Abstract
AbstractThe purpose of this article is to explore the normative nature of the Ecosystem Approach in international environmental law. To do so, the article examines the implementation of this approach in two Mediterranean regimes: the Barcelona Convention and the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean. As these two regimes have implemented the Ecosystem Approach by taking into account the experiences of other international regimes, they are representative of broader trends in relation to this concept. The examination reveals that the Ecosystem Approach operates as an interstitial principle: a norm that fulfils the functions of a principle with regard to other rules, but is devoid of normative autonomy. This understanding of the Ecosystem Approach brings clarity to a concept that is ambiguous yet is widely disseminated in environmental governance. It may also further the progressive emergence of the Ecosystem Approach as a general principle of international environmental law.
Highlights
1. : In 1949, American conservationist Aldo Leopold invited us to ‘think like a mountain’.1 To make his point he provided the example of hunters relentlessly killing wolves in fear that they would prey on deer, depriving the hunters of their game
The purpose of this article is to explore the normative nature of the Ecosystem Approach in international environmental law
The preservation of ecosystem integrity can be achieved only through an Ecosystem Approach (EcAp).[10]. As it was incorporated in environmental regimes, the EcAp has become known by many different names and definitions, which makes its exact meaning and purpose unstable.[11]
Summary
The history of the EcAp in international environmental law has been studied thoroughly.[22]. The Barcelona Convention, for example, underwent important legal reform following the Rio Conference of 1992 in order to incorporate the principles that were formulated in the Rio Declaration.[51] the GFCM has regularly taken note of the international policy developments within the FAO regarding fisheries.[52] the EU exerts significant influence on the evolution and implementation of these regimes This is apparent, for instance, in the numerous decisions of the GFCM that incorporate elements of the EU Common Fisheries Policy,[53] or in the current implementation of the EcAp within the MAP. In this article, ‘principles’ are to be understood as a specific type of norm; while ‘interstitial’ refers to the absence of normative autonomy
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
