{"title":"人类世的生态规律","authors":"Peter D. Burdon","doi":"10.1080/20414005.2020.1748483","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The issue motivating this article is the extent to which ecological legal thinking needs to change and adapt to the Anthropocene. My contention is that legal scholars tend to use the notion of the ‘Anthropocene’ as a synonym for the extreme impact human beings are having on the environment. Yet, few go further and consider whether the intellectual foundations or prescriptive proposals of ecological law have been challenged by Earth systems science. This is precisely the gap I intended to address in this article. Part one provides a descriptive summary of key findings in Earth systems science. Following this, part two presents two challenges to ecological lawyers. First I argue that we ought to abandon attempts to formulate a non-anthropocentric theory of law and embrace descriptive and perceptual forms of anthropocentrism. Second, I argue that earth systems science undermines many versions of ecological integrity found in legislation around the world.","PeriodicalId":37728,"journal":{"name":"Transnational Legal Theory","volume":"11 1","pages":"33 - 46"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/20414005.2020.1748483","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ecological law in the Anthropocene\",\"authors\":\"Peter D. Burdon\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/20414005.2020.1748483\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The issue motivating this article is the extent to which ecological legal thinking needs to change and adapt to the Anthropocene. My contention is that legal scholars tend to use the notion of the ‘Anthropocene’ as a synonym for the extreme impact human beings are having on the environment. Yet, few go further and consider whether the intellectual foundations or prescriptive proposals of ecological law have been challenged by Earth systems science. This is precisely the gap I intended to address in this article. Part one provides a descriptive summary of key findings in Earth systems science. Following this, part two presents two challenges to ecological lawyers. First I argue that we ought to abandon attempts to formulate a non-anthropocentric theory of law and embrace descriptive and perceptual forms of anthropocentrism. Second, I argue that earth systems science undermines many versions of ecological integrity found in legislation around the world.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37728,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Transnational Legal Theory\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"33 - 46\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-04-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/20414005.2020.1748483\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Transnational Legal Theory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/20414005.2020.1748483\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transnational Legal Theory","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20414005.2020.1748483","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
ABSTRACT The issue motivating this article is the extent to which ecological legal thinking needs to change and adapt to the Anthropocene. My contention is that legal scholars tend to use the notion of the ‘Anthropocene’ as a synonym for the extreme impact human beings are having on the environment. Yet, few go further and consider whether the intellectual foundations or prescriptive proposals of ecological law have been challenged by Earth systems science. This is precisely the gap I intended to address in this article. Part one provides a descriptive summary of key findings in Earth systems science. Following this, part two presents two challenges to ecological lawyers. First I argue that we ought to abandon attempts to formulate a non-anthropocentric theory of law and embrace descriptive and perceptual forms of anthropocentrism. Second, I argue that earth systems science undermines many versions of ecological integrity found in legislation around the world.
期刊介绍:
The objective of Transnational Legal Theory is to publish high-quality theoretical scholarship that addresses transnational dimensions of law and legal dimensions of transnational fields and activity. Central to Transnational Legal Theory''s mandate is publication of work that explores whether and how transnational contexts, forces and ideations affect debates within existing traditions or schools of legal thought. Similarly, the journal aspires to encourage scholars debating general theories about law to consider the relevance of transnational contexts and dimensions for their work. With respect to particular jurisprudence, the journal welcomes not only submissions that involve theoretical explorations of fields commonly constructed as transnational in nature (such as commercial law, maritime law, or cyberlaw) but also explorations of transnational aspects of fields less commonly understood in this way (for example, criminal law, family law, company law, tort law, evidence law, and so on). Submissions of work exploring process-oriented approaches to law as transnational (from transjurisdictional litigation to delocalized arbitration to multi-level governance) are also encouraged. Equally central to Transnational Legal Theory''s mandate is theoretical work that explores fresh (or revived) understandings of international law and comparative law ''beyond the state'' (and the interstate). The journal has a special interest in submissions that explore the interfaces, intersections, and mutual embeddedness of public international law, private international law, and comparative law, notably in terms of whether such inter-relationships are reshaping these sub-disciplines in directions that are, in important respects, transnational in nature.