Articles
Graduate Note
The Environmental Causes and Consequences of Migration: A Search for the Meaning of “Environmental Refugees,” David Keane
Notes
Water Rites: A Comparative Study of the Dispossession of American Indians and Palestinians from Natural Resources, Annalisa Jabaily
Making Coffee Good to the Last Drop: Laying the Foundation for Sustainability in the International Coffee Trade, Grace H. Brown
The Door Opens Slightly: Recent European Union Regulations on Genetically Modified Products and the Ongoing United States-European Union GM Product Dispute, Brian P. Rafferty
Implementing Environmental Law in the European Union: Lessons from the Bathing Water Directive, Luke W. Goodrich
Citizen Participation in Environmental Enforcement in Mexico and the United States: A Comparative Study, Katherine M. Bailey
Graduate Note
The Environmental Causes and Consequences of Migration: A Search for the Meaning of “Environmental Refugees”
By David Keane
This article discusses the term “environmental refugee” from both a legal perspective and an environmental perspective. Environmental refugees are people who have been forced from their homes because of marked environmental disruptions, including natural disasters, industrial accidents, and armed conflict. The article posits that “environmental refugee” is a misnomer that causes much confusion in international law. It argues that environmentally displaced persons are not protected under international law and that extending the definition of “refugee” under the 1951 Refugee Convention, for example, would not be an appropriate response. It then examines the term within the context of environmental considerations and discusses the environmental impacts of refugees in general.
The article concludes that preventable environmental damage is rarely the sole factor in migration and that, in turn, migration is rarely the sole factor in environmental damage. It is more practically valuable to understand migration and environmental damage as part of the complex relationship between people and the environment, rather than focusing on one aspect as a sole cause or consequence of the other.
Note
Water Rites: A Comparative Study of the Dispossession of American Indians and Palestinians from Natural Resources
By Annalisa Jabaily
This note compares and contrasts the natural resource regulation policies of the United States and Israel towards American Indians and Palestinians, respectively. In particular, the note focuses on the U.S. and Israeli governments’ policies of land and water dispossession. Part II of the note provides insight into the history of land and water regulation practiced by American Indians and Palestinians. This section demonstrates that, despite presumptions to the contrary in U.S. and Israeli discourses, American Indians and Palestinians developed sophisticated methods of land and water regulations long before the imposition of current natural resource regimes. Part III of note goes on to articulate the systematic way in which U.S. characterization of land as “pristine” and in need of settlement led to the near complete banishment of American Indians from U.S. natural resources and their regulations. Similarly, the Israeli characterization of land as “neglected” justified unequal allocation of possessory land rights and water resources between Palestinians and Jews. As a result, Palestinians, like American Indians, have endured legal and ideological dispossession of natural resources.
Ultimately, the author argues that America’s settlement/preservation dichotomy and Israel’s settlement/development dichotomy were actually complementary parts of the same dispossessive strategy. Although the paper stops short of predicting outcomes for American Indians and Palestinians in the struggle for land and water use, the note attempts to elicit analysis, strategies, and solutions for resolving current tensions between State ideologies and the actual physical land use and water needs of Palestinians and American Indians.
Note
Making Coffee Good to the Last Drop: Laying the Foundation for Sustainability in the International Coffee Trade
By Grace H. Brown
This note analyzes initiatives to address the negative social and environmental spillover effects of the unregulated coffee market. Unbeknownst to the average American coffee drinker, a combination of coffee oversupply, low coffee prices, and poor bean quality has created a global coffee crisis. Initial attempts by many coffee consuming countries to avert such a crisis have failed and the collapse of binding agreements has left the coffee market unregulated. The note first looks at historical efforts (and eventually failures) to regulate the global coffee market. The note then turns to the negative social spillover effects created by the unregulated coffee market, which include reduced quality of life for farmers, environmental concerns regarding the use of industrial coffee growing techniques, and potential health risks for both farmers and coffee drinkers. Public and private initiatives to address these negative spillover effects have been disorganized. As a result, well-meaning labeling efforts by activists may have increased consumer confusion over brands certified as environmentally safe and those certified as Fair Trade.
