THE EFFECTIVENESS OF ENVIRONMENTAL LAW European Environmental Law Forum Series, Volume 3 THE EFFECTIVENESS OF ENVIRONMENTAL LAW Edited by Sandrine Maljean-Dubois Cambridge – Antwerp – Portland Intersentia Ltd Sheraton House | Castle Park Cambridge | CB3 0AX | United Kingdom Tel.: +44 1223 370 170 | Fax: +44 1223 370 169 Email: [email protected] www.intersentia.com | www.intersentia.co.uk Distribution for the UK and Ireland: NBN International Airport Business Centre, 10 Th ornbury Road Plymouth, PL6 7 PP United Kingdom Tel.: +44 1752 202 301 | Fax: +44 1752 202 331 Email: [email protected] Distribution for Europe and all other countries: Intersentia Publishing nv Groenstraat 31 2640 Mortsel Belgium Tel.: +32 3 680 15 50 | Fax: +32 3 658 71 21 Email: [email protected] Distribution for the USA and Canada: International Specialized Book Services 920 NE 58th Ave. Suite 300 Portland, OR 97213 USA Tel.: +1 800 944 6190 (toll free) | Fax: +1 503 280 8832 Email: info@isbs. com Th e Eff ectiveness of Environmental Law © Th e editor and contributors severally 2017 Th e editor and contributors have asserted the right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, to be identifi ed as authors of this work. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form, or by any means, without prior written permission from Intersentia, or as expressly permitted by law or under the terms agreed with the appropriate reprographic rights organisation. Enquiries concerning reproduction which may not be covered by the above should be addressed to Intersentia at the address above. Cover image licenced by Ingram Image. ISBN 978-1-78068-467-3 D/2017/7849/71 NUR 823 British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data. A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. PREFACE Th e present book is most welcome. Th is is in part because suffi cient attention has not been paid to eff ectiveness in the past. Th e book shines a spotlight on the eff orts of negotiators and lawyers to frame legal instruments with environmental objectives, together with strategies and mechanisms to ensure their eff ective fulfi lment. Recently, there has been an increased focus on the assessment of the eff ectiveness of legal and policy instruments in achieving their intended goals. In this context, the Paris Agreement on Climate Change provides one example of the need, expressed by states, to plan periodic meetings to collectively assess the overall eff orts of mitigation, adaptation and other implementation measures. Th at being said, we should remember that measuring the eff ects of the intended objectives is a rather diffi cult task. Th e question we might ask is: what exactly should be assessed? Should the results of a collective framework be evaluated or, rather, the various measures taken to ensure the eff ective implementation of an instrument? Th e latter might provide good indicators of the best road to follow in achieving a given objective. In addition, there is a need to defi ne the methodology for assessing the eff ectiveness of an instrument clearly; the law has to partner with other disciplines in this respect. Synergies among multilateral environmental agreements may contribute to greater eff ectiveness. Environmental issues are interdependent and there is an acute need to adopt a holistic approach towards the protection of the global environment, now more than ever. Climate change, the protection of the ozone, biodiversity and desertifi cation regimes, to name but a few, are all closely linked and these interconnections need to be taken into account when measuring eff ectiveness. Th e essential relationship between eff ectiveness and sustainability must also be subject to scrutiny. Sustainability cannot exist without the sound protection of the environment. As such, there is a need to better grasp the notion of eff ectiveness in the environmental fi eld, so as to ensure the promotion of sustainable development. Th e present book, edited by Sandrine Maljean Dubois, represents a critical milestone in the endeavour to shed light on the importance of eff ectiveness in the environmental fi eld and to refl ect on the appropriate means and measures by which to ensure the eff ectiveness of environmental instruments. Laurence Boisson de Chazournes Professor at the Faculty of Law of the University of Geneva June 2016 Intersentia v CONTENTS Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v Introduction. Th e Eff ectiveness of Environmental Law: A Key Topic Sandrine Maljean-Dubois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1. Th e eff ectiveness of environmental law: a long-neglected issue . . . . . . . . . . 2 2. Eff ectiveness: what is it? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.1. Eff ectiveness and other related concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.2. Th e multiple meanings of eff ectiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. Diffi culties in assessing eff ectiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4. How to improve the eff ectiveness of environmental law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 4.1. Better legislation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 4.2. Better implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 PART 1. MEASURING AND ASSESSING EFFECTIVENESS Chapter 1. Th e Climate Resilience of Critical Infrastructural Network Sectors. An Interdisciplinary Method for Assessing Formal Responsibilities for Climate Adaptation in Critical Infrastructural Network Sectors Herman Kasper Gilissen, Peter Driessen, Heleen Mees, Marleen van Rijswick, Hens Runhaar, Caroline Uittenbroek and Rebecca Wörner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 2. A methodological framework for the assessment of climate resilience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 2.1. Phase 1: Preparation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 2.2. Phase 2: Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 2.3. Phase 3: Refl ection and recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 3. Six indicators for assessing climate resilience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 4. Application of the assessment framework: two case studies from the Netherlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 4.1. Steps 1 and 2: Justifi cation of the selection and the climate risks per sector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Intersentia vii Contents 4.2. Steps 3 and 4: Overview of sectoral characteristics and current responsibilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 4.3. Steps 5 and 6: Assessment, refl ection and recommendations . . . . . . 