The Legal Normative Overlap of Environmental Agreements
(A study of legal contradiction of environmental norms within and without institutional mandate)
الملخص
Without a central authority or overarching international institution, environmental regimes and institutions have evolved independently and in a fragmented way. Although some debates exist regarding legal overlap on specific subject matters within international law, no study carried out or proposed legal taxonomy or criteria to identify the sources of legal overlap and conflicts within environmental law. This research aims to elucidate the types of overlap by providing an argument to recognize how such overlaps arise within environmental appliances, and it identifies both states and international institutions as the main sources of legal conflict within the environmental framework. These findings contribute to recognizing the barriers that hinder conflict resolution and to proposing practical solutions for managing legal conflicts. This study can assist policy-makers in enhancing the effectiveness of environmental legal instruments by refining the text to avoid contradictions within Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) during the negotiation phase. Accordingly, the study and its findings aim to address existing gaps in the environmental legal system, particularly concerning the issue of congested rules. This can be achieved by adopting the criteria and basis of overlap proposed in this study and applying them to address the extensive fragmentation across environmental fields. Ultimately, this research provides a legal method to foster synergies and offers recommendations for managing overlaps within congested MEAs.
المراجع
2. Biermann, F., & Kim, R. E. (2020). Architectures of Earth system governance: Setting the stage. In F. Biermann & R. E. Kim (Eds.), Architectures of Earth System Governance: Institutional Complexity and Structural Transformation (pp. 1–34). Cambridge University Press.
3. Elferink, A. G. O. (1999). The impact of Article 7(2) of the Fish Stocks Agreement on the formulation of conservation and management measures for straddling and highly migratory fish stocks. Journal Name, (Issue), 2. (Add journal name and issue if available).
4. Elsässer, J. P. (2023). United Nations beyond the state? Interactions of intergovernmental treaty secretariats in global environmental governance (Doctoral dissertation). Universität Potsdam.
5. Hale, T. (2020). Transnational actors and transnational governance in global environmental politics. Annual Review of Political Science, 23(1), 203–220.
6. Hickmann, T., van Asselt, H., Oberthür, S., Sanderink, L., Widerberg, O., & Zelli, F. (2020). Institutional interlinkages. In F. Biermann & R. E. Kim (Eds.), Architectures of Earth System Governance: Institutional Complexity and Structural Transformation (pp. 119–136). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108784641.006
7. Ivanova, M. (2021). The untold story of the world’s leading environmental institution. (Add publication details if available).
8. Jinnah, S. (2010). Overlap management in the World Trade Organization: Secretariat influence on trade-environment politics. Global Environmental Politics, 10(2), 54–79.
9. Kim, R. E., & Mackey, B. (2014). International environmental law as a complex adaptive system. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 14(1), 5–24.
10. Skovgaard, J. (2017). The devil lies in the definition: Competing approaches to fossil fuel subsidies at the IMF and the OECD. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 17(3), 341–353.
11. Woods, N. (2023). Multilateralism in the twenty-first century. Global Perspectives, 4(1), 68310.
12. Zelli, F. (2015). Institutional fragmentation. In Encyclopedia of Global Environmental Governance and Politics (pp. 469–477). Edward Elgar Publishing.
13. Convention on Biological Diversity. (n.d.). Text of the convention. Retrieved from https://www.cbd.int/doc/legal/cbd-en.pdf
14. World Trade Organization. (n.d.). Article 27.3(b) Background information. Retrieved from https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/trips_e/art27_3b_background_e.htm
15. CITES Secretariat. (n.d.). Convention text. Retrieved from https://www.cites.org/eng/disc/text.php
16. Basel Convention Secretariat. (n.d.). Basel Convention text. Retrieved from https://www.basel.int/Portals/4/Basel%20Convention/docs/text/BaselConventionText-e.pdf
17. Library of Congress. (n.d.). Treaties and other international agreements of the United States. Retrieved from https://www.loc.gov/law/help/us-treaties/bevans/m-ust000004-0248.pdf
18. United Nations. (n.d.). United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Retrieved from https://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/unclos_e.pdf
19. Food and Agriculture Organization. (n.d.). FAO legal text. Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/3/a-bb037e.pdf
20. Cambridge University Press. (2020). DOI reference. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108784641.001
21. General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade GATT
22. Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora CITES.
23. Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal
24. World Trade Organization WTO
25. Convention of Biological Diversity CBD
26. Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights TRIPS
27. United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea UNCLOS
28. United Nations Fish Stocks Agreement UNFSA
الحقوق الفكرية (c) 2025 Ali Sadik Thajb
هذا العمل مرخص حسب الرخصة Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
