DOCSLIB.ORG

International Environmental Law Professor Dan Bodansky

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
International Environmental Law Professor Dan Bodansky Santiago, Chile 24 April – 19 May 2017 INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW PROFESSOR DAN BODANSKY Codification Division of the United Nations Office of Legal Affairs Copyright © United Nations, 2017 INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW PROFESSOR DANIEL BODANSKY REQUIRED READINGS (printed format) Bodansky, Daniel. The Art and Craft of International Environmental Law, Harvard University Press, 2009 Legal instruments and documents 1. General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (article XX), 1947 2. Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, 1972 3. Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, 1992 4. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, 1992 5. Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, 1998 6. Adoption of the Paris Agreement, 2015 7. Convention on Biological Diversity, 1992 8. Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity, 2000 9. Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization to the Convention on Biological Diversity, 2010 10. Nagoya–Kuala Lumpur Supplementary Protocol on Liability and Redress to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, 2010 11. Convention on the Law of the Non-navigational Uses of International Watercourses, 1997 For text, see The Work of the International Law Commission, 8th ed., vol. II, United Nations Publication, p. 266 12. Principles on the allocation of loss in the case of transboundary harm arising out of hazardous activities (United Nations General Assembly resolution 61/36 of 4 December 2006) For text, see The Work of the International Law Commission, 8th ed., vol. II, p. 420 13. Articles on the prevention of transboundary harm from hazardous activities (United Nations General Assembly resolution 62/68 of 6 December 2007) For text, see The Work of the International Law Commission, 8th ed., vol. II, p. 414 14. Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization (Preamble), 1994 15. Santiago Declaration on the 25th Anniversary of the Signing of the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty, submitted by Chile at the Thirty- ninth Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting – Nineteenth Committee on Environmental Protection Meeting, Santiago, Chile, 23 May 2016 – 1 June 2016, Number AD003, Agenda Item ATCM 18 Case law Environment, Sustainable Development and International Law - Extracts from Relevant Case Law 16. Minors Oposa v. Secretary of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Supreme Court of the Republic of the Philippines, 30 July 1993, 33 I.L.M. 174 1994, p. 185 17. United States — Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline, Report of the Appellate Body of the World Trade Organization, WT/DS2/AB/R, 29 April 1996, pp. 13, 15, and 16-18 18. Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1996, p. 226, pp. 241-244, paras. 27-36 19. Gabcíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1997, p. 7, paras. 53 and 140 20. United States — Import Prohibition of certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, Report of the Appellate Body of the World Trade Organization, WT/DS58/AB/R, 12 October 1998, paras. 128-131, 152-153, 167-169 and 185-186 21. Social and Economic Rights Action Center (SERAC) and Center for Economic and Social Rights (CESR) / Nigeria, Communication 155/96, African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, 27 May 2002, paras. 53-58, 68-69 and findings 22. Award in the Arbitration Regarding the Iron Rhine ("Ijzeren Rijn") Railway between the Kingdom of Belgium and the Kingdom of Netherlands, 24 May 2005, reproduced in Reports of International Arbitral Awards, Vol. XXVII (2005), pp. 35-125, paras. 58-59 and 221-223 23. European Communities – Measures Affecting the Approval and Marketing of Biotech Products, Report of a Panel of the World Trade Organization, WT/DS291/R, WT/DS292/R, WT/DS293/R, 29 September 2006, paras. 7.65, 7.67-7.76 and 7.86-7.96 24. Brazil – Measures affecting Imports of Retreaded Tyres, Report of the Appellate Body of the World Trade Organization, WT/DS332/AB/R, 3 December 2007, paras. 139-155 and 178-183 25. Albania: Power Sector Generation and Restructuring Project (IDA Credit No.3872- ALB), World Bank’s Inspection Panel, Investigation Report, 7 August 2009, paras. 322- 332 26. Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v. Uruguay), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2010, p. 14, paras. 101, 164, 177, 188, 204-205, 215-217 and 219 27. Responsibilities and obligations of States sponsoring persons and entities with respect to activities in the Area, Seabed Disputes Chamber of the International Tribunal of the Law of the Sea, Advisory Opinion of 1 February 2011, paras. 121-137 and 141-163 RECOMMENDED READINGS (electronic format) Legal instruments and documents 1. Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer, 1985 2. Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, 1987 3. Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal, 1989 4. Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters, 1998 5. Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade, 1998 6. Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, 2001 7. Compilation of key documents of the Antarctic Treaty system, Second edition (Buenos Aires : Secretariat of the Antarctic Treaty) 2014 Legal writings (not reproduced) 8. Daniel Bodansky, “What Makes International Agreements Effective?”, World Health Organization, 1999 9. Daniel Bodansky, “Tale of Two Architectures: The Once and Future UN Climate Change Regime”, Arizona State University Law Journa, Vol. 43, 2011, pp. 697-712 10. Daniel Bodansky, “International Environmental Law,” from Robert Falkner, ed., Handbook of Global Climate and Environmental Policy, 2013, pp. 179-196 11. Daniel Bodansky, “Climate Change and Human Rights: Unpacking the Issues,” 38 Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law, Vol. 38, 2010, pp. 511-524 12. Daniel Bodansky, “Legally-Binding vs. Non-Legally-Binding Instruments,” from Scott Barrett et al., eds., Towards a Workable and Effective Climate Regime, 2015, pp. 155- 165 13. Bodansky and Lawrence, “Trade and Environment,” from Daniel Bethlehem, ed., Oxford Handbook of International Trade Law, 2009, pp. 505-538 14. Ronald Mitchell, “Regime Design Matters: International Oil Pollution and Treaty Compliance,” International Organization, Vol. 48, 1994, pp. 425-458 15. Peter Sand, “The Evolution of International Environmental Law,” from Bodansky, Brunnee and Hey, eds., The Art and Craft of International Environmental Law, Oxford University Press, 2007, pp. 30-43 16. Peter Sand, “Lessons Learned in Global Environmental Governance,” Environmental Affairs, Vol. 18, 1991, pp. 213-277 17. Kal Raustiala, “The Participatory Revolution in International Environmental Law,” Harvard Environmental Law Review, Vol. 21,1997, pp. 537-586 18. Donald R. Rothwell, “Polar Environmental Protection and International Law: The 1991 Antarctic Protocol’, European Journal of International Law, Vol. 11, No. 3, 2000, pp. 591-614 19. Oran R. Young, “Governing International Spaces: Antarctica and Beyond”, Science Diplomacy: Antarctica, Science, and the Governance of International Spaces, Paul A. Berkman, Michael A. Lang, David W. H. Walton, and Oran R.Young, (eds), Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge, 2011, pp.287-294 20. Phil Tracey, “Twenty five years of the Protocol on Antarctic environmental protection”, Australian Antarctic Magazine, Issue 31, 2016, pp. 29-30 21. “The Antarctic Environmental Protocol, 1991-2011”, presented by ASOC at the Thirty- fourth Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting - Fourteenth Committee on Environmental Protection Meeting, Buenos Aires, Argentina 20 Jun 2011 - 01 Jul 2011, Number IP089 rev.1, Agenda Item ATCM 18 ATCM 5 CEP 3. General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 1947 (now incorporated into GATT 1994), article XX UNTS, vol. 55, p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
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chapter 1: Multilateral Environmental Agreements 1 I
    UNEP Training Manual on International Environmental Law FOREWORD Today’s world is facing an unprecedented environmental crisis. Deterioration of the Earth’s environment increasingly threatens the natural resource base and processes upon which all life on Earth depends. Without strong and multifaceted action by all of us, the biosphere may become unable to sustain human life and future generations will suffer deprivation and hardship unless current patterns of production, consumption and waste management dramatically change. The urgency of balancing development with the Earth’s life support systems is being finally recognized and understood. Now it is time to act upon this understanding. It is widely recognized that most environmental problems, challenges and solutions are transboundary, regional or global in scope. The environment is an area where states and stakeholders are cooperating extensively and progressively. Although environmental degradation and competition for scarce resources are potential sources for conflict, history has repeatedly shown that they are more often catalysts for cooperation. Problems of shared resources regularly produce shared solutions. The environment can make its full and rightful contribution to peace and stability in the world. Worldwide commitments are necessary to protect environmental features such as the biosphere including the ozone layer, migratory species, habitats and ecosystems. Control of movement of wastes, environmentally harmful activities and installations can only be achieved by common and widely applied standards. Environmental law is recognized as an effective tool for catalyzing national and international action to achieve such protection and control. As one of UNEP’s priority areas, environmental law has expanded rapidly over the last decades and today comprises hundreds of global and regional norms that aim to protect our Earth.
    [Show full text]
  • Resolving Treaty Conflicts
    St. John's University School of Law St. John's Law Scholarship Repository Faculty Publications 2005 Resolving Treaty Conflicts Christopher J. Borgen St. John's University School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/faculty_publications Part of the International Law Commons This Article is brought to you for free and open access by St. John's Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of St. John's Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. RESOLVING TREATY CONFLICTS CHRISTOPHER J. BORGEN* INTRODUCTION Should the rules of the World Trade Organization trump inter- national environmental agreements? How are treaties between the United States and its European partners affected by the construc- tion of the European Union? What can be done to avert conflict among Russia, Iran, and certain central Asian states over the con- trol of the oil beneath the Caspian Sea? Although seemingly dispa- rate topics, all of these dilemmas are, in part, disputes over whether certain treaties should be given preference over other treaties. These conflicts are fueled by many different political and economic concerns. Regardless of the source of concern, however, as a matter of international law, the question remains the same: Is there a principled method by which sovereign states in the interna- tional system can resolve conflicting obligations between treaties? Due to treaty proliferation in recent years, this question is more important than ever. The viability of international law, as a legal system, rests largely on the viability of treaties as a source of law.
