寻求欧盟环境法中的“环境正义”

Q3 Social Sciences
Elias Van Gool
{"title":"寻求欧盟环境法中的“环境正义”","authors":"Elias Van Gool","doi":"10.54648/eelr2022022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Environmental justice (‘EJ’) receives a lot of attention in the environmental social sciences and in U.S. law. But in Europe, it has so far been largely ignored in legal literature and policy debates, which seems difficult to reconcile with an anthropocentric understanding of current environmental law. This article focuses on distributive and procedural dimensions of EJ and on considerations of intragenerational fairness within the EU. General features of EU environmental law are examined in search of ‘hidden’ elements that might help or frustrate this goal. Themain finding is that other fields of law and policy are likely more significant enablers of EJ in Europe. To the extent that EU environmental law contributes, it seems largely an accidental result that is not guaranteed by its design. Substantive EU environmental law pursues a territorially uniform level of environmental protection and seems to have, with the possible exception of environmental impact assessments, no direct mechanisms to consider inequities between human populations. Examples are found of rules that even have clearly adverse consequences for underprivileged populations. The Aarhus Convention provides theoretical opportunities for procedural justice, but the current implementation in practice fails to achieve those and might even operate counterproductively as a mechanism that further benefits the already powerful. Primary EU environmental law largely mirrors these findings. Nevertheless, a correct interpretation of sustainable development in Article 11 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) is identified as a potential key to better integrate EJ in EU policy.\nenvironmental justice, EU environmental law, anthropocentrism, distributive effects, offsets, procedural justice, Aarhus Convention, offsets, Article 191 TFEU, Article 11 TFEU","PeriodicalId":53610,"journal":{"name":"European Energy and Environmental Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Searching for ‘Environmental Justice’ in EU Environmental Law\",\"authors\":\"Elias Van Gool\",\"doi\":\"10.54648/eelr2022022\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Environmental justice (‘EJ’) receives a lot of attention in the environmental social sciences and in U.S. law. But in Europe, it has so far been largely ignored in legal literature and policy debates, which seems difficult to reconcile with an anthropocentric understanding of current environmental law. This article focuses on distributive and procedural dimensions of EJ and on considerations of intragenerational fairness within the EU. General features of EU environmental law are examined in search of ‘hidden’ elements that might help or frustrate this goal. Themain finding is that other fields of law and policy are likely more significant enablers of EJ in Europe. To the extent that EU environmental law contributes, it seems largely an accidental result that is not guaranteed by its design. Substantive EU environmental law pursues a territorially uniform level of environmental protection and seems to have, with the possible exception of environmental impact assessments, no direct mechanisms to consider inequities between human populations. Examples are found of rules that even have clearly adverse consequences for underprivileged populations. The Aarhus Convention provides theoretical opportunities for procedural justice, but the current implementation in practice fails to achieve those and might even operate counterproductively as a mechanism that further benefits the already powerful. Primary EU environmental law largely mirrors these findings. Nevertheless, a correct interpretation of sustainable development in Article 11 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) is identified as a potential key to better integrate EJ in EU policy.\\nenvironmental justice, EU environmental law, anthropocentrism, distributive effects, offsets, procedural justice, Aarhus Convention, offsets, Article 191 TFEU, Article 11 TFEU\",\"PeriodicalId\":53610,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Energy and Environmental Law Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Energy and Environmental Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54648/eelr2022022\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Energy and Environmental Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/eelr2022022","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

环境正义在环境社会科学和美国法律中受到广泛关注。但在欧洲,到目前为止,它在法律文献和政策辩论中基本上被忽视了,这似乎很难与对当前环境法的以人类为中心的理解相调和。本文重点讨论了EJ的分配和程序层面,以及欧盟内部代际公平的考虑。欧盟环境法的一般特征被审查,以寻找可能有助于或阻碍这一目标的“隐藏”因素。主要发现是,法律和政策的其他领域可能是欧洲EJ的更重要推动者。就欧盟环境法的贡献而言,这似乎在很大程度上是一个偶然的结果,其设计并不能保证这一点。实质性的欧盟环境法追求地区统一的环境保护水平,除了环境影响评估之外,似乎没有直接的机制来考虑人口之间的不平等。有些规则甚至对贫困人口产生明显的不利影响。《奥胡斯公约》为程序正义提供了理论上的机会,但目前在实践中的实施未能实现这些机会,甚至可能作为一种进一步造福本已强大的机制发挥反作用。欧盟的主要环境法在很大程度上反映了这些发现。然而,《欧盟运作条约》第11条对可持续发展的正确解释被认为是将EJ更好地纳入欧盟政策的潜在关键
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Searching for ‘Environmental Justice’ in EU Environmental Law
Environmental justice (‘EJ’) receives a lot of attention in the environmental social sciences and in U.S. law. But in Europe, it has so far been largely ignored in legal literature and policy debates, which seems difficult to reconcile with an anthropocentric understanding of current environmental law. This article focuses on distributive and procedural dimensions of EJ and on considerations of intragenerational fairness within the EU. General features of EU environmental law are examined in search of ‘hidden’ elements that might help or frustrate this goal. Themain finding is that other fields of law and policy are likely more significant enablers of EJ in Europe. To the extent that EU environmental law contributes, it seems largely an accidental result that is not guaranteed by its design. Substantive EU environmental law pursues a territorially uniform level of environmental protection and seems to have, with the possible exception of environmental impact assessments, no direct mechanisms to consider inequities between human populations. Examples are found of rules that even have clearly adverse consequences for underprivileged populations. The Aarhus Convention provides theoretical opportunities for procedural justice, but the current implementation in practice fails to achieve those and might even operate counterproductively as a mechanism that further benefits the already powerful. Primary EU environmental law largely mirrors these findings. Nevertheless, a correct interpretation of sustainable development in Article 11 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) is identified as a potential key to better integrate EJ in EU policy. environmental justice, EU environmental law, anthropocentrism, distributive effects, offsets, procedural justice, Aarhus Convention, offsets, Article 191 TFEU, Article 11 TFEU
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
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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