of theIndustrial Revolution, aworld market waswellestablished, creatinganunprecedented levelofglobalinterconnectednessofagriculturalproductionand itscascade of impacts.107 Yetagriculture and trade priortoabout 1800 were still contained within theenergetic limits on transportand productionmethods achievable in an agrarianenergysystem.108 Poweredbyfossilfuels, populationexpansion, technological innovations, andrisingconsumption, global marketshaveexpandedexponentially sincethe dawn of the IndustrialRevolution.109 As noted above, theecologicalimpactsofmodern agriculture, transformedover thepast twocenturies by fossil fuelsand scientific,industrial, and chemical revolutions,are of another order altogether.110 Fossil-fuelledmodern agriculture depends on mechanization, automation, massiveuse of inorganicfertilizersand pesticides, irrigation that reliesonmajor alterations of aquaticand hydrologicsystems with dams and other watermanagement infrastructure, an industrialapproach that favorsdisease-vulnerablemonoculturesofadwindlingnumber of species of plants andanimals,genetic engineering, and increasing consumptionof

105. See BJÖRN NYKVIST ET AL., NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE ON PLANETARY BOUNDARIES:ASTUDYFOR THE SWEDISH ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 22 (2013) (discussing that humansnow liveinwhat is knownastheAnthropocene—“an erawhen humans have becomethe dominantgeologicalforce”—andthat international trade causes environmentalimpacts elsewhere, as opposed to locally). 106. See, e.g.,PEARCE, supra note6,at93–95 (outliningSusanPayne’s London connection with Africa,specifically that she owns thelargest land holdinsouthernAfrica, while she engagesin buying and sellingAfrican farmland with unlimited rights to irrigation). 107.Rachel Beddoe et al., Overcoming Systemic Roadblocks to Sustainability:The Evolutionary RedesignofWorldviews, Institutions, andTechnologies,106 PROC.NAT’L ACAD.SCI.U.S.2483, 2485 (2009) (explaining that theIndustrial Revolutionbrought fuelstothe nation, whichled to economic growth from factors suchaspesticides,fertilizers, andmechanizedagriculture). 108. See SIEFERLE, supra note 79, at 34 (discussing the natural limitations of traditional agrarian expansiondue to alimitedamount of solar energy);SMIL, supra note 72, at 166 (describing howthe agrarianfood productionsystem ledtocyclical famine). 109. See KARL POLANYI,THE GREAT TRANSFORMATION:THE POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC ORIGINS OF OUR TIME 42–43 (2ded. 2001) (notingthat theIndustrial Revolution brought anew belief that an unlimitedamount of materialcommoditiescouldresolve societalissues, and further, that growth in populationand industry influenced change inthe market economy). 110.See Lester R. Brown, The SocialImpact of theGreen Revolution,39INT’L CONCILIATION 3, 6(1971) (“The technological breakthrough achieved by agriculturalscientists foreshadows widespread changesinthe economic, social,and politicalorders ....”). 444 Vermont Law Review [Vol.43:425 meat.111 Along with theseimpacts, themetabolic rift between wherefood andfiber areproduced andconsumedhas widenedsignificantly.112 Themodernglobalized economy is theprogeny of this market.113 Today’sglobalized market operates on theprinciples of capitalism,profit- seeking, andcommitment to perpetual economic growth.114 Capitalnow moves with fewconstraints around theglobe, always seeking to expandand maximize short-term profit. Countries and multinationalcorporations engageinafrenzyofmarket competition that relies on thegreatest exploitationofcheap labor andlowest-cost extractionofmaterialand energy possible.115 In therecent rash of land andresource grabs— particularly in Africa,Latin America,and Asia—and bioprospectingin tropicalforests, theownersand controllers of financial capital, alongwith political leaderstheysupportortolerate, retain authority and controlover theflows of materialand energy.116 Thecontemporaryrationalefor international trade and investment is embedded in thedominant paradigm that gives prioritytoeconomic growth

