Document Type
Contribution to Book
Publication Date
7-2018
Publication Title
Global Environmental Change and Innovation in International Law
First Page
21
Keywords
Third World Approaches to International Law, Global South
Last Page
41
Abstract
The Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL) scholarly movement seeks to assess and to advance the ‘promise of international law to transform itself into a system based, not on power, but justice’, by considering how global norms impair or advance the interests of states in the Global South. This chapter seeks to contribute to the TWAIL scholarly project by examining whether international environmental law (IEL)’s norms and mechanisms have been a source of international legal innovation by challenging entrenched global socio-economic and power imbalances, making this field of law more supportive of the interests of the South. This chapter uses a TWAIL approach to understand evolution and innovation in IEL in the context of the growing South-South divide, as some emerging economies’ significant contributions to global environmental problems and their financial and technological capabilities to protect the global comment environment set them apart from other developing countries. It considers whether IEL has incorporated innovative norms and mechanisms in this changing geopolitical context that allow it to promote environmental justice at the global level.
DOI
10.1017/9781108526081
Recommended Citation
Galvao-Ferreira, Patricia. (2018). Differentiation in International Environmental Law: Has Pragmatism Displaced Considerations of Justice?. Global Environmental Change and Innovation in International Law, 21-41.
https://scholar.uwindsor.ca/lawpub/138
Comments
This material has been published in Global Environmental Change and Innovation in International Law edited by Neil Craik, University of Waterloo School of Environment, Enterprise and Development, Cameron S. G. Jefferies, University of Alberta Faculty of Law, Sara L. Seck, Dalhousie University, Nova Scotia, Tim Stephens, University of Sydney Law School https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108526081. This version is free to view and download for private research and study only. Not for re-distribution or re-use.