Concluding that the precautionary principle embodies customary international law is one thing. Determining what this means is quite another. That challenge is met by this work, which resolves a number of crucial questions concerning the scope of this principle of international environmental law; the conditions triggering a right or duty to take precautionary action; the measures to be taken; the allocation of the burden of proof; and the role of socio-economic factors. These questions are dealt with one at a time through the charting and analysis of patterns and common denominators in the extensive (inter)national practice of states regarding the precautionary principle. The hard legal core of the principle is thus gradually exposed. In the process, a realistic and accessible account is given of how and to what extent this general principle can and does direct the actions of states in concrete instances. Ultimately, this work sets out what it takes to act in conformity with the precautionary principle under general international law, and will be of interest to anyone involved with international law and environmental protection.

This work makes clear what it means that the precautionary principle represents customary international law. Through the analysis of state practice regarding this principle of international environmental law, it answers crucial questions concerning the conditions triggering a right or duty to take precautionary action; the nature and content of such action; the issue areas to which the principle applies; the allocation of the burden of proof; and the role of socio-economic factors. Ultimately, it details what it takes to act in conformity with the precautionary principle under general international law.

The international community has long grappled with the issue of safeguarding the environment and encouraging sustainable development, often with little result. The 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development was an emphatic attempt to address this issue, setting down 27 key principles for the international community to follow. These principles define the rights of people to sustainable development, and the responsibilities of states to safeguard the common environment. The Rio Declaration established that long term economic progress required a connection to environmental protection. It was designed as an authoritative and comprehensive statement of the principles of sustainable development law, an instrument to take stock of the past international and domestic practice, a guide for the design of new multilateral environmental regimes, and as a reference for litigation. This commentary provides an authoritative and comprehensive overview of the principles of the Declaration, written by over thirty inter-disciplinary contributors, including both leading practitioners and academics. Each principle is analysed in light of its origins and rationale. The book investigates each principle's travaux préparatoires setting out the main points of controversy and the position of different countries or groups. It analyses the scope and dimensions of each principle, providing an in-depth understanding of its legal effects, including whether it can be relied before a domestic or international court. It also assesses the impact of the principles on subsequent soft law and treaty development, as well as domestic and international jurisprudence. The authors demonstrate the ways in which the principles interact with each other, and finally provide a detailed analysis of the shortcomings and future potential of each principle. This book will be of vital importance to practitioners, scholars, and students of international environomental law and sustainable development.

The interplay between procedure and substance has not been a major point of contention for international environmental lawyers. Arguably, the topic’s low profile is due to the mostly uncontroversial nature of the field’s distinction between procedural and substantive obligations. Furthermore, the vast majority of environmental law scholars and practitioners have tended to welcome the procedural features of multilateral environmental agreements and their potential to promote regime evolution and effectiveness. However, recent developments have served to put the spotlight on certain aspects of the procedure substance topic. ICJ judgments revealed ambiguity on aspects of the customary law framework on transboundary harm prevention that the field had thought largely settled. In turn, in the treaty context, the Paris Agreement’s retreat from binding emissions targets and its decisive turn towards procedure reignited concerns in some quarters over the “proceduralization” of international environmental law. The two developments invite a closer look at the respective roles of, and the relationship between, procedure and substance in this field and, more specifically, in the context of harm prevention under customary and treaty law.

"This publication contains the 'Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations Protect, Respect and Remedy Framework', which were developed by the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises. The Special Representative annexed the Guiding Principles to his final report to the Human Rights Council (A/HRC/17/31), which also includes an introduction to the Guiding Principles and an overview of the process that led to their development. The Human Rights Council endorsed the Guiding Principles in its resolution 17/4 of 16 June 2011."--P. iv.

The global transmission of infectious diseases has fuelled the need for a more developed legal framework in international public health to provide prompt and specific guidance during a large-scale emergency. This book develops a means for States to take advantage of the flexibilities of compulsory licensing in the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), which promotes access to medicines in a public health emergency. It presents the precautionary approach (PA) and the structure of risk analysis as a means to build a workable reading of TRIPS and to help States embody the flexibilities of intellectual property (IP). The work investigates the complementary roles of the World Health Organization (WHO) and the World Trade Organization (WTO) in order to promote the harmonisation of the precautionary approach in relation to the patenting of crucial pharmaceutical products. By bringing together international trade law and intellectual property law Phoebe Li demonstrates how through the use of risk analysis and the precautionary approach, States can still comply with their legal obligations in international law, while exercising their sovereignty right in issuing a compulsory licence of a drug patent in an uncertain public health emergency. This book will be of great interest to students and academics of medical and healthcare law, intellectual property law, international trade law, and human rights law.

Explores whether states possess extraterritorial obligations under international law to respect and ensure economic, social and cultural rights.