111.See MCNEILL, supra note77, at 216 (stating that by the early 1990s, most industrialized nations revolutionized theiragriculture practice with fossil fuels, chemicals, monocropping, and machines); Rockström et al., supra note25(suggestingthatreliance on fossil fuels and industrialized agriculture haveresultedindamaging levelsofhuman activity that aredetrimental to thesystems that keepEarth in astable state); Jonathan A. Foleyetal., Solutions foraCultivated Planet,478 NATURE 337, 338–39 (2011) (discussingthe environmental impacts of agricultural expansionand intensification, threatening land and water quality, biodiversity, andthe climate). 112. See Clark &Foster, supra note 104, at 315 (arguing that capitalism, global trade,and intense agricultural practices create ametabolicriftinsoilnutrients). 113.See id. at 313 (“[T]heriseofthe capitalistworldeconomyitselfwas synonymous with the emergence of ahierarchical division of nations through theappropriationofdistant lands, labor, and resources.”). 114.See id. at 314 (finding that theglobalized markets approachofcapitalism is “‘expansion- oriented and accumulation-driven’, whichpushes it to subsumethe entire worldtoits logicof accumulation”). 115. See MCNEILL, supra note77, at 358 (highlightingthatthe extractionofmaterials and energy mayhave left mankind in an “ecological crisis,” which is unsustainableand necessitatesanew regimetoavoidcollapse); JAMES GUSTAVE SPETH,THE BRIDGE AT THE EDGE OF THE WORLD: CAPITALISM, THE ENVIRONMENT, AND CROSSING FROM CRISIS TO SUSTAINABILITY 47–51 (2008) (proclaiming that consumption stimulates a“growth fetish”inthe economy,which now grows exponentially,paralleltonatural resourceuse andpollution output); PEARCE, supra note6,at29–30 (providingone example of amultinational corporation,Tabuk Agriculture Development Company, in Saudi Arabia that is irresponsiblyusing enormous amountsofwater tooperate a90,000-acredairy farm). 116. See Clark&Foster, supra note104, at 312–13 (examiningthe world’s capitalsystem, specifically its vertical flow of energyand matter to more developed countries, negativelyimpacting the socio-ecologicalconditions of theextractivecountries); PEARCE, supra note6,at141 (discussing American fruit companies taking over wholestatesinLatin America andsustaining relationships with corrupt governments). 2019] ConfrontingRemoteOwnershipProblemswithEcological Law 445 and strong protectionofprivate propertyand statesovereignty.117 Trade broadensthe market arenasinwhich privateproprietors can seekprofit, createemployment opportunities, andcontributetoeconomic growth. It also expandsthe goods and services availabletopeopleworldwide—for example, NorthAmerican grocerystoresnow have producefromaround theworld throughout theyear.118 Trade liberalizationreduces or eliminates measures of sovereign states that imposetariffs or other restrictions on imports or foreigninvestments.119 Themaineconomic justificationfor internationaltrade derives from DavidRicardo’s principleofcomparativeadvantage—a country “has a comparativeadvantage if it can produce thegoodinquestion more cheaply relativetoother goodsitproduces than can its trading partners, regardless of absolutecosts.”120 Comparativeadvantage reliesonacountry’s internal cost ratios in producinggoods andservices rather than on absolute advantage; absoluteadvantage is basedonadirect comparison of costsof individualgoods andservices in different countries.121 However, comparativeadvantage is basedonthe assumptionthatcapital is immobile.122 In theglobalized economy,inwhich capitalisincreasingly mobile beyond nationalbordersthrough foreign investmentsand transnationalcompanies, this core assumption is more and more in doubt.123 In contemporarytrade regimes,

[g]lobalizationcreates an increasinglyprominent role for transnational corporations,encouragesthe transportationof resourcesand manufactured goods allover theplanet,facilitates theinstantaneous opportunistic movement of finance capital across national boundariesinsearch of thehighest returns, and

117.See HERMAN E. DALY &JOSHUA FARLEY,ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS:PRINCIPLES AND APPLICATIONS 366 (2ded. 2011) (demonstratingthatinternational tradeisnot tradebetweencountries, but rather betweenprivate firms within different countries for the firm’sprivatebenefit andeconomic gain). 118.See id. at 355 (highlightingthat tradeallows ustoexperience “other peoples’traditions, tastes, and capacities”). 119.Cf. id. at 396 (“In therecent eraofliberalization, we oftenwitnessed unpredicted changes in international capitalflowsinand out of countries ....”). 120. Id.at310. 121.See id. at 311 (explaining, with ahypothetical,how comparativeadvantage works). 122. Id. at 312. 123.See id. at 361 (finding that “itisnot impossible forproductivecapacity,capital, to be transferred from one country to another,” eventhoughcapital mobility must be ruledout forthe “comparativeadvantage argument to work between countries”). 446 Vermont Law Review [Vol.43:425

