The Non-Compliance Mechanism Under the Aarhus Convention as ‘Soft’ Enforcement of International Environmental Law: Not So Soft After All!

Fasoli, Elena; McGlone, A.

doi:10.1007/s40802-018-0102-0

Cited by 15 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…80 Distinctive features of the compliance mechanism in Aarhus include the public trigger (i.e., the public can trigger a complaint) and the requirement of prior exhaustion of remedies (a soft admissibility requirement). 81 However, the decisions of its compliance committee are subject to consensus approval by the Convention's governing body, implicitly giving veto power to the Party whose compliance issues are at stake. 82 Escazu ˊhas significantly improved upon this provision.…”

Section: The Committee To Support Implementation and Compliancementioning

confidence: 99%

The Right to a Healthy Environment in Latin America and the Caribbean

Tigre

2024

International Courts Versus Non-Compliance Mechanisms

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Compliance through the Inter-American System and the Escazú Agreement    IntroductionLatin America and the Caribbean (LAC) is a region filled with paradoxes: it is uniquely biologically rich and relies heavily on primary products and natural resources, with economies driven by external commodity demands. 1 As LAC continues to pursue 'development', 2 important ecosystems and ecological processes are affected. It is also the deadliest region for environmental defenders, with countries consistently placing first in global rankings. 3 At the same time, LAC is a leading region in the recognition of the right to a healthy environment, with the majority of countries havingThe author would like to thank Lavinia Bhaskaruni for research assistance and Natalia Urzola, Alexandra Harrington, and Gastón Medici Colombo for helpful comments on earlier drafts of this chapter. This chapter was also significantly improved by a rich discussion at the

show abstract

Section: The Committee To Support Implementation and Compliancementioning

confidence: 99%

The Right to a Healthy Environment in Latin America and the Caribbean

Tigre

2024

International Courts Versus Non-Compliance Mechanisms

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Whether confrontational, formal sanctioning mechanisms or cooperative, informal NCMs facilitate the implementation of court judgments and managerial decisions beyond the nation state is a topic of growing interest in the literature, 126 including the question of whether NCMs are always 'soft'. 127 Making use of concept structures with set-theoretical categories as outlined above can be helpful to theorise and empirically compare the distinct types of enforcement along an axis ranging from soft/weak to hard/strong. Using settheoretic methods, a particularly soft non-compliance mechanism can be considered 'mostly out of the set' (of strong enforcement mechanisms), while a particularly strong sanction mechanism, such as the ability of the CJEU to impose significant daily fines, would be considered 'mostly in the set'.…”

Section: H1+2: Hpl*pap + Srm*nap  Impmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implementing Decisions on Environmental Conflicts Beyond the Nation State

Corcaci

2023

NJEL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article theorises the national implementation of European and international decisions on environmental conflicts, integrating both judgments from courts and so-called managerial decisions from (non-)compliance mechanisms in multilateral environmental agreements. Starting from the observation that the impact of climate change is increasing with backlash from populist governments and political regimes against its mitigation, implementing legal obligations in the absence of specialised environmental courts is crucial to protect the environment from harm. However, systematic insights on the national implementation of judgments and managerial decisions made beyond the nation state are underexplored. Following a political science perspective, this article conceptualises the conditions explaining this phenomenon by making use of existing research from various disciplines including political science and law on policy implementation to enable systematic comparisons. For this purpose, the article outlines a concept structural approach based on two hypothesised explanations: one based on the mechanisms used to solve conflicts, and another relating to the legitimacy of relevant institutions and processes of conflict resolution. These explanatory pathways reflect the existing management and enforcement approaches from the political science literature on implementation and follow a conjunctural logic. The theoretical approach developed in this article enables systematic comparisons across decisions and thus accounts for a variety of separate but equally valid explanations. Future research and empirical analysis will directly feed back into the concept structure for further theoretical development and lead to generalisable insights on the national implementation of court judgments and managerial decisions on environmental conflicts. In this way, the aim is to contribute to both political science and legal literature regarding European and international environmental law, environmental politics, and judicial governance.

show abstract

“…Wszystko to idzie w parze z brakiem jednego wyspecjalizowanego organu sądowego, który zapewniałby harmonijny rozwój zbioru norm odnoszących się do zmian klimatu -dotyczy to również bardziej generalnie całego międzynarodowego prawa środowiska (zjawisko tzw. fragmentation of interpretation albo fragmentation of jurisdiction) 23 . W historii międzynarodowego 18 28 -mogą stanowić pewien asumpt do uzyskania niekiedy wpadkowych, lecz ważnych w kontekście przeciwdziałania zmianom klimatu wypowiedzi orzeczniczych.…”

Section: Cechy Prawnomiędzynarodowego Reżimu Zmian Klimatuunclassified

Wyzwania w zakresie adjudykacyjnego rozstrzygania sporów międzynarodowych dotyczących zmian klimatu – w kierunku zacierania się granic prawa publicznego i prywatnego?

Czech¹

2021

PwD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article discusses the issue of insufficient use of judicial methods to resolve international disputes concerning climate change (between states and other entities). It analyses the numerous shortcomings of these methods, which hinder comprehensive resolution of such disputes. The solution to the problems identified in the paper may be to consolidate different types of parallel litigations concerning the same facts into one multilateral arbitration dispute with mixed (private- and public-law) characteristics.

show abstract

The Non-Compliance Mechanism Under the Aarhus Convention as ‘Soft’ Enforcement of International Environmental Law: Not So Soft After All!

Cited by 15 publications

References 12 publications

The Right to a Healthy Environment in Latin America and the Caribbean

The Right to a Healthy Environment in Latin America and the Caribbean

Implementing Decisions on Environmental Conflicts Beyond the Nation State

Wyzwania w zakresie adjudykacyjnego rozstrzygania sporów międzynarodowych dotyczących zmian klimatu – w kierunku zacierania się granic prawa publicznego i prywatnego?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About