1,721,016 research outputs found
Legal Issues in Transdisciplinary Environmental Studies (LITES). LITES is an International Book Series published by SPRINGER - First Director MONTEDURO, Massimo - Other Directors DI BENEDETTO, Saverio; ISONI, Alessandro - http://www.springer.com/series/15038?detailsPage=free
No full textThe ‘Legal Issues in Transdisciplinary Environmental Studies’ (LITES) is a double blind peer reviewed Book Series published by SPRINGER. All information is available on Springer's official website: http://www.springer.com/series/15038 ; http://www.springer.com/series/15038?detailsPage=free . LITES is an international Book Series based on the assumption that the process of dialogue and cultural integration between law, life and earth sciences, and social and human sciences should be strengthened and updated, by relying on transdisciplinary research platforms such as agroecology, environmental studies, environmental science, and sustainability science. According to the new paradigm of social-ecological systems (SES), the concept of the environment is conceived as a complex system of relationships between ecological and social factors, including the cultural and economic ones. The primary purpose of law, in this conceptual framework, is to preside over the durability of the essential conditions for the survival of the social-ecological systems and the protection of life at all scales (of individuals, societies, ecosystems).
LITES Book Series aims to explore the relationships between legal and environmental sciences according to a transdisciplinary perspective. On the one hand, natural and social environmental sciences need to integrate the point of view of law: this entails to study the complexities of SES in the light of normative and institutional variables, with the lens of categories such as rights, duties, powers, responsibilities, and procedural safeguards. On the other hand, law is called upon to review its own internal geometries, confronting them with the holistic approach toward sustainability in the scientific debate. Accordingly, law should address the need of changing the approach that so far has led to both hypertrophy and disarticulation when regulating closely linked matters such as the environment, agriculture, forestry, landscape and cultural heritage, energy, and food.
LITES Book Series is addressed to a wide international and interdisciplinary readership, targeting academic researchers and scholars, experts and practitioner lawyers, public administrations, judges, and law-makers. Its volume editors and contributing authors have different backgrounds and come from all over the world in order to provide a forum for discussion and normative analysis about new legal frontiers of human-environment interactions across disciplinary barriers. Since LITES Book Series was founded in 2015, 73 professors and researchers agreed to join the Advisory Board and the Editorial Board, and 25 different countries of the world, distributed throughout all five continents, are currently represented in the two Boards. They are: Australia, Brazil, China, Costa Rica, Denmark, France, Germany, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Iran, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kenya, the Netherlands, Norway, Singapore, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand, United Kingdom, United States. The composition of the Advisory Board and the Editorial Board is fully transdisciplinary and covers several fields of investigation (along with a number of different legal disciplines, also ecology, agroecology, geobotany, rural sociology, environmental anthropology, landscape architecture, environmental and food history, literature and food studies, and so on), in order to make possible to compare different points of view, by including them into a common polyocular framework of research. These features make LITES Book Series one of a kind. The Members of the Advisory Board are:
Marcos ALMEIDA CERREDA, University of Santiago de Compostela, Spain;
Hugo Fjelsted ALRØE, International Centre for Research in Organic Food Systems, Denmark;
Miguel ALTIERI, University of California, Berkeley, United States;
Diana BALMORI, Fellow of the American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA), United States;
Egon BOCKMANN MOREIRA, Federal University of Paraná, Brazil;
Nerina BOSCHIERO, University of Milan, Italy;
Michael CARDWELL, University of Leeds, United Kingdom;
Eloisa CRISTIANI, Scuola Sant’Anna of Pisa, Italy;
Francesco DI DONATO, University "Parthenope" of Naples, Italy;
