| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
107520
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
073521
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2006.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
argue that although environmental law is state centric in nature, there is a growing body of international environmental law that allows at least some input from public actors in implementing key substantive and procedural obligations. The evolution of these environmental entitlements is linked to the global diffusion of democratic norms of civic participation, the application of the nondiscrimination principle in both public and private international law, and the cosmopolitan reach of human rights claims. It is at the intersection of individual and nongovernmental organization (NGO) rights with interstate obligations that transnational citizenship entitlements are emerging¾notably equal opportunities for access and redress for affected publics. I critically survey relevant multilateral environmental agreements to gauge the significance of rule making bestowing entitlements on publics affected by transboundary and global environmental harm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
170058
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
136218
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Within the United Nations, the United Nations Development Programme, United Nations Environment Programme and Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs have all highlighted climate risks as relevant to their work in areas affected by conflict, endorsing human security approaches as valid for mapping the relationships between climate stresses and conflict-related harm. While this policy interest has limited operational presence, I discuss salient assessments of climate vulnerability in (post)conflict areas, arguing that these agencies have applied a natural disaster rather than conflict regulation inflection of humanitarian reason. The former entails a biopolitical paradigm of disaster risk reduction, prescribing technical-managerial measures to build the resilience of vulnerable populations. This framing supports a depoliticised stance reflecting UN norms of neutrality and impartiality. I claim that this position nevertheless disregards its own geopolitical conditions and effects, which dilute the scope for international humanitarian law to assign responsibility for conflict-related harm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
121450
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2012.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Coping with (and adapting to) climatological hazards is commonly understood in intergovernmental and aid agency fora as a purely technical matter. This article examines the UN Development Programme's stakeholder consultations in the West Bank and Gaza Strip in order to challenge the donor-driven technical-managerial framing of Palestinian climate vulnerability by showing how Israeli occupation practices exacerbate environmental stresses. While emphasizing the importance of social, economic, and political contexts in shaping populations' responses to climate change in general, the authors demonstrate the multiple ways in which the occupation specifically compounds hazards reveals it as constitutive of Palestinian climate vulnerability.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|