A critique of the Global Pact for the environment: a stillborn initiative or the foundation for Lex Anthropocenae?

Abstract

In May 2018, the process which may ultimately lead to the negotiation of a legally binding Global Pact for the environment formally commenced under the auspices of the United Nations General Assembly. Expectations for the Pact are high, evidenced in particular by its multiple and overlapping objectives: to serve as a generic binding instrument of international environmental law (IEL) principles; to integrate, consolidate, unify and ultimately entrench many of the fragmented principles of IEL; and to constitute the first global environmental human rights instrument. In the wake of the impending intergovernmental process, the paper offers a thorough critique of the draft Pact in its present iteration. We do so with the aim of evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of the present draft Pact by interrogating: (a) its diplomatic and symbolic relevance and possible unique contribution at the policy level to global environmental law and governance, and (b) its potential at the operational level of IEL and global environmental governance, focusing on the extent to which the draft Pact accommodates both existing and more recent rules and principles for environmental protection. As the Pact's primary ambition is to become a universally binding global treaty, it would be churlish not to recognise its potential for innovation, as well as the considerable opportunity that the negotiation of the Pact will have to generate broadsweeping and positive impacts. However, our central thesis is that only if the Global Pact were to incorporate ambitious normative provisions to strengthen those public and private global governance efforts that aim to halt the deterioration of Earth system integrity, as well as to maintain and improve integrity, will it be able to offer a firm foundation of the type of Anthropocene Law, termed here as the Lex Anthropocenae, required to confront head-on the deep socio-ecological crisis of the Anthropocene.

The relationship between the principle of sustainable development and the human right to a clean and healthy environment in Kenya’s legal context: An appraisal

“…32 Kotzé and French have further argue that the term environment 'has traditionally included -yet separated out -distinctive aspects such as wildlife conservation, pollution control and waste management often in a haphazard way that ignores not only ecological complexity but also important social (human) relations and their interactions'. 33 This reductionist approach, as several commentators have argued, reinforces destructive ontological assumptions about the superiority of humans in relation to non-human elements of nature. De Lucia summarises the assumptions as being the idea that nature and human beings are radically separate entities, that humans are masters over nature clothed with the authority and know-how to exert mastery over nature in order to improve, control and perfect it with ultimate goal of making it more exploitable.…”

Earth System Law for the Anthropocene

“…Yet, to date, international environmental law and its scholars have not embraced the Earth system approach and are unable to respond juridically to the Earth system's unique regulatory demands [53]. Some commentators have cursorily suggested alternatives such as "Earth-centered law", "Anthropocene environmental law", "planetary boundaries law", and "Lex Anthropocenae" [54][55][56][57]. But no thorough critique or elaborate theoretical account has thus far been offered, and it remains unclear what such a new legal paradigm, its architecture, actors, focus, regulatory scope, normativity, geographical reach, ethical premise, and scientific agenda could be.…”

The Outcome of the Negotiations on the Global Pact for the Environment: A Commentary

“…Some scholars welcomed the proposal very positively and saw in this initiative "the type of innovative, big thinking necessary to reverse course on environmental degradation" [6] (p. 61). Conversely, others considered that the preliminary version of the Global Pact drafted by the group of legal experts only regurgitated many of the accepted principles of international environmental law and that this initiative was therefore bringing "little new on the table" [7] (p. 833). Some authors also questioned whether the Global Pact was "the right vehicle for enhancing environmental protection", given the "numerous issues of both legal and policy nature" that such a project would raise [8] (p. 1).…”