Stéphane DOUMBÉ-BILLÉ, University of Lyon 3, France;
Qun DU, Wuhan University, China;
Francesca FARIOLI, Italian Association for Sustainability Science (IASS), Italy;
Júlio César GARCIA, Universidade Estadual do Oeste do Paraná, Brazil;
Stefano GREGO, European Society for New Methods in Agricultural Research (ESNA); University of Tuscia, Italy;
Ines HÄRTEL, European University Viadrina, Frankfurt (Oder), Germany;
Ellen HEY, Erasmus University Rotterdam, the Netherlands;
Carole HERMON, University of Toulouse 1 Capitole, France;
Otto HOSPES, Wageningen University, the Netherlands;
Narong JAIHARN, Thammasat University, Bangkok, Thailand;
Antonio JANNARELLI, University “Aldo Moro” of Bari, Italy;
André JANSSEN, Georg-August-University Göttingen, Germany;
Patricia KAMERI-MBOTE, University of Nairobi, Kenya;
Kheng Lian KOH, National University of Singapore, Singapore;
Parviz KOOHAFKAN, World Agricultural Heritage Foundation (WAHF), Iran;
Hansjörg KÜSTER, University of Hannover, Germany;
Richard LASTER, Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel;
Cecilia LEONG-SALOBIR, University of Wollongong, Australia;
Sebastian LOHSSE, University of Münster, Germany;
Rowena MAGUIRE, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia;
Stelio MANGIAMELI, University of Teramo, Italy;
Wanda MASTOR, University Toulouse 1 Capitole, France;
Gabriel MICHANEK, Uppsala University, Sweden;
Massimo MONTELEONE, University of Foggia, Italy;
Elisa MORGERA, University of Edinburgh, United Kingdom;
Egon NOE, Aarhus University, Denmark;
Roland NORER, University of Lucerne, Switzerland;
Matthieu POUMARÈDE, University Toulouse 1 Capitole, France;
Michel PRIEUR, University of Limoges, France;
Oliver RUPPEL, University of Stellenbosch, South Africa;
Francesco SINDICO, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, United Kingdom;
Catherine TUCKER, University of Florida, United States;
Enrique ULATE CHACÓN, University of Costa Rica;
Hitoshi USHIJIMA, Chuo University, Tokyo, Japan;
Christina VOIGT, University of Oslo, Norway;
Alexander WEZEL, ISARA-Lyon, France;
Doris WITT, University of Iowa, United States.
The Members of the Editorial Board are:
Mariagrazia ALABRESE, Scuola Sant’Anna of Pisa, Italy;
Marta BOTTI CAPELLARI, Universidade Estadual do Oeste do Paraná, Brazil;
Marco BROCCA, University of Salento, Italy;
Pierangelo BUONGIORNO, University of Salento, Italy;
Rosa CALDERAZZI, University “Aldo Moro” of Bari, Italy;
Mononita Kundu DAS, National Law University in Jodhpur, India;
Elizabeth DOOLEY, Ecological Institute, Berlin, Germany;
Anja EIKERMANN, Georg-August-University Göttingen, Germany;
Yanti FRISTIKAWATI, Atma Jaya Catholic University, Indonesia;
Brian JACK, Queen’s University, Belfast, United Kingdom;
Séverin JEAN, University of Toulouse 1 Capitole, France;
Hope JOHNSON, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia;
Serenella LUCHENA, University of Salento, Italy;
Belén OLMOS GIUPPONI, University of Stirling, United Kingdom;
Francesco Paolo PATTI, University of Roma Tre, Italy;
Maurizia PIERRI, University of Salento, Italy;
Edoardo Carlo RAFFIOTTA, University of Bologna, Italy;
Daria RATSIBORINSKAYA, Erasmus University Rotterdam, the Netherlands;
Francesca ROMANIN JACUR, University of Milan, Italy;
Umberto RONGA, University of Naples Federico II, Italy;
Elisa RUOZZI, University of Turin, Italy;
Diana SANTIAGO IGLESIAS, University of Santiago de Compostela, Spain;
Sonia SCOGNAMIGLIO CESTARO, University "Parthenope" of Naples, Italy;
Giuliana STRAMBI, Institute of International and Comparative Agricultural Law, Florence, Italy;
János Ede SZILÁGYI, University of Miskolc, Hungary;
Sara TOMMASI, University of Salento, Italy;
Michele TROISI, University of Salento, Italy
International Investment Law and the Environment
No full textThis book addresses an issue of increasing importance in public international law: the controversial relationship between international investment law (IIL) and environmental protection.
The inquiry underlying this book can be briefly summarized as follows: is it possible to reconcile foreign investor rights and environmental protection? Or more precisely: how and to what extent can environmental concerns be integrated into the strict logic of international investment rules? International practice raises more specific queries: is a state obliged to pay compensation for the indirect expropriation of foreign investments due to environmental regulations? Is it possible for a country to withdraw a foreign investor’s permit to carry out a dangerous activity without infringing the international standard of fair and equitable treatment?
