A legal paradigm shift towards climate justice in the Anthropocene
##plugins.pubIds.doi.readerDisplayName##:
https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl/0000-0000-0000-1177Gako-hitzak:
Anthropocene, global heating, climate emergency, climate justice, climatic harms, paradigm shift, new materialismLaburpena
Business as usual is widely acknowledged as the main driver of ecological collapse and climate breakdown, but less attention is paid to the role of law as usual as an impediment to climate justice. This article analyses how domestic and international environmental law facilitate injustices against living entities and nature. It calls for a paradigm shift in legal theory, practice and teaching to reflect the scale and urgency of the unfolding ecological catastrophe. Section 2 outlines the links between climatic harms and climate injustices. This is followed by discussions of unsustainable law and economic development in sections 3 and 4. Section 5 examines the potential contribution of new materialist legal theory in bringing about a legal paradigm shift that reflects the jurisgenerative role of nature in promoting climate justice.
##plugins.generic.usageStats.downloads##
Metrics
Downloads:
PDF (English) 1122
Erreferentziak
Acosta, A., 2010. El Buen (con) Vivir, una utopía por (re)construir: Alcances de la Constitución de Montecristi. OBETS. Revista de Ciencias Sociales [online], 6(1), 35–67. Available from: https://doi.org/10.14198/OBETS2011.6.1.03 [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Acosta, A., and Gudynas, E., 2011. La renovación de la crítica al desarrollo y el buen vivir como alternativa. Utopıa y Praxis Latinoamericana [online], 16(53), 71–83. Available from: https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=27919220007 [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Adelman, S., 2015. Epistemologies of Mastery. In: A. Grear and L.J. Kotzé, eds., Research Handbook on Human Rights and the Environment. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 9-27.
Adelman, S., 2017a. Geoengineering: Rights, Risks and Ethics. Journal of Human Rights and the Environment [online], 8(1), 119–138. Available from: https://doi.org/10.4337/jhre.2017.01.06 [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Adelman, S., 2017b. Rethinking Global Environmental Governance. In: E. Daly, J. May and L. Kotzé, eds., New Frontiers in Global Environmental Constitutionalism [online]. Nairobi: UNEP, 296–307. Available from: https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/20819/Frontiers-Environmental-Constitutionalism.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Adelman, S., 2018. The Sustainable Development Goals, Anthropocentrism and Neoliberalism. In: D. French and L. Kotzé, eds., Sustainable Global Goals: Law, Theory and Implementation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 15-40.
Adelman, S., 2021. Modernity, Anthropocene, Capitalocene and the Climate Crisis. In: D. Hillier and A. Grear, eds., The Great Awakening: New Modes of Life Amidst Capitalist Ruins. Goleta: Punctum Books.
Adelman, S., forthcoming 2021. Planetary Boundaries, Planetary Ethics and Climate Justice in the Anthropocene. In: D. French and L.J. Kotzé, eds., Research Handbook on Law, Governance and Planetary Boundaries. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Agamben, G., 1998. Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life. Stanford University Press.
Agamben, G., 2005. State of Exception. University of Chicago Press.
Alaimo, S., 2010. Bodily Natures: Science, Environment and the Material Self. Bloomington/Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.
Anghie, A., 2007. Imperialism, Sovereignty and the Making of International Law. Cambridge University Press.
Arias-Maldonado, M., 2015. Environment and Society: Socionatural Relations in the Anthropocene. London: Springer.
Ashgar Leghari v Federation of Pakistan (W.P. No. 25501/2015). Lahore High Court Green Bench.
Atapattu, S., 2016. Climate Change, International Environmental Law Principles, and the North-South Divide. Transnational Law & Contemporary Problems, 26(2), 247-262.
Barad, K., 2001. Re(con)figuring space, time, and matter. In: M. DeKoven, ed., Feminist Locations: Global and Local, Theory and Practice. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 75–109.
Barad, K., 2003. Posthumanist performativity: Toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. Signs: Journal of women in culture and society [online], 28(3), 801-831. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1086/345321 [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Barad, K., 2007. Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Durham: Duke University Press.