generallyencouragesthe integrationofregional and national economies.124

In this economic environment,the competitionfor high returns, combined with thedomesticbenefits nationstatesderiveifthey can attract investment and productiveenterprises, createsadisincentivefor strong environmental protectionorother socially or ecologically beneficial measures that reduce profits.125 This dynamicisespecially disadvantageous forlessdevelopedcountries, whichend up trapped in debt and hampered in regard to domestic social andenvironmental programsastheycompeteto exportcommodities to marketsinwealthiercountries.126 Theinternational community hasastrong commitment to enhancing trade andinvestment across nationalborders.The World Trade Organization(WTO) is theinternational institutionthatadministers and enforces internationaltrade rulesatthe global scale.127 Bilateralor multilateraltradeagreements, such as theexpiring NorthAmerican Free TradeAgreement (NAFTA), supplementthoserules at theregional scale.128

124.WilliamE.Rees, Globalizationand Sustainability:ConflictorConvergence?,22BULL. SCI., TECH.&SOC’Y 249, 257 (2002). 125. Id. at 258. 126. See id. (indicating that theprice of primarygoods in developing countries depreciated over 50% from 1980 to 1983). 127.See What We Stand For,WTO, https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/whatis_e/ what_stand_for_e.htm(last visitedApr.14, 2019)(demonstratingthatthe WTOpromotes trade and investment by lowering tradebarriers and discouraging unfair practices). 128.The NAFTAexperience demonstrates governments’ ability to adopt rigorous,enforceable supranational rules to support theirpriorities. See North American FreeTrade Agreement, Can.-Mex.- U.S.,Dec. 17, 1992, 32 I.L.M. 289 (1993)(showing that Articles 1116 and 1117 allowinvestors to pursue arbitration). Theydid so in NAFTA Chapter11bywaivingtheirsovereignimmunity to allow private investorstopursue binding arbitration seeking judiciallyenforceablemonetary awards that include estimated lost profits forbreach of the NAFTA’s investor protections. Id. at arts. 1101–1138.2. Although acomprehensive review of Chapter 11 cases involving challenges to environmental measures is beyond thescope of this analysis, tworecentcases bear mentionbecause they clearlyillustrate problematic aspects of remote ownershipand control. Forexample, see Clayton v. Canada,CaseNo. 2009.04 (Perm. Ct.Arb.2015), whereaChapter 11 panelofthree arbitrators ruled 2–1 thatCanada violated Chapter 11 as aresult of ajoint federal-provincial environmental assessment process thatled to Canada’srejectionofamarineterminal on theDigby Peninsula in Nova Scotia that aU.S.-based company soughttoshipbasaltfromaquarryinthe area to theU.S.The federal and provincial governmentsconcluded that theproject “poses thethreat of unacceptableand significant adverse effects to theexistingand futureenvironmental,socialand culturalconditions influencing thelives of individualsand families in the adjacent communities.” Letterfrom Mark Parent,Minister of Env’tand Labour,toPaulG.Buxton, ProjectManager, Bilcon of Nova ScotiaCorp. (Nov. 20, 2007).Canadanow facesthe panel’s rulingonthe investors’compensationclaim totalingmore than $475 million. See SCOTT SINCLAIR,CANADIAN CTR. FOR POLICY ALT., CANADA’S TRACK RECORD UNDER NAFTA CHAPTER 11: NORTH AMERICAN INVESTOR–STATE DISPUTES TO JANUARY 2018, at 5(2018) (reflecting on Canada’seight losesand NAFTA Chapter 11’s interference with Canada’s regulatory authority). In 2019] ConfrontingRemoteOwnershipProblemswithEcological Law 447

TheWTO,established in 1995, aims “to help trade flowasfreelyas possible—so long as thereare no undesirable sideeffects—because this is important foreconomic development and well-being.”129 Theapproach to thehuman-Earth relationshipreflected in theWTO is largelymimickedin regionaltrade andinvestment agreements.130 Expanded liberalized trade and investment is akey component of the internationalcommunity’s dominant commitment to ever-rising economic growth.131 Forexample, in 2014 theG20 leadersstated:

