The need for the law to support sustainability issues: an academic perspective.

1. Achim Steiner in his speech at the opening of the ‘World Congress on Justice, Governance and Law for Environmental Sustainability’ entitled ‘Environmental Sustainability, Justice, Governance & Law: Challenges and Opportunities’ ( http://www.unep.org/newscentre/default.aspx?DocumentID=2690&ArticleID=9176 ‘United Nations Environment Programme’ website).

Having mentioned many sustainability issues such as “forests, the atmosphere, freshwater” and how we use these for “economic growth”in an unsustainable fashion, Steiner addresses “linkages between environmental challenges and the role of the legal and auditing community”. He says that “right policy choices need to be followed by the enactment of good legislation and regulation, supported by a well-informed, strong and independent judiciary, by adequate enforcement systems, as well as conducive environments and effective governance frameworks”. This means that linkages between the environment and the law need to be tightened up and that new, “good legislation” (3)needs to be written and enforced correctly across the globe. This implies that there is indeed a very strong link between sustainability issues and the law. Moreover, this source can be used for the two sides to my question.

Firstly, the fact that there is a UN conference report all about plans to improve and update the law and our global legal systems to meet sustainability and environmental issues suggests that the answer is overall yes; the law is adapting to growing sustainability issues because this report is all about plans to adapt the law and to address these issues from a legal point of view.

However, secondly, Steiner states that “there is a need for urgent, concerted and effective action”. This implies that, no, the law is not currently adapting to growing sustainability issues because it is being addressed by the UN, suggesting that there is a problem and a lack of progress, so, action needs to be taken. This report is merely one which addresses the problem of a lack of adaptation by the law and one which begins to outline plans to make sure that it does progress and adapt. There is not in fact any real and solid evidence that shows real changes in global legal systems and legislation to directly target growing sustainability issues.

Personally, I think this suggests overall that the law is changing and adapting to sustainability issues because it is a clear plan that has been agreed to and that will be implemented. However, I do not think that it proves the law is adapting sufficiently because it does not state any real change yet but if the plan is implemented completely, we will be well on the way to having a legal system that is adapting sufficiently to growing sustainability issues because this is such a well thought out plan that addresses all elements of the law, its enforcement and the environment globally.

This source is reliable because it comes from the United Nations itself which is a trustworthy international organization run by the governments of one-hundred and ninety-three member states. Moreover, those who make speeches at United Nations conferences are all specialists and academics in their fields and arguably the best at what they do. After all, they are asked by the highest of authorities for information and are trusted by these combined authorities too.

However, there are many other scientists and environmental specialists who may disagree with what has been said and may argue that they have research that suggests different information so not every ‘specialist’ is in agreement, meaning that we may not have the absolute truth regarding the environment and thus how to deal with it.

Sustainability and its legal foundation - one perspective

In a covering letter for the academic paper "Environmental Laws and Sustainability” posted on the ‘Sustainability: Special Issues’ web page, Prof. Dr. John C. Dernbach states that “sustainability does not now have an adequate or supportive legal foundation, in spite of the many environmental and natural resources laws that exist. If we are to make significant progress toward a sustainable society, much less achieve sustainability, we will need to develop and implement laws and legal institutions that do not now exist, or that exist in a much different form.”(‘Environmental Laws and Sustainability’, Prof. Dr. John C.)

This suggests that the law is not adapting sufficiently to growing sustainability issues and that there is a lot to be done with the law to help achieve sustainability and to meet the demands of ever-growing issues regarding our interaction with the planet and how we will preserve it for future generations. By “supportive legal foundation”, the writer implies that sustainability is lacking in some way; it does not carry enough ‘weight’ or authority because it has little “legal foundation."

This suggests that without a strong legal basis, sustainability is merely a concept or a theory which cannot be fully applied or implemented by authorities across the globe. Therefore, sustainability and the law are interdependent regarding growing sustainability issues. Sustainability itself needs the law to back it up and provide it with substance and authority so it can be taken seriously and be used effectively by governments and the law also needs to keep up and adapt to incorporate sustainability and the environment to make sure that we can care for our planet and that the law is modern and always compatible with modern, global society.

Whilst a well-researched and well-regarded academic wrote the paper in question meaning it is mostly reliable, parts of the paper are opinion based and are therefore subjective. They are Prof. Dr. John C Dernbach’s own arguments and points of view. Therefore, these sections of the paper might be biased towards his opinion that “sustainability does not now have an adequate or supportive legal foundation”.

Implications of Brexit? One perspective

At first, it seems that there will not be too many repercussions from ‘Brexit’ as a UK outside of the EU should still have the same pro-environmental attitude which is shared by most major political parties and groups.

In October 2016, Westminster published a briefing on the implications ‘Brexit’ might have on UK environmental policy. It found that “the UK’s climate goals have not changed", that “existing UK commitments need strong new policies that set a clearer direction across the economy, irrespective of Brexit”, that “some policy previously set at EU level should be preserved and strengthened in future”and that “the UK should take opportunities to improve on some EU policy approaches”.

On the surface then, it seems that the current UK government delivering ‘Brexit’ will continue to match EU standards on tackling climate change through upholding what it deems to be good EU policy and law and possibly changing it accordingly to make it “stronger”and maybe more advantageous for the UK climate and markets as well. For instance the UK government may like to address the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) which “does not directly target greenhouse gas emissions reduction in agriculture although it provides funding for afforestation, which can reduce emissions. A UK-based policy framework should link farming support more closely to actions that would reduce emissions.”

It is likely that any other UK government over the coming years or at the next general election would adopt the same ideology and maintain EU policy and mechanisms which it sees as helpful and useful due to the pressure from “insider pressure groups”(Professor Wyn Grant), other political parties such as the ‘Green Party’ and the fact that the work will already have been started and negotiations regarding ‘Brexit’ already made in Brussels by the May Administration.

However, whilst all this sounds straight forward in theory and the idea of losing EU policy not a worry as we will keep a lot of it anyway, it will take a lot of time and work by our lawyers. A speaker on BBC Radio 4’s ‘Today Programme’ (July 2017)estimated that it could take up to fifteen years just to “untangle” EU law regarding agriculture and tailor it more to UK needs. Whilst it sounds positive to have more ‘UK specific’ environmental laws which meet UN guidelines as well, it raises the question of what we do in the meantime between receiving no help or guidance on updated EU policy and fully creating our own. It may be a difficult and long process which could be very beneficial but also unsuccessful.

The ‘Climate Change Committee’ noted that “after leaving, the UK may need to submit a national pledge of effort to the UN climate process, which could be based on legislated carbon budgets.”This, yet again seem to create more work and more difficulties however it could bring about new policy which is more beneficial to the UK’s environmental needs whilst being in-line with global needs and targets.

To conclude, it would be long-winded and difficult to sift through all the EU legislation and tailor it to UK needs but it could be very beneficial to the UK and to our trading partners. We will have to see how it works out whilst making sure that our government and law makers make an effective and efficient job of selecting an deselecting existing EU environmental policy whilst making sure we are independent of EU rules enough to maintain a good level of electoral consistency in adhering to the ideology behind ‘Brexit’: to be rid of most EU ties and rules