    [Show full text]
  • International Environmental Lawthe Practitioner's Guide to the Laws Of
    The Practitioner’s to Guide the Laws of the Planet International Environmental Law International Environmental Law ROGER R. MARTELLA, JR. AND J. BRETT GrOSKO, EDITORS The Practitioner’s Guide to the Laws of the Planet Until recently, international environmental law was largely the focus of diplomatic discussions, treaty negotiations, and academic debates of interest to a group of passionate and patient attorneys working for governments and international nongovernmental organizations. But, increasingly, understanding international environmental law is becoming a core skillset for every environmental attorney. As companies and clients necessarily become multinational in nature and must confront a rapidly emerging and confusing regime of international environmental laws, there is a growing need for the attorneys who represent them to understand the unique International ramifications of international environmental law, regardless of where they practice and whom they represent. This book provides practitioners with a comprehensive and practical analytical Environmental Law framework for meeting this growing demand and placing practitioners in a position to advise clients, whether from law firms, in house, or within government and nongovernmental organizations. The focus of the book is to provide pragmatic The Practitioner’s Guide to information that is most likely to be relevant when answering international environmental law questions. the Laws of the Planet Section I provides insight into several key issues to orient attorneys to the current
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Reciprocity and the Making of International Environmental Law
    Reciprocity and the Making of International Environmental Law © Michael Byers Associate Professor, Duke University School of Law Introduction Consider the following assertions: (1) International law is only political rhetoric; (2) International law controls and constrains the behavior of states. Notwithstanding the sophistication of modern scholarship in international law and international relations, these simple assertions remain disturbingly familiar. They concern a question that arises in every introductory course in international law and international relations disciplines, that dominates interdisciplinary enquiries, and that - despite the multiple effects of globalization - remains prominent in the public psyche: Is international law really law? Boiled down to their bare bones, most academic writings at the interface between international law and international relations address this age-old question. To what degree - and how - do norms, rules and institutions constitute tools used by international decision-makers to encourage other decision-makers to adopt policies and take actions that cannot entirely be explained on the traditional realist bases of interest and power? Regardless of whether we call it law (and I am greatly encouraged by the new- found willingness of some IR scholars use the “L-word”) there is a growing sense that obligation / normativity does contribute to the shaping of international decision-making in ways that cannot adequately be explained solely on the basis of more traditional theoretical approaches (such as game theory). Regime theory, institutionalism and constructivism represent an ongoing evolution of thought that - from my perspective at least - goes a long way to explaining how norms and rules “matter”. Nevertheless, much of the work engaged in by those of us who seek to explain the role of international law in international politics suffers somewhat from being either: (a) too general and theoretical to discuss any real life examples (e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Treaties As a Source of International Environmental Law - Winfried Lang
    INTERNATIONAL LAW AND INSTITUTIONS – Treaties as a Source of International Environmental Law - Winfried Lang TREATIES AS A SOURCE OF INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW Winfried Lang (died May 1999) Oostenrijkse Ambassade, Belgium Keywords: environmental law, treaty-making, treaty, international law Contents 1. Introduction 2. International Law 2.1. Hard Law vs. Soft Law 2.2. Treaty Law vs. Customary law 2.3. Principles vs. Jurisprudence 3. International Treaties 4. Practicalities of Treaty-Making 5. Contents of Treaties 6. Special Features of Environmental Treaty-Making 6.1. Science 6.2. Public Opinion 6.3. Non-governmental Organizations 7. Advantages and Disadvantages of Treaty-Making 8. Optimal Treaty-Making 9. Compliance Control 10. Conclusion Glossary Bibliography Biographical Sketch Summary Throughout this paper the main focus was to explain the contribution of conventions and treaties to the creation of IEL. We covered the various levels and techniques of treaty-making; the contents of a treaty in general were specified as well as the characteristicsUNESCO of environmental negotiati –ons. EOLSS The advantages of the treaty-making approach to IEL were compared with its drawbacks before throwing some light on the ingredients of optimal treaty-making. Finally a brief reference was made to the intricacies of compliance-controlSAMPLE and its inno vativeCHAPTERS contributions to international law. 1. Introduction Sustainable development, defined by the Brundtland Commission as “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising
    [Show full text]