Trade andcompetitionare powerfuldriversofgrowth, increased livingstandards and jobcreation. In today’sworld we don’tjust tradefinal products. We work together to make things by importingand exportingcomponentsand services. We need

Lone Pine ResourcesInc. v. Government of Canada,aU.S. investor claimedinexcess of $250 million to compensatefor theQuebec government’s revocationunder its2011 Act to LimitOil and Gas Activities of theinvestor’s licenses to explorefor oiland natural gas along and nearthe St. Lawrence Rivernear Trois Rivières,Quebec. See Lone Pine Res.Inc. v. Canada, ICSIDCase No.UNCT/15/2. NoticeofArbitration, ¶¶ 49, 58 (Sept. 6, 2013) (stating that LonePine expended millions of dollars and considerabletimeand resources in Quebectoreceivenecessaryminingpermits). The investor anticipated that theexplorationlicensescouldlead to shalegas development in theregion. Id. ¶¶ 7–8. Based on astrategicassessmentofthe impacts of shale gasand other hydrocarbon development on the human and biophysical environment in theregion, thegovernment of Quebecconcluded that theregion wasnot suitablefor hydrocarbon development. Id. 129. See Understanding theWTO:Who We Are,WTO, https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/ whatis_e/who_we_are_e.htm(last visitedApr. 14, 2019)(“At[the]heart [ofthe WTO] arethe WTO agreements, negotiatedand signed by thebulkofthe world’s trading nations.”);WTO,ANNUAL REPORT 2016, at 4(2016) (providing abasic understanding of theWTO,including who it is,whatitstandsfor, and what it does). These documentsprovide thelegal ground rules forinternational commerce. They areessentiallycontracts, binding governmentstokeeptheirtradepolicieswithin agreedlimits. Although negotiatedand signed by governments, thegoal is to help producersofgoods and services,exporters,and importersconduct their business, while allowing governmentstomeetsocial and environmental objectives. Understanding theWTO:Who We Are, supra.The WTOadministers andenforcestrade rulespursuant to the General Agreement on Tariffsand Trade(GATT),the GeneralAgreement on Trade in Services (GATS), andthe Trade-Related AspectsofIntellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). See WTO, ANNUAL REPORT 2016, supra at 2, 5, 37 (explaining theWTO’scollaborationwith theWorld Bank). A significant change from prior international trade arrangements was theestablishmentofanoverarching dispute settlementprocess coveringall aspects of theWTO. See id. at 5(outlining the dispute settlement process). 130.See WTO, Regional Trade Agreements,https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/region_e/ scope_rta_e.htm(last visitedApr.14, 2019) (outlining that regional trade agreementsare essential in international trade relations and specifically that,since 2016, allWTO members have aregional trade agreement in effect). 131. See MANUEL GONZÁLEZ DE MOLINA &VÍCTOR M. TOLEDO,THE SOCIAL METABOLISM:A SOCIO-ECOLOGICAL THEORY OF HISTORICAL CHANGE 137 (2004) (citingthe statistical growth of international trade); G20, G20Leaders’ Communiqué,¶11 (Nov. 16, 2015) (statingthat globaltrade andinvestment areparamount to economic growth and development). 448 Vermont Law Review [Vol.43:425

policiesthattakefulladvantage of globalvalue chains and encourage greaterparticipationand value additionbydeveloping countries.Our growth strategiesinclude reformstofacilitate tradebyloweringcosts,streamliningcustoms procedures, reducing regulatoryburdens and strengthening trade-enabling services. We arepromotingcompetition, entrepreneurship and innovation, including by loweringbarriers to new business entrantsand investment.Wereaffirm our longstanding standstill androllback commitments to resist protectionism ....Weneeda strong trading system inanopen global economytodrivegrowth andgeneratejobs.Tohelpbusiness make bestuse of trade agreements, we will work to ensureour bilateral, regional and plurilateralagreementscomplement one another,are transparent and contributetoastronger multilateraltrading system under World TradeOrganization(WTO) rules. These rulesremainthe backbone of theglobal trading system that has delivered economicprosperity.Arobustand effectiveWTO thatresponds to current and future challenges is essential.132

