The Sustainable Development Goals, anthropocentrism and neoliberalism

Adelman, Sam

doi:10.4337/9781786438768.00008

Cited by 86 publications

(60 citation statements)

References 9 publications

(9 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These include, for example, international environmental law's support of several foundational paradigms that underlie global economic, political, legal, and social human systems such as: anthropocentric sustainable development, (neo) colonialism, property rights, state sovereignty, and neoliberal corporate exploitation [30]. As I have shown elsewhere in some detail [30,31], international environmental law (mostly implicitly, but often also explicitly), structurally contributes to causing, sustaining, and exacerbating these predatory paradigms that, in turn, result in Earth system destruction, exploitation, and the oppression of vulnerable humans (mostly those situated in the Global South) and oppression of the non-human world (see also references [32,33]).…”

Section: International Environmental Law and The Anthropocenementioning

confidence: 99%

Earth System Law for the Anthropocene

Kotzé

2019

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Law has failed to address the ever-deepening socio-ecological crisis of the Anthropocene. In the light of, and as a response to, law’s failures in this respect, this paper argues in support of developing a new legal paradigm for the Anthropocene epoch called Earth system law. It does so first by briefly describing the Anthropocene trope and the extent and dimensions of its socio-ecological crisis. The paper then specifically focuses on international environmental law as an example of how and why law has become incapable of, and inappropriate for, addressing this crisis, and for being unable to respond to the Anthropocene’s regulatory demands. By drawing on three Earth system-related regulatory implications of the Anthropocene trope (i.e., inclusivity, interdependencies and complexity), the final part of the paper makes out a case in support of reforming law and creating a new Earth system oriented legal paradigm that is fit for purpose in the Anthropocene epoch.

show abstract

Section: International Environmental Law and The Anthropocenementioning

confidence: 99%

Earth System Law for the Anthropocene

Kotzé

2019

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…But as deceptively simple and environmentally oriented an idea as sustainable development seems to be, it is not a socio-ecologically friendly process. 30 Critical legal scholars have shown that it is rather a convenient, fictitious ideological palliative that IEL underwrites and that legitimizes and helps rationalize anthropocentric Earth system altering practices. 31 Other principles of IEL such as the polluter pays, prevention, and precautionary principles are more explicitly focused on achieving environmental protection results.…”

Section: Iel's Normative Ambition?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…and States continue down the unambitious "sustainable development" path, which they fully endorsed at subsequent global conferences (such as the UN Conference on Environment and Development of 1992 and the World Summit on Sustainable Development in 2002), and through grand development visions such as Our Common Future of 1987, the Millennium Development Goals, and more recently, the Sustainable Development Goals 46. …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

International Environmental Law’s Lack of Normative Ambition: an Opportunity for the Global Pact for the Environment?

Kotzé

2019

J. Eur. Environ. Plan. Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper argues that international environmental law (iel) is not sufficiently ambitious to confront the Anthropocene’s socio-ecological crisis. The critique specifically focuses on iel’s lack of ambitious and “unmentionable” ecological norms such as rights of nature, Earth system integrity, and ecological sustainability that are not yet considered to be part of the corpus of iel, but that arguably should be in light of the prevailing and ever-deepening socio-ecological crisis. Assuming that the recent Global Pact for the Environment initiative and its accompanying United Nations-mandated report that assesses possible gaps in iel are indicative of the type of reforms we might expect of iel now and in future, the paper determines if and the extent to which the Global Pact initiative embraces ambitious norms and addresses iel’s “unmentionable” normative gaps. A secondary, but related, objective of the paper is to briefly respond to the recent view that any radical critique of the Global Pact initiative is either unfounded, unwarranted or undesirable.

show abstract

“…Commentators criticise the principle of SD for facilitating the prioritisation of economic development over environmental and social concerns. 10 By contrast, detractors of the HRHE fault the human rights approach to environmental protection for giving weight to the entitlement to a clean and healthy environment while downplaying the need for commensurate duties to care for nature. 11 In reference to relevant critical debates, this article explores how the principle of SD and the HRHE have taken shape in Kenya's legal context.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Mwanza

2020

Environmental Law Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Kenya’s legal system is characterised by a plurality of constitutional norms that are relevant for governing the relationship between the environment and the people. Key among these are the principle of sustainable development (SD) and the human right to a clean and healthy environment (HRHE). Both norms were constitutionalised in 2010, a development that represents what scholars have termed environmental constitutionalism and sustainability constitutionalism, respectively. The constitutionalisation of the principle of SD and the HRHE is a welcome development which has the potential to fill some gaps that existed in the old constitutional arrangement. At the same time, this development is set against a backdrop of critical debates that question their effectiveness in regard to environmental protection. This article demonstrates that the two norms have developed in a manner that is responsive to the salient criticism raised against them. Moreover, courts in Kenya have construed them as complementary norms. Specifically, courts in Kenya have applied the HRHE to clarify the meaning and scope of the environmental prong of SD and construed the duty to pursue ecologically SD (a component of SD) as encompassing the obligation to protect ecological processes that support all life.

show abstract

The Sustainable Development Goals, anthropocentrism and neoliberalism

Cited by 86 publications

References 9 publications

Earth System Law for the Anthropocene

Earth System Law for the Anthropocene

International Environmental Law’s Lack of Normative Ambition: an Opportunity for the Global Pact for the Environment?

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About