The author suggests a number of ways for activists and other proponents of the sustainable coffee movement to clearly convey the message of sustainable coffee. First, labor and environmental groups should combine their efforts and develop a strong sustainable coffee brand that consumers instantly recognize. Second, such groups can learn from the model of the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), which led a successful and unified campaign to provide voluntary certification for timber products that upheld basic principles of good forest management. Finally, the U.S. government should participate in the sustainable coffee movement by establishing national coffee standards and raising coffee issues in future trade negotiations. The note concludes by arguing that revitalized private and public initiatives are needed to make headway against current problems and to lay the foundation for a sustainable international coffee trade.
Note
The Door Opens Slightly: Recent European Union Regulations on Genetically Modified Products and the Ongoing United States-European Union GM Product Dispute
By Brian P. Rafferty
Recent unrest in European countries over the farming and importation of genetically modified (GM) foods demonstrates how views in those countries differ strongly from those of their US trading partners, who strongly support the sale of such products. This note analyzes the separate regulatory histories of the US and EU in order to address the underlying causes of the GM debate.
The note argues that while the precautionary principle, recognized in both the US and EU to varying degrees, plays some role in how each party views GM products, it is not determinative of the controversy. This is illustrated by the approach to certain issues like nuclear energy adopted by the US, which may be seen as equally if not more precautionary than the approach of the EU. Rather, tension is created by contrasting regulatory policies and historical experiences. The United States’ preference for narrowly-defined rules with foreseeable consequences and historical disinclination toward broad policy stands in opposition to the EU’s proclivity for overarching principles. Finally, the note examines the possibility of whether the two will be able to reach a common ground by discussing the end-goals of both sides. The note gives particular attention to the recently signed Cartagena Protocol which provides for both the precautionary regulation of GM products sought by the EU and the insulation from public pressure required by US politicians.
Note
Implementing Environmental Law in the European Union: Lessons From the Bathing Water Directive
By Luke W. Goodrich
In 1975 the European Council formally adopted a directive aimed at increasing the quality of bathing water in all Member States. This note describes the difficulties facing the EU in achieving Member State compliance with the directive, using the situation as an example of a more general difficulty with EU enforcement of environmental policy. The note explains the institutional underpinnings of the EU system, highlighting the supranational body’s reliance on individual state implementation and its limited competency on environmental issues. The note then points to a number of factors giving rise to the enforcement difficulty, including problems of monitoring, and Member States’ avoidance and delay.
In response to these difficulties, the note goes on to recommend an approach to environmental directives that includes more streamlined, flexible requirements, precise monitoring standards, and public disclosure of environmental issues concerning the directive. The note points out that while such an approach is not without its own practical and legal obstacles, some wholly distinct from those facing directives currently, it could provide the means for integrating Member State autonomy into a successful environmental policy rather than a hurdle to struggle over.
Note
Citizen Participation in Environmental Enforcement in Mexico and the United States: A Comparative Study
By Katherine M. Bailey
The environmental laws and administrative processes of Mexico and the U.S. are very similar; however, the variation in the legal systems of these two nations has led to drastically different approaches to environmental compliance, the role of NGOs, and the use of the NAAEC citizen submission process. Solutions to common pitfalls in environmental compliance in both nations include increasing educational programs, influencing legislation, getting involved in the electoral process, filing administrative complaints, and filing litigation through the court system. However, this paper examines how the success of each of these tools varies widely due to the effectiveness of NGOs and other actors on the two countries’ respective legal systems. In the U.S., NGOs play a more active role in environmental issues than in Mexico, due in part to the substantial tax breaks the federal government allows for these groups. Whether charitable organizations, social welfare organizations, PACs, or some combination thereof, these institutions facilitate individuals’ and organizations’ involvement in the pursuit of environmental compliance and conservation, often interacting closely with government agencies. The NAAEC was created as an international remedy for when a state believes that another state has not properly acted to ensure compliance with its national environmental laws. The detailed citizen submission process is beneficial because it is widely accessible, but it loses effectiveness by being non-binding, the difficulty involved in creating a factual record, and the often delayed nature of the process. This paper concludes that due to the differences in the legal and administrative systems of Mexico and the U.S., Mexicans turn to the NAAEC citizen submission process much more quickly to effectuate change in domestic laws than do U.S. nationals.