Theoutcomedocumentofthe Rio+20 Conference stated that measures to promoteagreen economy or sustainabledevelopment should“[n]ot constituteameans of arbitrary or unjustifiablediscriminationoradisguised restrictiononinternational trade.”133 TheSustainableDevelopment Goals (SDGs)that theU.N.General Assembly adoptedin2015 implicitly endorse theWTO regime134 and include agoal of doublingthe share of theleast developing countries’ global exportsby2020.135 Othershavedone comprehensivereviews of theWTO agreementsand other trade andinvestment agreements andtheir relationshipto environmentalissues.136 Such adetailedanalysis is beyond thescope of this Essay,but some summaryobservations regardingthe WTOare relevant to considerationofhow internationaltrade andinvestment can best promotea mutually enhancing human-Earthrelationshipinthe Anthropocene. First, theWTO and similar regional accordsinstitutionalize aglobaleconomic model that promotes global expansionofeconomic activity founded on

132.G20, G20Leaders’ Communiqué,¶¶8,16(Nov. 15–16, 2014). 133.U.N.Conference on SustainableDevelopment, The Future We Want,¶58, U.N. Doc. A/CONF.216/L.1*(June 19, 2012). 134.G.A.Res. 70/1, at 27 (Sept. 25, 2015). 135. Id. 136.JAMES K.R. WATSON,THE WTO ANDTHE ENVIRONMENT:DEVELOPMENTOF COMPETENCE BEYOND TRADE 2(2013). 2019] ConfrontingRemoteOwnershipProblemswithEcological Law 449 limited interference with privateproperty rights.137 However,thismodel lacks amechanism to understandlocal conditions or to monitorormake adjustmentsaccording to aggregateimpactsonecological limits, such as planetary boundaries.138 Second, thedisputesettlement mechanisminthe WTOmakes clear theinternational community’s capacity to adopt supranationalrules with an enforcementregime that has real impact on national policy.139 Thefinal decisions in WTOdisputes in whichnational environmentalmeasures were held to violateWTO rules demonstratethe power of this judicialization140 of international rules andshow how difficult it is forWTO member states to adopt environmentalmeasures that overcomeconcernsregarding over-regulationand protectionism.141

D. Trade,Investment,and Remote OwnershipProblems

Long-distance trade and internationalinvestment tend to increase the detrimental influence of remote actors on social, economic, and ecological systemsatalocal scale.142 In theforms of remote ownershipthatare the most abstract,investors in privatecorporatelandgrabs forconversion into vastindustrialagriculturaloperations typically have little knowledge of or interest in theculturalhistory,ecological functioning,orlocal-levelhuman-

137.Id. at 4–5. 138.See id. (showcasing how theWTO has ruledtothe detriment of theenvironment). 139.See id. at 93 (providing that theWTO is notonlyresolving specificdisputes between Members, but also making de facto precedent at thesametime). 140. See id. at 89 (demonstrating thejudicialization of the WTOrules). 141.The most notable of thesecases were:(1) theTuna-Dolphincases; see Report of thePanel, U.S.—Restrictions on Imports of Tuna,DS21/R(Sept.3,1991), GATTBISD (39thSupp.), at 155, reprinted in 30 I.L.M.1594 (1991) [hereinafter Tuna/DolphinI](rejecting an embargo theU.S.imposed on commercialyellowfin tunaand yellowfin tuna productsthatwere harvested in away thatharmed dolphins); see also Reportofthe Panel, U.S.—Restrictions on ImportsofTuna,WTO Doc. DS29/R (June 16, 1994) (unadopted)[hereinafter Tuna/DolphinII](reviewing the Tuna/DolphinIdecisionafter theE.U.and theNetherlands requested aGATTPanelreview because neither Mexico nor theU.S. requested that theGATT Contracting Partiesadopt thefindings of Tuna/DolphinI); (2) the Shrimp- Turtlecase, see Appellate BodyReport, U.S.—Import ProhibitionofCertain Shrimpand Shrimp Products,WTO Doc. WT/DS58/AB/R (adopted Oct.12, 1998), reprinted in 38 I.L.M.121 (1999) [hereinafter Shrimp/Turtle](rejecting theU.S.’s appealofthe Panel Report’s prior decision toreject the U.S.’s imposed prohibition on theimportationofcertain shrimp and shrimpproductsthat werecaught using methods that harmedsea turtles);and (3)the Brazil Tire cases. See Report of the Panel, Brazil— Measures AffectingImportsofRetreaded Tyres,WTO Doc.WT/DS332/R (adopted Dec. 17, 2007) [hereinafter Brazil Tyres](rejecting Brazil’s import restrictions on certainused tires to reduce negative environmental impactsfrom tire storage and disposal). 142. See PEARCE, supra note6,at115 (overviewing theauthor’svisit with investorCampo Aberto,Aberto’s plans to profitfromBrazilianagriculture,and an exampleofaninternational investment that is likelytocontributetoBrazil’srelentless practiceofmonoculture). 450 Vermont Law Review [Vol.43:425

