Procedure and Substance in International Environmental Law.
- 1st ed.
- 1 online resource (240 pages)
- The Pocket Books of the Hague Academy of International Law / les Livres de Poche de l'Académie de Droit International de la Haye Series ; v.40 .
- The Pocket Books of the Hague Academy of International Law / les Livres de Poche de l'Académie de Droit International de la Haye Series .
Intro -- THE HAGUE ACADEMY OF INTERNATIONAL LAW -- TABLE OF CONTENTS -- Chapter I. Introduction -- A. Context -- B. Procedure and substance in law -- C. Procedure and substance in public international law -- 1. International adjudication -- 2. Procedural versus substantive rules -- D. Procedure and substance in international environmental law -- 1. Procedural and substantive obligations -- 1.1. Customary law -- 1.2. Treaty law -- 2. Procedures in international environmental law -- 2.1. Adjudication -- 2.2. Procedural aspects of treaty-based regimes -- 3. The proceduralization of international environmental law -- 3.1. Practical considerations -- 3.2. Theoretical considerations -- Chapter II. The harm prevention rule -- A. Overview -- B. The origins of international environmental law and the no harm rule -- 1. The Trail Smelter case -- 2. General principles concerning territorial sovereignty -- 3. The evolution and crystallization of the no harm rule -- 3.1. Due diligence -- 3.2. Prevention -- 3.3. Substantive and procedural obligations -- 3.4. Environmental harm, including beyond national jurisdiction -- C. From no harm to harm prevention : implications for procedure and substance -- 1. Taking stock -- 2. The harm prevention rule as conceived by the ICJ -- 2.1. What is procedure, and what is substance ? -- 2.2. What is the relationship between procedure and substance ? -- (a) Conceptual/terminological relationship -- (b) Practical/functional relationship -- (c) Legal relationship -- 2.3. When is the harm prevention rule violated ? -- 2.4. Is there one rule or are there two ? -- 3. The harm prevention rule revisited -- 3.1. The case for a single harm prevention rule -- 3.2. The case for a conduct-focused harm prevention rule -- (a) Due diligence links procedure and substance -- (b) Violation without harm -- (c) The law of State responsibility. 3.3. Why it matters -- 3.4. The framework in a nutshell -- Chapter III. Harm prevention beyond the "neighbourhood" -- A. Context -- B. Long-range transboundary impacts -- 1. Applying the harm prevention rule -- 2. Adjudicating harm prevention -- C. Concerns beyond national jurisdiction -- 1. Applying the harm prevention rule -- 2. Adjudicating harm prevention -- D. Harm prevention and human rights -- E. Harm prevention beyond the neighbourhood in a nutshell -- Chapter IV. Complex harm prevention : multilateral environmental agreements -- A. Context -- B. Treaty-based approaches : an overview -- 1. Scope -- 2. Towards agreement -- 2.1. Process-oriented, dynamic and adaptable -- 2.2. The framework-protocol model -- C. The climate regime -- 1. Substantive aspects -- 1.1. The UNFCCC -- 1.2. The Kyoto Protocol : from obligations of conduct to obligations of result -- 1.3. The Paris Agreement : a return to obligations of conduct -- 2. Procedural aspects -- 2.1. Information and scientific assessment -- (a) Procedural requirements.. -- (b) Notable features -- 2.2. Lawmaking and standard-setting -- (a) Conferences of the Parties -- (b) Lawmaking processes -- (c) The Paris Agreement -- 2.3. Performance and compliance -- (a) Judicial dispute settlement -- (b) Non-compliance procedures -- (i) Goals and features.. -- (ii) Paris Agreement -- D. Treaty-based procedure and substance in a nutshell -- Chapter V. Conclusion -- Bibliography -- List of abbreviations -- About the author -- Biographical note -- Principal publications.
The interplay between procedure and substance has not been a major point of contention for international environmental lawyers. Arguably, the topic's low profile is due to the mostly uncontroversial nature of the field's distinction between procedural and substantive obligations. Furthermore, the vast majority of environmental law scholars and practitioners have tended to welcome the procedural features of multilateral environmental agreements and their potential to promote regime evolution and effectiveness. However, recent developments have served to put the spotlight on certain aspects of the procedure substance topic. ICJ judgments revealed ambiguity on aspects of the customary law framework on transboundary harm prevention that the field had thought largely settled. In turn, in the treaty context, the Paris Agreement's retreat from binding emissions targets and its decisive turn towards procedure reignited concerns in some quarters over the "proceduralization" of international environmental law. The two developments invite a closer look at the respective roles of, and the relationship between, procedure and substance in this field and, more specifically, in the context of harm prevention under customary and treaty law.