MITIGATING THE PRINCIPLE OF SOVEREIGNTY OVER BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES?

Liziane Paixão Silva Oliveira, Ana Flávia Barros -Platiau, Jorge Gomes do Cravo Barros

Resumo


With time, States' sovereign rights were limited by international law and the western liberal order under the UN auspices. Concerning environmental issues, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) stressed this trend within national jurisdiction. However, concerning resources beyond national jurisdiction, legal doctrine and international relations theories offered a heated debate on the validity of the principle of sovereignty over biological resources. It is the case for the Antarctic Treaty System and the biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction regime (BBNJ). Therefore, there is a clear and partial fragmentation of the international environmental legal system, due to the limited circulation of principles. For some authors, the common concern of mankind represents a threat to this principle, while for others sovereignty is still totally assured by legal commitments. After an analysis of the UN resolutions, we discuss sovereign rights and the CBD, and then we look at the common concern of mankind. From a legal and political standpoint, the results are that the principle of sovereignty had a double-fold evolution: it is limited by the concept of common interest of mankind and the international obligations more than ever, but it is not challenged by them.


Palavras-chave


sovereignty; Antarctica, BBNJ; biodiversity; United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity

Texto completo:

PDF

Referências


ABBOTT, K. W.; GENSCHEL, P.;SNIDAL, D.; ZANGL, B. Orchestration: Global Governance Through Intermediaries. Available at: . Retrieved on:18 apr. 2016.

ABI-SAAB, G. La souveraineté permanente sur les ressources naturelles. In: BEDJAOUI, M. (Org). Droit International: bilan et perspectives. Paris: Pedone, 1991.

ALFAIA JÚNIOR, J.R. G. Reclamar ou intervir? As obrigações positivas do Estado em situações de desastre ambiental. 2014. 309 f. Tese (Doutorado em Relações Internacionais) - Universidade de Brasília, Brasília, 2014.

ALTEMIR, A.B. El PatrimonioComún de la Humanidad: Hacia un régimen jurídico internacional para su gestión. Barcelona: Bosch, 1992.

BOULET, R.; BARROS-PLATIAU, A. F.; MAZZEGA, P. 35 years of Multilateral EnvironmentalAgreements: a networkanalysis.Artificial Intelligence and Law, v. 24, n. 2, p. 133-148, jun. 2016.Available at: . Retrievedon:26 apr. 2016.

BOUTROS GHALI, B. An Agenda for Peace (A/47/277 - S/24111).1992. Available at: . Retrieved on: 26 apr. 2016.

BUCK, S. J. The Global Commons in Introduction. Washington: Island, 1998.

BURHENNE-GUILMIN, F.; CASEY-LEFKOWITZ, S.The Convention on Biological Diversity: A Hard Won Global Achievement. YearbookofInternational Environmental Law, v. 3, p. 43-59, 1992.

CASTAÑEDA, J. Carta de derechos y Deberes Económicos de los Estados desde el punto de vista del derecho Internacional. In: CASTAÑEDA, J. Justicia Económica Internacional. México: FCE, 1976.

DUPUY, P. M. Formation of Customary International Law and General Principles. In:Bodansky, D.; BRUNNÉE, J.; HEY, E. The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law.Oxford:OUP, 2007.

EGEDE, E.Africa and the Deep Seabed Regime: Politics and International Law of the Common Heritage. Heidelberg: Springer, 2011.

GLOWKA, L. et al. Guíadel Conveniosobre laDiversidadBiológica.Washington:UICN, 1996.

KEOHANE, R. O. The demand for international regimes.International Organization,Spring,v. 36, n. 2, p. 325-356, 1982.

KISS, A. Droit international de l’environnement.Paris: Pedone, 1996.

KISSINGER, H. Ordem mundial. Trad. Cláudio Figueiredo. Rio de Janeiro: Objetiva, 2015.

KLEMM, C.; SHINE, C. Droit international de l´environnement: diversité biologique. Genebra:UNITAR, 1998.

KOTZE, L. Fragmentation of International Environmental Law: An Oceans Governance Case Study. In: COUZENS,E.; HONKONEN, Tuula(Ed.).International Environmental Law-making and Diplomacy Review. Finland: University of Joensuu,2008. p. 11-30.

KRASNER, Stephen D. Structural Causes and Regime Consequences: Regimes as Intervening Variables. International Organization, Spring, v.36, n. 2, 1982.