Barad, K., 2008. Posthumanist Performativity: Toward an Understanding of How Matter Comes to Matter. In: S. Alaimo and S.J. Hekman, eds., Material Feminisms. Bloomington/Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.
Benhabib, S., 2011. Dignity in Adversity: Human Rights in Troubled Times. Cambridge University Press.
Benjamin, W., 1968. Illuminations: Essays and Reflections. New York: Schocken Books.
Bennett J., 2004. The force of things: Steps toward an ecology of matter. Political theory [online], 32(3), 347-372. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/0090591703260853 [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Bennett, J., 2010. Vibrant Matter: A Political Ecology of Things. Durham: Duke University Press.
Bonneuil, C., and Fressoz, J.B., 2016. The Shock of the Anthropocene: The Earth, History and Us. Trans.: D. Fernbach. London: Verso.
Braidotti, R., 2006. Posthuman, all too human: Towards a new process ontology. Theory, Culture & Society [online], 23(7-8), 197-208. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276406069232 [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Braidotti, R., 2016. Posthuman critical theory. In: D. Banerji and M.R. Paranjape, eds., Critical Posthumanism and Planetary Futures. New Delhi: Springer, 13-32.
Braidotti, R., 2017. Critical posthuman knowledges. The South Atlantic Quarterly [online], 116(1), 83-96. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1215/00382876-3749337 [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Brondizio, E.S., et al., 2019. Global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. [online]. Bonn: IPBES Secretariat. Available from: https://ipbes.net/global-assessment [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Burdon, P.D., 2015. Earth Jurisprudence: Private Property and the Environment. Abingdon: Routledge.
Cano Pecharroman, L., 2018. Rights of nature: rivers that can stand in Court. Resources [online], 7(1), 13-27. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3390/resources7010013 [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Capra, F., and Mattei, U., 2015. The Ecology of Law: Toward a Legal System in Tune with Nature and Community. San Francisco: Berrett–Koehler.
Code, L., 2006. Ecological Thinking: The Politics of Epistemic Location. Oxford University Press.
Connolly, W., 2011. A World of Becoming. London: Duke University Press.
Coole, D., and Frost, S., 2010. New Materialisms: Ontology, Agency, and Politics. Durham: Duke University Press.
Crutzen, P., 2002. Geology of Mankind. Nature [online], 415(4687), 23-23. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1038/415023a [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Crutzen, P., and Stoermer, E., 2000. The Anthropocene. The International Geosphere–Biosphere Programme (IGBP): A Study of Global Change of the International Council for Science (ICSU) [online], nº 41, 17-18. Available from: http://www.igbp.net/download/18.316f18321323470177580001401/1376383088452/NL41.pdf [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Cullinan, C., 2011. Wild Law: Governing People for Earth. Cape Town: Siber Ink.
Davies, M., 2017. Law Unlimited Materialism, Pluralism and Legal Theory. Abingdon: Routledge.
De Lucia, V., 2013. Towards an Ecological Philosophy of Law: A Comparative Discussion. Journal of Human Rights and the Environment [online], 4(2), 167–190. Available from: https://doi.org/10.4337/jhre.2013.02.03 [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Deleuze, G., and Guattari, F., 1988. A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. London: Bloomsbury.
Earthlife Africa Johannesburg v Minister of Environmental Affairs & Others, Case No. 65662/16, High Court, Order of 8 Mar. 2017.
Engel-Di Mauro, S., ed., 2019. Capitalism Nature Socialism, 30(2).
Escobar, A., 2011. Sustainability: Design for the Pluriverse. Development [online], 54(2), 137–140. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1057/dev.2011.28 [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Fineman, M.A., 2013. Equality, autonomy, and the vulnerable subject in law and politics. In: M. Fineman and A. Grear, eds., Vulnerability: Reflections on a New Ethical Foundation for Law and Politics. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Fioramonti, L., 2013. Gross Domestic Problem: The Politics Behind the World's Most Powerful Number. London: Zed Books.