Earth interactions of theland underlyingtheir investment.143 They simply want thegreatest financial return possible, regardless of theecologicalor social cost.144 Meanwhile,local peoplepossessing centuries-oldknowledge of,connectionto, andexperiencewith theconvertedland aremoved to new places,nolonger abletomaintaintheirconnectiontoplace or to sustain themselves on local ecosystems—nolonger abletomaintainamutually enhancing human-Earth relationship.145 Breaches of this essential relationshiphave occurredacross historyand acrossthe globe.146

III. CONFRONTING REMOTE OWNERSHIP UNDER ECOLOGICAL LAW

Like ecologicaleconomics, ecologicallaw is still mostly conceptual and notyet widelyunderstood or practiced,largely becausethey both envisionatransitionawayfromthe hard-wiredinsistence on economic growth that undergirdspolicyand decisionmaking globally.147 Yetthe growth-insistenteconomic modeland thelegal and governancesystems that supportitare entirely sociallyconstructed,and therefore subject to change as theflaws in theirconceptual foundations becomemoreand more clear. Ecologicaleconomics andecological laware emerging social constructions that respondtothe increasinglyapparent impossibility of perpetual economic growth on our finite planet (even if economic growthismoreand more decoupled fromthroughput of materialand energyinthe economy andconsequent ecological impacts).148

143.See generallyid. (exposing theauthor’s encounterswith several landgrabbers in different areasofthe globe, and specifically revealingthe human costsoflandgrabbing for thepurpose of large- scale agriculture). 144.Asimilarset of problemscan arise when locally based ownersseek to profit from remote sale of local productsthat exertalocal ecological footprint—local owners whohave not developed institutions forsustainablegovernance of thecommons. 145.See ANDREAS NEEF,LAND RIGHTS MATTER!ANCHORS TO REDUCE LAND GRABBING, DISPOSSESSION AND DISPLACEMENT:ACOMPARATIVE STUDY OF LAND RIGHTS SYSTEMSIN SOUTHEAST ASIA ANDTHE POTENTIALOFNATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL LEGAL FRAMEWORKS AND GUIDELINES 8, 13 (CarolineKruckow &Maike Lukow eds., 2016) (statingthatland grabshave caused the displacement of more than 770,000 people, and specifically that displacement has affectedthe rights of indigenouspeoples of thesix Southeast Asian countries). 146. See,e.g.,PEARCE, supra note 6(providing specific examples of global landgrabbingdone by thosegeographically disconnected from theland grab); ROBIN WALL KIMMERER,BRAIDING SWEETGRASS:INDIGENOUS WISDOM,SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE, ANDTHE TEACHINGS OF PLANTS 259 (2013)(positing that “[r]estoration is imperativefor healing theearth”and that if “[w]erestore the land, ...the land restores us,” providing amutually beneficial human-Earth relationship). 147.WESTRA, supra note27, at 143. 148. See Garver, The Rule of Ecological Law, supra note 4, at 326,330 (finding that ecological lawarises from the tension between our infiniteeconomicgrowth andthe socio-ecological consequences that will occur with such growth). 2019] ConfrontingRemoteOwnershipProblemswithEcological Law 451

