De stockholm a copenhague: Genese et evolution des responsabilites communes mais differenciees dans le droit international de l'environnement
During the 1960s and 1970s, considerable economic inequalities led third world countries, seeking economic development, to demand that a new international economic order be established. The law responded to these economic inequalities by developing the concept of differential treatment with regard t...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | McGill law journal 2010-12, Vol.56 (1), p.177-228 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | During the 1960s and 1970s, considerable economic inequalities led third world countries, seeking economic development, to demand that a new international economic order be established. The law responded to these economic inequalities by developing the concept of differential treatment with regard to the respective treaty obligations of the states. Since the 1970s, the international community, which already exhibited economic and social consciousness, also developed greater environmental awareness. It was in this context that the concept of "common but differentiated responsibilities" was formulated.
The aim of this article is to analyze the origins and evolution of common but differentiated responsibilities in international environmental law, while drawing attention to the most striking contrasts in respect to the special and differential treatment of the multilateral trading system and the common but differentiated responsibilities of international environmental law. The author hopes to lay the foundations for a truly crosscutting analysis of differential treatment.
Part one retraces the first appearance of the concept of common but differentiated responsibilities, which was set in motion at the 1972 Stockholm Conference, as well as its reception in environmental treaties. In this section, the author also analyzes the discussion surrounding the legal nature of the concept. Part two addresses the basis of the concept by reviewing the practical and ethical considerations that oversaw its emergence and still justify its use. Finally, part three classifies and examines its various manifestations in different environmental treaties. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0024-9041 1920-6356 |