31 5. Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 PART 2. IMPROVING EFFECTIVENESS 2.1. BETTER LEGISLATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Chapter 2. Th e Eff ectiveness of Payment for Ecosystem Services: a mix between a gradient model of public intervention and an eff ective normative framework Adélie Pomade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 2. Cases Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 2.1. French Vittel case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 2.2. Belgium agro-environmental measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 2.3. Costa Rica’s PES program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 3. Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 3.1. Th e balance between public and private regulation within PES . . . 55 3.2. Th e intensity and quality of the normative framework of the mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 4. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 Chapter 3. Th e Eff ectiveness of Environmental Law through Contracts Mathilde Hautereau-Boutonnet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 1. Th e vertical eff ectiveness of environmental law through contracts . . . . . 69 1.1. Th e contractual infl uence of the environmental legal order . . . . . . . 70 1.2. Th e environmental infl uence of the contractual legal order . . . . . . . 73 2. Th e horizontal eff ectiveness of environmental law through contracts . . . 76 2.1. Th e creation of contractual environmental obligations . . . . . . . . . . . 76 2.2. Th e prescription of contractual environmental obligations . . . . . . . 78 viii Intersentia Contents Chapter 4. Legal Weaknesses and Windows of Opportunity in Transnational Biodiversity Protection: as Seen through the Lens of an Ecosystem Approach-Based Paradigm Elina Raitanen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 2. Ecosystem approach-based paradigm – Normative basis and the rationale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 3. Operationalizing the ecosystem approach-based paradigm to combat the regulatory weaknesses of biodiversity protection . . . . . . . . . . 87 3.1. Towards coherent laws – Creating linkages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 3.2. Towards adaptive law – Th e precautionary principle revisited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 4. Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 Chapter 5. Better Expertise through Institutional Linkages. Th e Case of the Mediterranean Basin Guillaume Futhazar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 1.1. Technical bodies: a broad category . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 1.2. Criteria for technical bodies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104 1.3. Th e role of law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 2. Th e Mediterranean institutional landscape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 2.1. Th e Mediterranean technical bodies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108 2.2. Joint activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 3. “Shared objects” as a means for coordination between technical bodies and regimes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112 3.1. Common goals and frameworks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 3.2. Shared technical bodies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 4. Memoranda of Understanding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116 4.1. Th e purpose of the Mediterranean MoUs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116 4.2. Th e legal nature of Mediterranean MoUs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117 4.2.1. Instruments with several legal indicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117 4.2.2. Th e possible diff erent legal natures of the Mediterranean MoUs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119 5. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122 Intersentia ix Contents Chapter 6. Environmental Dignity Rights Erin Daly and James R. May . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126 2. Dignity rights in comparative constitutional perspective . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132 3. Environmental rights in comparative constitutional perspective . . . . . . 136 4. Imagining environmental dignity rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138 5. Invoking environmental dignity rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141 5.1. Dignity as the measure of environmental violations . . . . . . . . . . . . 142 5.2. Standing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144 5.3. Rights to inclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 6. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146 Chapter 7. Th e Environmental Protection of Traditional Knowledge and the Active Participation of Indigenous Peoples in the Planning, Management and Decision-Making Processes as Means of Improving the Eff ectiveness of Environmental Law Priscilla Cardoso Rodrigues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 2. Indigenous traditional knowledge and its recognition as cultural ecosystem services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152 2.1. Defi nition and legal protection of the indigenous traditional knowledge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152 2.2. Indigenous traditional knowledge as cultural ecosystem services 154 3. Th e valuation of indigenous traditional knowledge within the ecosystem services framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157 3.1. Th e valuation of ecosystem services, benefi ts, and values . . . . . . . . 157 3.2. Valuing the indigenous traditional knowledge through an ecosystem services approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159 3.3. A conceptual and methodological proposal to valuate the indigenous traditional knowledge through an ecosystem services approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161 4. Th e active participation of indigenous peoples in planning, management and decision-making processes as a means of improving the eff ectiveness of the environmental law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 5. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169 x Intersentia