Under ecologicallaw,remoteownershipand controlofland and ecosystems wouldgiveway mostly or entirely to institutions favoring locally tailored rules.149 When they incorporateinstitutions and features that areessentialtoreal sustainability, theselocally tailoredrules reflectthe emphasis on attentiontoplace and local ecological knowledgethatis necessary to sustainamutually enhancing human-Earth relationship.150 Moreover,these locally sourcedrules subjecttrade and investment rules to thehierarchicalprimacy of ecologicallimits and theattainment of a mutually enhancing human-Earthrelationship.151 In such aregime, providing investorswith investment opportunitiesinvolving theconversion of land in such away that decreases theprospectsfor amutually enhancing human-Earth relationshipwouldbeinconceivable.152 To serve as thefoundationfor an overarching, globalobjectivethat can be appliedatthe scaleoflandscapes or theentire Earth, amutually enhancing human-Earth relationshipmustencompass not onlythe most pristinewild ecosystems, but also densehuman settlementsand other areas wherehumansortheir impactshavesignificantly transformed the evolutionary trajectoryofthe pre-human or an imagined human-free ecosystem.153 Arigorous yet practicable notionofsustainability must incorporatesomelevel of symbiosisbetween humans and non-human natureinorder to be consistent with amutually enhancing human-Earth relationship.154 Thechallenge is to determine, alongthe spectrumfromthe leastimpacted tothe most anthropogenically transformed ecosystems, wherebenchmarksfor amutually enhancinghuman-Earth relationship(that arepracticableinlaw and governance systems)can and shouldbedrawn at different spatial and temporal scales, while accountingfor humans as an integral ecosystemcomponent.155 Another challenge in applying acohesiveyet practicable notionofa mutually enhancing human-Earthrelationshipisthathuman communities

149.See id. at 317 (explaining that thedegrowth movement emphasizes localautonomy). 150. See Garver, ASystems-BasedTool forTransitioning to Law, supra note 4, at 171 (providing examples of how localcommunities develop tailoredecologicalpolicies). 151.See Garver, TheRuleofEcologicalLaw, supra note4,at321 (stating theeconomic constraints of thecurrent environmental lawsand thatecological lawwould place ecological constraints on themarket instead). 152.See id. (asserting that ecologicallaw placesecological constraints on property). 153. See Erle Ellis &Navin Ramankutty, PuttingPeople in theMap:AnthropogenicBiomes of the World,6FRONTIERS ECOLOGY &ENV’T 439, 445–46 (2008)(discussing that“[s]ustainable ecosystem management”requires“maintaining beneficialinteractions between managed and natural systems”). 154.Garver, The RuleofEcological Law, supra note4,at327. 155.Garver, ASystems-BasedTool for TransitioningtoLaw, supra note 4, at 167. 452 Vermont Law Review [Vol.43:425 andecosystemsatthe local,landscape,and regionallevel inevitablyand increasinglyare “subject to human impacts that derivefromspatially and temporally diversedrivers—including thosethatare remote geographically or whoseimpactsare temporally delayed.”156 Meanwhile,thoselocal communitiesinevitablycause temporally and spatially remote impactsas well.157 Thus,atwhatevertemporal or spatialscale, practical efforts to promoteamutually enhancinghuman-Earth relationshiprequire an adaptive, multi-scalar systems approach that maintainsanongoingfocus on and connectiontothe local scale.158 This approach requires thehumility inherent in dealingwiththe inevitableuncertaintiesand unpredictability in how systemsevolve by applying aprecautionary approach,and not the hubris of many Western secular and religious traditions that idealizetotal human mastery and perfectionofnature.159 Determiningplace-based benchmarks formutual human-Earth enhancement and implementing an adaptive, systems-based approachto lawwithprimacy forecological limits impliesaneed to place constraints on human choice and to guide human intentiontowardnew goals.160 The human-Earth relationshipwill inevitablybesocially constructed, and human intentionisthus acriticalvariablefor thehuman prospect.161 For example, properly done andimplemented on aregionaland ultimately global scale, reciprocal restorationadherestoanadaptive, systems-based approach and both commits to and recognizes theneed forhuman intention, choice, decision making,and activeintervention to restore damaged human-Earth relationships.162 Ecologicallaw that incorporates abroad vision of reciprocal restorationand similarinnovativeideas is ultimatelya hopeful vision of human societiesorientating this intentionsoastodevelop workablenorms andrules forathrivinghuman community within a thrivingcommunity of alllife on Earth.163

156.Id. 157.See id. at 166 (“Ultimately, how human societycraftslaw andgovernancesystems from the local to the global level will significantly affectwhether humanity will trigger globally or regionally catastrophicshiftsinthe ecosystems on whichhuman societiesdepend.”). 158.Id. at 167. 159. Id. 160. Id. 161.See id. at 168 (emphasizing that theincorporationofhuman intentions and “decision making with ecological systemsatvariousscales can leadeithertolocal or civilizational collapse, at one extreme,ortolong-termresilienceand adaptiveness, at the other”). 162.See HUMAN DIMENSION, supra note49, at 258(providing that reciprocal restoration recognizesthe human role in theecological restoration process). 163.See id. at 1(arguing that ecological restorationneeds human involvement that is value based, involving human knowledge and behaviors). 2019] ConfrontingRemoteOwnershipProblemswithEcological Law 453