Fisher, E., Scotford, E., and Barritt, E., 2017. The legally disruptive nature of climate change. The Modern Law Review [online], 80(2), 173-201. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.12251 [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Fitzpatrick, P., 2002. The Mythology of Modern Law. Abingdon: Routledge.
Fox, N.J., and Alldred, P., 2018. New materialism. In: P.A. Atkinson et al., eds., The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Methods. London: Sage, 1-16.
French, D., and Kotzé, L.J., 2019. “Towards a Global Pact for the Environment”: International environmental law’s factual, technical and (unmentionable) normative gaps. Review of European, Comparative & International Environmental Law [online], 28(1), 25-32. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/reel.12278 [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Gonzalez, C.G., 2021. Racial capitalism, climate justice, and climate displacement. Oñati Socio-Legal Series [online], 11(this issue). Available from: https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl/0000-0000-0000-1137 [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Gramsci, A., (with Q. Hoare and G. Nowell-Smith, eds. and trans.), 1971. Selections from the Prison Notebooks of Antonio Gramsci. London: International Publishers.
Grear, A., 2012. Human Rights, Property and the Search for Worlds Other. Journal of Human Rights and the Environment [online], 3(2), 173–195. Available from: https://doi.org/10.4337/jhre.2012.03.01 [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Grear, A., 2014. Towards “Climate Justice”? A Critical Reflection on Legal Subjectivity and Climate Injustice: Warning Signals, Patterned Hierarchies, Directions for Future Law and Policy. In: A. Grear and C. Gearty, eds., Choosing a Future: The Social and Legal Aspects of Climate Change. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 1–7.
Grear, A., 2015. Deconstructing Anthropos: A Critical Legal Reflection on “Anthropocentric” Law and Anthropocene “Humanity”. Law and Critique [online], 26(3), 225–249. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10978-015-9161-0 [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Grear, A., 2017a. “Anthropocene, Capitalocene, Chthulucene”: Re-encountering environmental law and its ‘subject’ with Haraway and New Materialism. In: L. Kotzé, ed., Environmental Law and Governance for the Anthropocene. Oxford: Hart, 77–96.
Grear, A., 2017b. Foregrounding vulnerability: materiality’s porous affectability as a methodological platform. In: A. Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos and V. Brooks, eds., Research Methods in Environmental Law: A Handbook. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 3-28.
Grear, A., 2018. Human Rights and New Horizons? Thoughts toward a New Juridical Ontology. Science, Technology, & Human Values [online], 43(1), 129-145. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243917736140 [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Gudynas, E., 2011. Buen Vivir: Today’s tomorrow. Development [online], 54(4), 441-447. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1057/dev.2011.86 [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Gudynas, E., 2016. Beyond varieties of development: disputes and alternatives. Third World Quarterly [online], 37(4), 721-732. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2015.1126504 [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Hamilton, C., 2003. Growth Fetish. Crows Nest: Allen & Unwin.
Hamilton, C., 2015. The Theodicy of the “Good Anthropocene”. Environmental Humanities 7(1), 233-238. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1215/22011919-3616434 [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Hamilton, C., 2016. The Anthropocene as Rupture. The Anthropocene Review [online], 3(2), 93-106. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/2053019616634741 [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Hamilton, C., 2017. Defiant Earth: The Fate of Humans in the Anthropocene. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Haraway, D.J., 1997. Modest_Witness@Second_Millennium. FemaleMan©_Meets_OncoMouse™: Feminism and Technoscience. Abingdon: Routledge.
Haraway, D., 2008. When Species Meet. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Haraway, D.J., 2016. Staying with the Trouble: Making Kin in the Chthulucene. Durham: Duke University Press.
Hayek, F.A., 1978. Law, Legislation and Liberty: Rules and Order (vol. 1). University of Chicago Press.
Hettne, B., 1995. Development Theory and the Three Worlds: Towards an International Political Economy of Development. London: Longman.
