International law for the Anthropocene? Shifting perspectives in regulation of the oceans, environment and genetic resources

Abstract

This article reviews the potential implications of the Anthropocene for the future development of international law in general, and for its distinct fields of the law of the sea, environmental law, and rules governing genetic resources in particular. Stability is deeply embedded in the fundamentals of international law, where it operates on two levels. One is the conscious objective of working towards legally guaranteed stability in international relations, in turn prone to frequent political change. The other level of stability is implied: it is the assumption, based on human experience so far, of the relatively stable circumstances of the late Holocene. The onset of the Anthropocene and the changes introduced in that underlying element of stability entail the potential for an unprecedented type of tension in interstate relations. This may spill over to and aggravate existing tensions between the territorial integrity of states and territorial claims, coupled with the fact of immense geopolitical differences, on the one hand, and sovereign equality of states as the founding postulate of international law, on the other. The international legal order will always be in search of stability and, ultimately, solutions to facilitate peace and prevent conflict. However, with a fundamental change of the context in which international law operatesand with the challenges increasingly recognized as the consequences of natural, not only political, changenew legal axioms will have to evolve.

Stratigraphic and Earth System approaches to defining the Anthropocene

“…The Anthropocene, the proposed new geological epoch in Earth history [ Crutzen and Stoermer, ; Crutzen, ; Zalasiewicz et al, ], is challenging many areas of research in a variety of ways. The term and concept have been discussed within diverse disciplines in the natural sciences [e.g., Ellis et al, ; Gillings and Paulsen, ; Capinha et al, ; Corlett, ; Williams et al, ] and in the environmental humanities and social sciences [e.g., Chakrabarty, ; Vidas, ; Malm and Hornborg, ; Fischer‐Kowalski et al, ; Bai et al, ; Latour, ; Vidas et al, ; Bonneuil and Fressoz, ], with more interdisciplinary approaches also appearing [ Braje, ; Latour, ; Maslin and Lewis, ].…”

The Anthropocene’s dating problem: Insights from the geosciences and the humanities

“…The acknowledged necessity by Jan Zalasiewicz to have the Anthropocene be good for ‘much wider sections of society’ opens an avenue to bridge the geosciences with other disciplines including history, philosophy, politics, international law and economics (e.g. Biermann et al, 2012; Brown and Timmerman, 2015; Chakrabarty, 2012; Robin, 2013; Vidas et al, 2015). Even more traditional geoscientists, such as Finney and Edwards (2016), acknowledge that proponents of a GSSA-defined (i.e.…”

A Global Environmental Constitution for the Anthropocene?

“…As the primary collection of global norms responsible for steering the world on the path to 'sustainable development', 27 IELwhich since its inception has taken for granted the relatively stable Holocene conditionsis acutely implicated by the normative consequences of the Anthropocene. 28 Admittedly, it would be both incorrect and unfair to pin the existence of the Anthropocene exclusively on the perceived failures of IEL. After all, as Verschuuren notes, 'the events that led to the Anthropocene have already existed well before the adoption of most of the principles [of IEL]'.…”