These questions, although quite simple in themselves, open the door to complex and multiform answers and solutions. Scholars studying the relevance of environmental and human health concerns in the context of IIL usually prefer to either address specific issues (e.g. regulatory expropriations, freezing clauses, etc.) or to limit their scrutiny to specific legal contexts (e.g. the North American Free Trade Agreement). Some scholars have focused on the matter more comprehensively by identifying points of friction between investment rules and environmental protection and by detecting or proposing various solutions. On the whole, the doctrinal approaches appear fragmentary, mirroring in essence the multiform nature of IIL (its multiple and autonomous sources create a kind of legal patchwork, which is only partially “unified” by the practice of arbitral tribunals) and all of these debates may be situated in the broader context of discourses on the fragmentation of international law.
With this in mind, this book is not engaged in a search for the chimera of a single legal formula which radically resolves the antagonism between foreign investments and environmental concerns. Instead, it gathers and scrutinizes the legal arguments and solutions in arbitral case law and investment treaties around this inquiry. By extrapolating and ordering the insights from this vast and heterogeneous mass of available practice, the book outlines a possible method for reconciling investor rights and environmental concerns, which is centred around the model of legal exception. Finally, when discussing the relationship between rule and exception, it counters possible objections to the proposed model coming from theories affirming the indeterminacy of international law, by highlighting the role of legal principles according to the Dworkinian theory.
More broadly, this attempt to analyse and order available arguments for integration and to sketch out an interpretative method has the purpose of not leaving this delicate matter to the mere discretion of arbitrators, according to a simple case-by-case approach. As such, this book essentially examines investment regimes and it is first and foremost a study of international investment law. Although other fields of international legal practice, such as certain human rights instruments, are also concerned with the foreign investments and environmental protection, the peculiarities of IIL, as a sui generis system of law with a marked influence on state sovereignty, suggest limiting the subject matter to experiences within this sector of international law. At the same time, comparisons with other fields of international law, in particular WTO law, provide crucial insights and are broadly employed to address the subject at hand. Moreover, this inquiry into the integration of environmental issues into the context of IIL may provide a paradigmatic model for the broader theme of integrating non-economic matters into the tissue of rules that protect foreign investments
La funzione interpretativa del principio di precauzione in diritto internazionale
No full textIl presente articolo affronta un tema di grande attualità e rilevanza nella prassi degli stati e nel dibattito tra gli autori: il significato e la funzione del principio di precauzione nel diritto internazionale. Muovendo dalla premessa che il principio di precauzione dia rilievo giuridico alle frequenti situazioni di incertezza scientifica riguardo a modelli di rischio per l’ambiente – dovute ai limiti della scienza nel prevedere gli effetti futuri delle innovazioni tecnologiche – si sostiene in questa sede che il suo concreto significato normativo non si traduca semplicemente nella previsione di obblighi di protezione per gli stati – come normalmente affermato dalla dottrina – anche in ragione della sua operatività rispetto a diritti e facoltà degli stati (come nel caso dell’accordo SPS dell’OMC e del Protocollo di Cartagena). Piuttosto, l’idea di base dell’articolo, supportata dall’analisi di numerosi strumenti giuridici internazionali e da diversi casi giurisprudenziali, è che il principio di precauzione si collochi ad un livello strumentale, di incidenza su regole primarie già esistenti (che prevedano tanto obblighi quanto diritti per gli stati), assumendo così un carattere principalmente interpretativo. Secondo questa ricostruzione del significato del principio, i giudici e gli stati devono prendere in considerazione, nell’interpretazione e nell’applicazione di regole di protezione ambientale e sanitaria, anche le situazioni di incertezza scientifica riguardo l’esistenza e la dimensione del rischio, secondo determinati criteri selettivi, ricavati dalla prassi (gravità e irreversibilità del danno temuto; estensione ed autorevolezza delle posizioni scientifiche). In questo modo, si supera l’obiezione della supposta vaghezza e genericità del principio di precauzione, se ne delinea una ricostruzione normativa unitaria (senza distinguere tra precauzione ‘obbligante’ e precauzione ‘facoltizzante’) e si apre la sua utilizzazione anche ad altri settori dell’esperienza giuridica nei quali operino norme di protezione (nel diritto internazionale, ad esempio, tutela dei lavoratori o del patrimonio culturale)