Hickel, J., 2019. Is it possible to achieve a good life for all within planetary boundaries? Third World Quarterly [online], 40(1), 18–35. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2018.1535895 [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Hope, M., 2019. The Brazilian development agenda driving Amazon devastation. The Lancet Planetary Health [online], 3(10), e409-e411. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(19)30195-0 [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Hornborg, A., 2011. Global Ecology and Unequal Exchange: Fetishism in a Zero–Sum World. Abingdon: Routledge.
Howe, H.R., 2017. Making Wild Law Work – The Role of “Connection with Nature” and Education in Developing an Ecocentric Property Law. Journal of Environmental Law [online], 29(1), 19–45. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/jel/eqw029 [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Environment and Human Rights, 2017. Advisory Opinion OC-23/17 of Nov. 15, 2017, Requested by the Republic of Colombia [online]. Available from: http://www.corteidh.or.cr/docs/opiniones/resumen_seriea_23_eng.pdf [Accessed 14 January 2020].
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 2018. Global Warming of 1.5O C: An IPCC Special Report on the Impacts of Global Warming of 1.5° C Above Pre-Industrial Levels. Summary for Policymakers. Geneva: World Meteorological Organization.
International Bar Association, 2020. Model Statute for Proceedings Challenging Government Failure to Act on Climate Change: An International Bar Association Climate Change Justice and Human Rights Task Force Report. International Bar Association.
Jameson, F., 2003. Future City. New Left Review [online], 21, May-June 2003, 65-79. Available from: https://newleftreview.org/issues/II21/articles/fredric-jameson-future-city [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Kaplan, S., 2020. Climate change affects everything – even the coronavirus. The Washington Post [online], 15 April. Available from: https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-solutions/2020/04/15/climate-change-affects-everything-even-coronavirus/?arc404=true [Accessed 15 June 2020].
Kaufmann, C.M., and Martin, P.L., 2017. Can rights of nature make development more sustainable? Why some Ecuadorian lawsuits succeed and others fail. World Development [online], 92, 130-142. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2016.11.017 [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Kotzé, L.J., 2019. Earth System Law for the Anthropocene. Sustainability [online], 11(23), 6796. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3390/su11236796 [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Kotzé, L.J., Du Toit, L., and French, D., 2021. Friend or foe? International environmental law and its structural complicity in the Anthropocene’s climate injustices. Oñati Socio-Legal Series [online], 11(this issue). Available from: https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl/0000-0000-0000-1140 [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Krämer, L., 2020. Rights of Nature and Their Implementation. Journal for European Environmental & Planning Law [online], 17(1), 47-75. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1163/18760104-01701005 [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Latour, B., 1993. We Have Never Been Modern. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Latour, B., 2004. The Politics of Nature: How to Bring the Sciences into Democracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Latour, B., 2009. A plea for earthly sciences. In: J. Burnett, S. Jeffers and G. Thomas, eds., New Social Connections: Sociology’s Subjects and Objects. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Latour, B., 2018. Down to Earth: Politics in the New Climatic Regime. Trans.: C. Porter. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Ley núm. 071 de 21 de diciembre de 2010 de Derechos de la Madre Tierra [Act nº 071 of the Plurinational State of Bolivia] (online). 21 December. Available from: https://www.ilo.org/dyn/natlex/natlex4.detail?p_isn=92470&p_lang=en [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Linarelli, J., Salomon, M.E., and Sornarajah, M., 2018. The Misery of International Law: Confrontations with Injustice in the Global Economy. Oxford University Press.
Magallanes, C.J.I., 2015. Maori cultural rights in Aotearoa New Zealand: Protecting the cosmology that protects the environment. Widener Law Review [online], 21(2), 273–327. Available from: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2677396 [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Malm, A., 2018. The Progress of this Storm: Nature and Society in a Warming World. London: Verso.
McAdam, J., 2010. Climate Change and Displacement: Multidisciplinary Perspectives. Oxford: Hart.