LOUKA, E. International Environmental Law: Fairness, Effectiveness and World Order.Cambridge:CUP, 2006.

MELLO, C. A. A Soberania através da história. In: MELLO, C. A. (Coord.).Anuário Direito e Globalização: A soberania. Rio de Janeiro: Renovar, 1999. p. 7-22.

MÉNDEZ-SILVA, R. La soberanía permanente de los pueblos sobre sus recursos naturales. In: VERDUZCO, A.G.R. (Org.). La soberanía de los Estados sobre sus recursos naturales. México: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, 1980. p 71- 88.

MONREAL, E. N. Nacionalización y recuperación de recursos naturales ante la ley internacional. México: Fondo de Cultura Económica, 1974.

PALLEMAERTS, M. International EnvirommentalLawfromStockholm to Rio: Back to theFuture?. In: SANDS, P. (Org). Greening International Law. New York: The New Press, 1994. p. 1-20.

PRANTL,J. TamingHegemony: Informal Institutions and theChallenge to Western Liberal Order.TheChineseJournal of International Politics,v. 7, n. 4, 2014, p. 449-482.

RAMLOGAN, R. The environment and international law: rethinking the traditional approach. Vermont Journal of Environmental law, v. 3, 2002. Available at: .Retrieved on:30 apr. 2016.

RAZZAQUE, J. Resource sovereignty in the global environmental order. In: RAZZAQUE, J.; BLANCO, E., (Ed.).Natural Resources and the Green Economy: Redefining the Challenges for People, States and Corporations. Haya: Brill, 2012. p. 81-110.

SALOM, J. R. P. El derecho internacional y el estatuto de los recursos genéticos.Anuario de Derecho Internacional,Pamplona, v. 13, 1997, p. 398-399.

SAMPAIO, D. The Antarctic exception: sovereignty and the Antarctic Treaty governance. Tese de doutorado. Universidade de São Paulo. Instituto de Relações Internacionais. Orientador: Rafael Duarte Villa. 2017.

SANDS, P. Principles of International EnvironmentalLaw: Frameworks, standards and implementation.Manchester: Manchester UniversityPress, 1995.

SEPÚLVEDA, C. Soberanía permanente sobre los recursos naturales, las matarías primas y la carta de derechos y deberes económicos de los Estados. In: GÓMEZ-ROBLEDO, A. (Org.). La soberanía de los Estados sobre sus recursos naturales. México: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México,1980. p. 145-155.

SILVA, G. E. do N. Direito Ambiental Internacional. 2. ed. Rio de Janeiro: Thex, 2002.

TARLOCK, Dan. Ecosystems. In:BODANSKY, D.; BRUNNÉE, J.;HEY, E. The Oxford HandbookofInternational Environmental Law. Oxford: OUP, 2007.

UICN. Centro de Derecho Ambiental de la Unión Mundial para la Naturaleza. Manual de Derecho Internacional enCentroamérica. Costa Rica: UICN, 2005.

UNITED NATIONS.The Millennium Development Goals Report 2015. Available at: .Retrievedon: 29 apr. 2016.

VARELLA, M. D. Tipologia de normas sobre controle do acesso aos recursos genético. In: BARROS-PLATIAU, A. F.; VARELLA, M. D. Diversidade Biológica e Conhecimentos Tradicionais. Belo Horizonte: Del Rey, 2004. p.109-132.

VERDUZCO, A. G. R. Significación Jurídica del Principio de la Soberanía. In: VERDUZCO, A. G. R. (Org). La soberanía de los Estados sobre sus recursos naturales. México: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, S.A. p. 43-62.

YOUNG, O. Governing Complex Systems. Social Capital for the Anthropocene. MIT Press, 2017.


Apontamentos

  • Não há apontamentos.


Direitos autorais 2018 Liziane Paixão Silva Oliveira, Ana Flávia Barros -Platiau, Jorge Gomes do Cravo Barros

Licença Creative Commons
Este obra está licenciado com uma Licença Creative Commons Atribuição-NãoComercial-CompartilhaIgual 4.0 Internacional.

ISSN 1807-3840

Rua Meton de Alencar, s/n - Centro
Fortaleza, Ceará, CEP 60.035-160
Telefone: +55 (85) 3366 7850

Bases de dados

Periódicos

Resultado de imagem para library of congress logo  http://www.cnen.gov.br/images/logo_livre2.png   Find in a library with WorldCat