Modelli giuridici di eccezione e integrazione di valori non commerciali: dall'esperienza del diritto GATT/OMC ai regimi di protezione degli investimenti esteri
No full textUno dei temi più discussi del diritto internazionale dell’economia riguarda l’integrazione di regole e valori non commerciali all’interno dei vari regimi giuridici che lo compongono. Tanto il diritto del commercio internazionale — in particolare, il sistema dell’Organizzazione Mondiale del Commercio — quanto la miriade di accordi internazionali che promuovono e proteggono gli investimenti esteri non prevedono, salvo rare eccezioni, obblighi per gli stati direttamente riguardanti valori fondamentali quali l’ambiente, la salute umana, i diritti dei lavoratori, il patrimonio culturale ed archeologico. Viceversa, i vari obblighi che questi
regimi creano in capo agli stati rischiano di porre limitazioni più o meno intense alla tutela di tali valori, quando le misure statali a ciò finalizzate risultano in contrasto con tali obblighi. La rilevanza dei valori non commerciali, nei regimi suddetti, può allora porsi, per così dire, al negativo, come possibile limite rispetto all’operatività delle regole fondamentali volte a liberalizzare gli scambi o a proteggere i diritti degli investitori. Il tema è stato fortemente dibattuto nell’ambito del regime del GATT 1947 prima e del diritto
dell’OMC dopo, in particolare riguardo a controversie che coinvolgevano misure statali volte a tutelare l’ambiente e la salute umana, ed è stato principalmente affrontato nel contenzioso tra gli stati secondo lo schema ’regola — eccezione’, in particolare sulla base dell’Art. XX GATT (2) e disposizioni omologhe. Oggi la discussione sull’integrazione di valori non commerciali si è estesa al terreno, molto più ’accidentato’ e complesso, del diritto internazionale degli investimenti, dove una trattazione unitaria di tale questione sembra particolarmente difficile da perseguire, in ragione dell’elevata frammentazione delle fonti, a differenza di quanto accade per il sistema dell’OMC. Alla luce di tutto ciò, questo articolo si propone di ricostruire il modello di integrazione proposto dalla prassi applicativa dell’Art. XX del GATT e di valutare se e quanto esso sia riproducibile nel variegato ambito del diritto internazionale degli investimenti, anche in virtù della progressiva inclusione nei trattati sugli investimenti di clausole che prevedono «eccezioni generali»’ sul tipo di quelle dell'Art. XX GATT
Restitution and Compensation for Environmental Damage in International Law: towards an Ecological Approach?
No full textThis article focuses on the obligations of States to repair environmental damage caused by their internationally unlawful acts. Such obligations are crucial to effectively implement environmental values underlying many rules of international law; however, for many years, these obligations essentially remained on a theoretical plane. Since the beginning of the 21st century, international practice on environmental reparation has been developing. This article intends to investigate whether and to what extent such practice, when establishing reparation for environmental damage, relies on the princi- ples of modern system ecology and thus is able to effectively restore the injured values. To this end, it first addresses in general terms the obligations of restitution and com- pensation in international law, which are aimed at removing the unlawful injury. Then, it analyses the practice of adjudicating bodies with respect to environmental repara- tion, namely the UN Compensation Commission, the ICJ and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. Finally, the article summarises the research findings on the relevance of an ecological approach for current environmental reparation practice and gives some insights into the interaction between reparation of environmental damage and primary rules on environmental protection
Sustainable Development or Strong Growth? Perspectives in G8 and G20 Declarations on Global Economic Governance in Time of Crisis.
No full textLa funzione ecologica della proprietà collettiva sulle terre ancestrali: un nuovo modello di rapporto tra diritti umani e tutela dell'ambiente?
Full text linkLe corti internazionali dei diritti dell'uomo, come nel caso della CEDU, garantiscono usualmente una protezione dell'ambiente solo in un modo indiretto, quando applicano regole volte a proteggere valori differenti quali la vita umana o la privata abitazione, in controversie che coinvolgono (anche) la lesione di beni naturali o ecologici. Questo articolo tratta dell'approccio particolare riguardo alla protezione dell'ambiente sviluppato dalla Corte Inter-Americana dei diritti dell'uomo, nel definire e tutelare il diritto di proprietà collettiva sulle terre ancestrali delle popolazioni indigene e tribali. L'idea è che un tale diritto svolga in sé una funzione diretta di tutela ambientale, in virtù del carattere intrinsecamente ecologico di una siffatta proprietà collettiva. L'esistenza di questa funzione intrinseca di tutela ambientale comporta importanti conseguenze anche sul rapporto di tale diritto con i poteri pubblici deputati alla protezione del bene-ambiente, come il recentissimo caso Kalina dimostra
- …
