Select Page

International Environmental Law
Temple University School of Law
Hollis, Duncan B.

I. MAPPING THE FIELD
I. #1 – Intro –Rainbow Warrior (in notes)
II. #2 Customary law – pg 138-9
A. Ways to induce states to consider acting in a particular way is legally required
1. Resolutions of senior IGO organs ecouraging behavior
2. Adoption of multilateral treaties
3. Creation of soft law
B. **imp customary norm: states may use their territory and carry out activities thereon as they wish but only to the extend that no harm is caused to other states
C. Customary law is being superceded in importance by massive amounts of blackletter law being created by lawmaking multilateral treaties
II. Treaties-opposite of customary law, blackletter law
A. Est general env norms
B. Create intl institutions
C. Law relating to treaties is largely the subject of well-est customary norms that have been codified or revised in a series of UN sponsored treaties
1. 1st and most imp treaty = Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT)-covers all agreements between states set out in written form and governed by international law
a. Art 26-requires that obligations under treaties must be carried out: pacta sunt servanda
D. Treay-making, 2 phases: international and domestic
1. Intl process:
a. Negotiation process to form treaties usuall happens under auspices of of an IGO
b. A treaty doesn’t enter into force until requisite # of states specified in the treaty have consented to be bound, and only those states are bound
c.Intl fin institutions – votes are allocated to members roughly in accordance to their investments
d. Other IGOs-each member is allocated one vote, substantive usually require 2/3 maj, procedural usually req a simple maj
i. No on member should vigorously oppose in either instance
e. “Final Clauses”-late stage of treaty making include provisions(for prospective parties), preconditions for participation, formal steps
2. Domestic process
a. States have domestic req to enter into treaties-some req an exec or legis decision
b. State must examine compatibility w other intl legal obligations
c.Some IGOs assist states w this
3. Options available to treaty parties
a. Obligations can be adjusted to capacity of a specified group
b. States can indicate “reservations” designed to alter obligations (at beginning when entering into the treaty, not later)
c.Statements refering to understandings or declarations made by states when ratifying treaty, or explaining how a state will apply it-only admissible when there is ambiguity in language of treaty – related to “b”
d. Treaties may offer relatively easy withdrawal provisions
4. Living treaties-treaties don’t usually stay unchanged once they are adopted
a. Devices have been developed to shortcut intl or dom procedures while changing treaties-legal basis for devices must be written down in a treaty or const instrument of IGO responsible for amending
b. Devices differentiate among
i. Substant

rules of law (not type or source law) bc no heirarchy of intl cts and no stare decisis
A. Jud dec are aluable in identifying customary law
VII. #3 Turtles: FRAGMENTATION-proliferation of intl norms, b4 was simple structure of actors and probs. Debate whether this is good or bad. Since there is no heirarchy of intl cts, dif bodies can come to dif conclusions and disputes remain unresolved. HOLDING pg 550
II. ASSESSING THE NEED FOR INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW
VIII. #4
IX. Tragedy of the Commons: each herdsman tries to keep as many cattle as possible BUT tragedy occurs when there is a reconing (one day the long desired goal of social stability becomes a reality)
A. Utility has one neg and one positive component
1. Pos=increment of one animal and the profit from its sale
2. Neg=overgrazing caused by that one animal, but effects of overgrazing are shared by all herdsmen, neg decision making of a herdsman is a fraction of -1
-> rational herdsman concludes to add another animal BUT conclusion is reached by every herdsman and they are all sharing a commons=the tragedy-> indiv best interest leads to ruin (society belives in freedom of the commons