CONCLUSION

Significantobstacles standinthe wayofatransitiontoalimits- insistent global legalsystemthat promotes amutually enhancing human- Earth relationship.164 Ecologicallaw encapsulates afuturevisionnot only of law, but also of thesocial,cultural, political,and economiccontexts in whichlaw is embedded.165 It is avisionthat impliesaninevitableevolution away from current political ordersand power structures toward new ones that must emerge as this transition unfolds.166 To attain this vision, the resistance to change in thelegal systemand related systemsishighand will take along timetoovercome.167 This is particularly truewith respectto necessary paradigm shifts—especially thetransitionfromthe dominant growth-insistent paradigm to thelimits-insistent paradigm proposed in this Essay.168 This transitionimpliesasignificant change in deeplyentrenched power structuresand political orders at allscales—change that will likely emerge in unpredictableways and through unpredictableactors.169 Among other promisingrecentdevelopment,the creationofthe EcologicalLaw and Governance Association(ELGA) in 2016 wasan important step toward thetransition fromenvironmentaltoecological law.170 TheOsloManifesto fromwhich ELGAemerged states:

To overcome theflaws of environmentallaw,mere reform is not enough. We do not needmorelaws, but different laws from whichnoareaofthe legal systemisexempted. Theecological

164.See supra Part I(explaining that conflicts arise between therightsofnature andhuman rights,and further explaining thenecessity of afundamental shift away from afocusonwealth). 165. See M’Goningle, supra note100 (showing that,through thelensoflegal pluralism, “a pluralityofsocial structures have internal legalordersthatfunction in acompelling regulatory fashion”). 166.See supra PartI(overviewingthe necessity ofachange from theassumptive need for wealth creationand suggestingthatecological law requires limits to have priorityinalegal system). 167.See Garver, ASystems-BasedTool forTransitioning to Law, supra note4,at167 (explainingthat asystem’s resistance to change can“lock in and lock out”certaincharacteristics of that system, andthatasystem’s resilienceand adaptiveness,together with thedegree of lock-inorlock-out characteristics, reflect that system’s ability to change). 168.See id. at 170 (discussing themerits of alock-in/lock-outassessmentsystem in the transition to alimits-insistent paradigm). 169. See id. at 167 (describingthe cultural humility that will be necessarytotransition to a growth-insistent paradigm);PETER G. BROWNETAL., RIGHT RELATIONSHIP:BUILDING A WHOLE EARTH ECONOMY 141 (2009) (“Peoplemust bear witness, whenworking, playing, transacting, and relatingtoeach other everyday, so that these discussions will turn from talk into the walk of right relationship.”). 170.See Garver, ASystems-BasedTool forTransitioning to Law, supra note4,at167 (discussing themission of theELGA). 454 Vermont Law Review [Vol.43:425

approach to lawisbased on ecocentrism,holism, and intra- /intergenerational and interspecies justice. Fromthisperspective, or worldview,the lawwill recogniseecological interdependenciesand no longer favour humans over natureand individualrightsover collectiveresponsibilities. Essentially, ecologicallaw internalises thenatural livingconditions of human existence andmakesthem thebasis of alllaw,including constitutions,human rights, property rights, corporate rightsand statesovereignty.171

ELGAisagrowingnetwork of jurists andotherswho areconvinced of the needtofurther develop ecologicallaw andtoseekopportunitiestoput it into practice.172 Addressing remote ownership problemsshouldbehighon thelist of prioritiesfor ELGAand like-mindedgroups andindividuals seekingamutually enhancing human-Earth relationship.173

171.Ecological Lawand Governance Association, Oslo Manifestofor Ecological Law & Governance,art.V(June 21, 2016),https://www.elga.world/oslo-manifesto/. 172.Garver, ASystems-Based Tool for Transitioning to Law, supra note4,at167. 173.See id. at 169 (statingthat systemswith strong privateproperty rights have historically causedpolitical inequality and ecologicaldetriment).