McAdam, J., 2011. Swimming against the tide: why a climate change displacement treaty is not the answer. International Journal of Refugee Law [online], 23(1), 2-27. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/ijrl/eeq045 [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Merchant, C., 1998. The Death of Nature. In: M.E. Zimmerman et al., eds., Environmental Philosophy: From Animal Rights to Ecology. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.
Moellendorf, D., 2012. Climate change and global justice. WIREs Climate Change [online], 3(2), 131-143. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.158 [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Morton, T., 2013. Hyperobjects: Philosophy and Ecology after the End of the World. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Moss, J., ed., 2015. Climate Change and Justice. Cambridge University Press.
Nollkaemper, A., and Burgers, L., 2020. A New Classic in Climate Change Litigation: The Dutch Supreme Court Decision in the Urgenda Case. EJIL!Talk [online], 6 January. Available from: https://www.ejiltalk.org/a-new-classic-in-climate-change-litigation-the-dutch-supreme-court-decision-in-the-urgenda-case/ [Accessed 17 January 2020].
Nuñez, A.J., 2019. Mother Earth and climate justice. In: T. Jafry, ed., Routledge Handbook of Climate Justice. Abindgon: Routledge, 420-430.
Pettifor, A., 2019. The Case for the Green New Deal. London: Verso.
Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos, A., 2011a. Critical autopoiesis: The environment of the law. In: B. de Vries and L. Francot, eds., Law’s Environment: Critical Legal Perspectives. The Hague: Eleven International, 11-17.
Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos, A., 2011b. Towards a critical environmental law. In: A. Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos, ed., Law and Ecology: New Environmental Foundations. Abingdon: Routledge, 18–38.
Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos, A., 2015. Actors or spectators? Vulnerability and critical environmental law. In: A. Grear and E. Grant, eds., Thought, Law, Rights and Action in the Age of Environmental Crisis. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 46–75.
Pistor, K., 2019. The Code of Capital: How the Law Creates Wealth and Inequality. Princeton University Press.
Plumwood, V., 1993. Feminism and the Mastery of Nature. Abingdon: Routledge.
Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, 2015. Four of nine planetary boundaries now crossed. PIK Potsdam Latest News [online], 16 January. Available from: https://www.pik-potsdam.de/en/news/latest-news/four-of-nine-planetary-boundaries-now-crossed [Accessed 27 October 2020].
R (On The Application Of Plan B Earth) (Claimant) v Secretary Of State For Transport (Defendant) & (1) Heathrow Airport Ltd (2) Arora Holdings Ltd (Interested Parties) & WWF-UK (Intervener), Case Nos: C1/2019/1053, C1/2019/1056 and C1/2019/1145.
Ramírez, R., 2010. La transición ecuatoriana hacía el buen vivir. In: I. León, ed., Sumak Kawsay/Buen vivir y cambios civilizatorios. Quito: Senplades, 125-141.
Ramírez-Cendrero, J.M., 2017. Limits and Contradictions of Post–developmentalism as a Heterodox Approach to Capitalist Development. Capitalism Nature Socialism [online], 29(4), 68-87. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/10455752.2017.1334220 [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Roberts, J.T., and Parks, B.C., 2009. Ecologically unequal exchange, ecological debt, and climate justice: The history and implications of three related ideas for a new social movement. International Journal of Comparative Sociology [online], 50(3-4), 385-409. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/0020715209105147 [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Rockström, J., et al., 2009. Planetary Boundaries: Exploring the Safe Operating Space for Humanity. Ecology and Society [online], 14(2), 32-55. Available from: https://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss2/art32/ [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Sachs, W., 1992. Environment. In: W. Sachs, ed., The Development Dictionary: A Guide to Knowledge as Power. London: Zed Books, 26-37.
Santos, B.D.S., 2002. Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation. Cambridge University Press.
