污染者该付多少钱?印度法院与环境损害评估

IF 2 3区 社会学 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Sroyon Mukherjee
{"title":"污染者该付多少钱?印度法院与环境损害评估","authors":"Sroyon Mukherjee","doi":"10.1093/jel/eqad021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract On the face of it, the polluter pays principle (PPP) simply prescribes that the costs of pollution should be borne by those who were responsible for causing it. In practice, implementing the PPP raises a number of complex questions. In this article, I focus on one such key question, as interpreted by higher courts in India: how much should the polluter pay? I propose—and then apply—a three-part choice framework for analysing judicial interpretations of the PPP. Indian case law on the subject is often presumed to be relatively coherent and consistent. However, a methodical application of the aforementioned framework reveals three distinct strands in the approaches taken by Indian courts, thus contributing to a more in-depth and systematic understanding of the PPP jurisprudence. I also identify certain gaps and inconsistencies in these approaches, and suggest ways in which they can be resolved, making the application of the set principle more consistent, logical and effective.","PeriodicalId":46437,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Environmental Law","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How Much Should the Polluter Pay? Indian Courts and the Valuation of Environmental Damage\",\"authors\":\"Sroyon Mukherjee\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jel/eqad021\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract On the face of it, the polluter pays principle (PPP) simply prescribes that the costs of pollution should be borne by those who were responsible for causing it. In practice, implementing the PPP raises a number of complex questions. In this article, I focus on one such key question, as interpreted by higher courts in India: how much should the polluter pay? I propose—and then apply—a three-part choice framework for analysing judicial interpretations of the PPP. Indian case law on the subject is often presumed to be relatively coherent and consistent. However, a methodical application of the aforementioned framework reveals three distinct strands in the approaches taken by Indian courts, thus contributing to a more in-depth and systematic understanding of the PPP jurisprudence. I also identify certain gaps and inconsistencies in these approaches, and suggest ways in which they can be resolved, making the application of the set principle more consistent, logical and effective.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46437,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Environmental Law\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Environmental Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jel/eqad021\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Environmental Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jel/eqad021","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

从表面上看,污染者付费原则(PPP)简单地规定了污染成本应由造成污染的责任人承担。在实践中,PPP的实施引发了一系列复杂的问题。在这篇文章中,我关注的是印度高等法院解释的一个关键问题:污染者应该支付多少钱?我提出并应用了一个由三部分组成的选择框架来分析PPP的司法解释。印度关于这一问题的判例法通常被认为是相对连贯和一致的。然而,对上述框架的系统应用揭示了印度法院采取的方法中的三个不同方面,从而有助于更深入和系统地理解PPP法理。我还指出了这些方法中的某些差距和不一致之处,并提出了解决这些问题的方法,使集合原则的应用更加一致、合乎逻辑和有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
How Much Should the Polluter Pay? Indian Courts and the Valuation of Environmental Damage
Abstract On the face of it, the polluter pays principle (PPP) simply prescribes that the costs of pollution should be borne by those who were responsible for causing it. In practice, implementing the PPP raises a number of complex questions. In this article, I focus on one such key question, as interpreted by higher courts in India: how much should the polluter pay? I propose—and then apply—a three-part choice framework for analysing judicial interpretations of the PPP. Indian case law on the subject is often presumed to be relatively coherent and consistent. However, a methodical application of the aforementioned framework reveals three distinct strands in the approaches taken by Indian courts, thus contributing to a more in-depth and systematic understanding of the PPP jurisprudence. I also identify certain gaps and inconsistencies in these approaches, and suggest ways in which they can be resolved, making the application of the set principle more consistent, logical and effective.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
15.80%
发文量
21
期刊介绍: Condensing essential information into just three issues a year, the Journal of Environmental Law has become an authoritative source of informed analysis for all those who have any dealings in this vital field of legal study. It exists primarily for academics and legal practitioners, but should also prove accessible for all other groups concerned with the environment, from scientists to planners. The journal offers major articles on a wide variety of topics, refereed and written to the highest standards, providing innovative and authoritative appraisals of current and emerging concepts, policies, and practice. It includes: -An analysis section, providing detailed analysis of current case law and legislative and policy developments -An annual review of significant UK, European Court of Justice, and international law cases -A substantial book reviews section
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信