The legal protection of environment in ancient Rome

Sáry, Pál

doi:10.21029/jael.2020.29.199

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…But the balance cannot be unreasonable, or result in unjustified, foreseeable infringements of human rights [highlighted by D.N.]" 15 Some courts have a similar view on this issue. This is evidenced by the decisions in many cases, including famous Urgenda case.…”

Section: Interaction and Interference: Greening Other Rights 151 Greening Human Rightsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Right to a Healthy Environment and Legal Regulation of Viticulture

Nikolić

2021

JAEL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The foundations for the introduction and development of the modern right to a healthy environment were laid almost half a century ago, by adoption of the Declaration on the Human Environment at the United Nations thematic Conference on the Human Environment, held in Stockholm in 1972. The gathering was preceded by extensive preparations in which members of the academic community and people from politics participated equally. Scientists have obviously prepared a good basis for considering key issues, and representatives of member states and UN bodies have given it an appropriate political dimension. Thanks to that, reasonable, necessary compromises were made, which made it possible to establish a (fragile) balance of interests in the then polarized world and to start a process of great importance for humanity with a lot of optimism. Unfortunately, relatively little has been done on global level since then. This is evidenced by the terminological inconsistency and conceptual uncertainty of the right to a healthy environment, unclear legal nature, dominant development and expansion through constitutionalization at the national level (not on the basis of international instruments), as well as indirect application through the so-called greening of other human rights. The United Nations Human Rights Council, which in October 2021 adopted a Resolution on a safe, clean, healthy and sustainable environment by which the right to a healthy environment was raised to the level of human rights, officially assessed that many questions about the relationship of human rights and the environment remain unanswered and require further examination. This paper opens several interrelated topics whose consideration can contribute to the further development of the right to a healthy environment. The author believes that over time there will be an interaction between the right to a healthy environment and property rights; that this will pave the way for a more extensive interpretation that could result in an individual's autonomous right to independently shape a healthy environment in the space person uses as the owner or holder of another property right; that such interaction would enable the owner to more effectively counter unjustified restrictions on property rights established by state bodies or supranational institutions, such as those existing in the field of viticulture. The paper points out the need to rethink policies and rights related to agriculture and to pay more attention to the part of the population that contributes to the preservation of a healthy environment through their way of life and work. In the final part, winegrowers ’oases that represent specific spatial units are analyzed.

show abstract

Section: Interaction and Interference: Greening Other Rights 151 Greening Human Rightsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Right to a Healthy Environment and Legal Regulation of Viticulture

Nikolić

2021

JAEL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Discourse developments within the public agenda on Danish nature management 2016–2021: Animal welfare ethics as a barrier to rewilding projects

Christensen,

Bentsen

2023

Ambio

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prompted by the increasing public focus on environmental policy and the continuous inability of States to reach environmental targets agreed upon in the context of the United Nations and the European Union, we explore the development of discourses within the Danish public agenda regarding nature management 2016–2021. This is done through a mixed-methods framework of discourse analysis and structural topic modeling based on documents from the Danish Parliament’s Environmental committee 2016–2021, estimating topic prevalence, and analyzing the discourses within each topic, resulting in a qualitative overview of 21 identified topics and their associated discourses and an overview of how the different topic proportions changed over time. A shift in the public agenda was found: a change from discussions about untouched forest focused on trade-offs between timber extraction and biodiversity, to a discussion about different understandings of animal welfare in the context of large grazers in nature national parks in Denmark.

show abstract

Directions of development of universal human right to a healthy environment

Nikolić¹

2023

Zb Pravnog fak Novi Sad

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The process of political shaping of the right to a healthy environment, started with the adoption of the Stockholm Declaration in 1972, basically ended only fifty years later, when the United Nations Assembly adopted the Resolution declaring access to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment as a universal human right. At the beginning of the long journey, the responsibilities for implementing the decisions expressed in the Stockholm Declaration were divided between the member states, on the one hand, and the international community, on the other.The dominant position was given to state authorities. It was agreed that they must be entrusted with the task of planning, managing and controlling ecological resources, in order to improve the quality of the environment, and that states have the right to sovereignly exploit their own resources in accordance with their environmental protection policy. On the other hand, the belief was expressed that the international community will find a source of strength for later concrete action in the Stockholm Declaration. Since then, very modest progress has been made at international level. Official UN statements noted that the 2022 Resolution is not legally binding for 193 member states, but that its proponents hope it will encourage countries to enshrine the right to a healthy environment in national constitutions and regional treaties and encourage them to implement laws that relate to that right, and that it will help people fight for their right to a safe climate, their right to breathe clean air and their rights to access clean and safe water, adequate food, healthy ecosystems and a non-toxic environment. In the global context, the right to a healthy environment is still aspirational (imperfect, unfinished), something that still needs to be fought for at the national level. It will remain so until the consumer society model is replaced by a new form of social organization, which will be based on a different value system. Such a conclusion is also indicated by the reasonable, well-balanced judgement of the Court of Justice of the European Union at the end of 2022, in the case of JP v. Ministre de la Transition écologique (C-61/21). It stated that the provisions of the directives related to air quality must be interpreted in the sense that they do not aim to give individuals the right to seek compensation from the member state for loss and damage caused by the state's violation of EU law, but that it does not excludes the possibility of an individual claiming compensation from the state on the basis of national law. During the past half century, about 150 countries around the world have constitutionalized the right to a healthy environment. It thus, at the national level, gained a significantly different physiognomy and more effective protection not only before the courts of general jurisdiction, but also before the constitutional courts, in proceedings regarding constitutional appeals. However, some new problems arise here. Among them, the competition (conflict) of property rights and certain sectoral rights included (integrated) within universal human right to a healthy environment, such as the right to water, which is discussed in this paper, is particularly significant. In conditions where it is not possible to satisfy the interests of everyone, states will be forced to prioritize their own citizens, and that means civil (private) rights, over universal human rights for the sake of social stability and the preservation of internal order. The process of constitutionalization will be slowed down, and it is possible that in some countries a kind of deconstitutionalization will be carried out, by amending the constitution or informally, through a more restrictive application of universal human rights and more restrictive decision-making regarding constitutional appeals. In the final part of the paper, it was stated that the boundaries between traditional subjects and objects of law are gradually being erased and that the environment must eventually be understood as a community of all living beings, which has a specific legal subjectivity and the right to be healthy.

show abstract

The legal protection of environment in ancient Rome

Cited by 3 publications

References 4 publications

Right to a Healthy Environment and Legal Regulation of Viticulture

Right to a Healthy Environment and Legal Regulation of Viticulture

Discourse developments within the public agenda on Danish nature management 2016–2021: Animal welfare ethics as a barrier to rewilding projects

Directions of development of universal human right to a healthy environment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About