Setzer, J., and Byrnes, R., 2019. Global Trends in Climate Change Litigation: 2019 Snapshot [online]. Policy publication. Grantham Research Institute and Centre for Climate Change Economics and Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, 4 July. Available from: https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/publication/global-trends-in-climate-change-litigation-2019-snapshot/ [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Setzer, J., and Vanhala, L., 2019. Climate change litigation: A review of research on courts and litigants in climate governance. WIREs Climate Change [online], 10(3), e580. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.580 [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Shellenberger, M., and Nordhaus, T., 2015. An Ecomodernist Manifesto: From the Death of Environmentalism to the Birth of Ecomodernism. 15 April. Oakland: The Breakthrough Institute.
Soper, K., 1995. What is Nature?: Culture, Politics and the Non-Human. Oxford: Blackwell.
Steffen, W., et al., 2005. Global Change and the Earth System: A Planet under Pressure. Berlin/Heidelberg/New York: Springer, 131.
Steffen, W., et al., 2015. The Trajectory of the Anthropocene: The Great Acceleration. The Anthropocene Review [online], 2(1), 81-98. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177%2F2053019614564785 [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Stengers, I., 2015a. Accepting the reality of Gaia. In: C. Hamilton, F. Gemenne and C. Bonneuil, eds., The Anthropocene and the Global Environmental Crisis: Rethinking Modernity in a New Epoch. Abingdon: Routledge.
Stengers, I., 2015b. In Catastrophic Times: Resisting the Coming Barbarism. Trans.: A. Goffey. London: Open Humanities Press.
Stone, C.D., 1972. Should Trees Have Standing? Toward Legal Rights for Natural Objects. Southern California Law Review, 45, 450-501.
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), 2019. Emissions Gap Report 2019 [online]. Nairobi: UNEP. Available from: https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/30797/EGR2019.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y [Accessed 2 February 2020].
United Nations Human Rights Committee, 2020. Views adopted by the Committee under article 5 (4) of the Optional Protocol, concerning communication No. 2728/2016, CCPR/C/127/D/2728/2016 [online]. 7 January. Available from: https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/Treaties/CCPR/Shared%20Documents/NZL/CCPR_C_127_D_2728_2016_31251_E.docx [Accessed 4 February 2020].
Urgenda Foundation v State of the Netherlands ECLI:NL:HR:2019:2007 – Supreme Court, 20-12-2019/19/00135.
Vogel, S., 2015. Thinking Like a Mall: Environmental Philosophy After the End of Nature. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Voigt, C., 2005. From climate change to sustainability: An essay on sustainable development, legal and ethical choices. Worldviews: Global Religions, Culture, and Ecology [online], 9(1), 112-137. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1163/1568535053628454 [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Watson, J., 2013. Eco–sensibilities: interview with Jane Bennett. Minnesota Review [online], 81(1), 147–158. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1215/00265667-2332147 [Accessed 15 September 2020].
Wood, D., 2018. Deep Time, Dark Times: On Being Geologically Human. New York: Fordham University Press.
World Conference on Environment and Development, 1987. Our Common Future [online]. Report. Oxford University Press. Available from: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/5987our-common-future.pdf [Accessed 15 September 2020].
##submission.downloads##
Argitaratuta
##submission.howToCite##
Zenbakia
Atala
##submission.license##
##submission.copyrightStatement##
##submission.license.cc.by-nc-nd4.footer##OSLS strictly respects intellectual property rights and it is our policy that the author retains copyright, and articles are made available under a Creative Commons licence. The Creative Commons Non-Commercial Attribution No-Derivatives licence is our default licence, further details available at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 If this is not acceptable to you, please contact us.
The non-exclusive permission you grant to us includes the rights to disseminate the bibliographic details of the article, including the abstract supplied by you, and to authorise others, including bibliographic databases, indexing and contents alerting services, to copy and communicate these details.
For information on how to share and store your own article at each stage of production from submission to final publication, please read our Self-Archiving and Sharing policy.
The Copyright Notice showing the author and co-authors, and the Creative Commons license will be displayed on the article, and you must agree to this as part of the submission process. Please ensure that all co-authors are properly attributed and that they understand and accept these terms.
