On 30 October 2011, it will be exactly ten years ago that the Convention on Access to information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters, signed by representative of 35 States and the European Community at a pan-European ministerial conference in the Danish city of Aarhus in 1998, entered into force. This multilateral treaty, negotiated under the auspices of the UN Economic Commission for Europe, represents the most comprehensive and ambitious effort to establish international legal standards in the field of citizens' environmental rights to date. Though some of these standards were inspired by earlier EU environmental legislation, many provisions of the Aarhus Convention went beyond the rights already guaranteed by the EU and compelled the European Commission to propose new legislature acts, most of which were adopted between 2003 and 2006, to bring EU environmental law up to the Convention's standards. Since its adoption over a --

United Nations publication sales no. E.13.II.E.3"--Page 4 of cover.

Evaluates the fundamental legitimacy of judicial practice in the growing number of environmental cases heard before international courts.

The Aarhus Convention on access to information, public participation in decision-making and access to justice in environmental matters has been celebrated as a pioneering international environmental agreement. Given that a quarter-century has passed since Aarhus was opened for signature, now is an opportune moment to revisit it from a fresh perspective. Marking this anniversary, this book explores Aarhus from the vista of the English School of International Relations, an ethically-minded perspective used to gauge the prevalence of state-oriented and human-oriented progress from the Convention's rationales and realities. It firstly considers Aarhus' propagation, investigating the legal, diplomatic and geopolitical contexts enabling its emergence. It secondly investigates Aarhus' germination, with reference to its trinity of procedural rights. Thirdly, the book examines the Convention's growth, in terms of the development of its organisational infrastructure. The chief finding is that Aarhus demonstrates, in environmental contexts, the feasibility and benefit of fostering 'humankind' solidarist progress, rooted in moral cosmopolitanism, within the existing power arrangements of a sovereignty-based pluralism. Pluralist concerns for diversity and international order are found to be a precondition for more ethically ambitious solidarist endeavours. These observations reinforce the logic of solidarisation, an English School innovation that presents sovereignty as (a) being ethically matured by solidarism whilst (b) delimiting solidarism within the threshold of states' tolerance.

This important new monograph offers an innovative new analysis of the Aarhus Convention. Environmental law is dense with monolithic concepts, from environmental democracy to intergenerational justice, from sustainable development to stewardship. Each concept generates its own mythology about what environmental law should aspire to. Sometimes these ideas become so big that we lose hold of their meaning and therefore what we allude to when we describe environmental law in such terms. No more so is this true than in relation to the Aarhus Convention – an ambitious instrument of environmental law that promotes public participation and access to justice in relation to the environment. Since its inception it has been revered in glowing terms, and praised variously for its contribution to citizenship, environmental responsibility and democratic legitimacy. But how are we to know whether these descriptions are mere puffs or genuine statements about the Convention's character? This book digs deep into the foundations of the Aarhus Convention, examining its ambitious potential through the lens of three foundational purposes – environmental rights, democracy and stewardship. In so doing, it contributes to our understanding both of the Convention and our understanding of three important purposes that inhabit environmental law, unravelling and reassembling them to build meaning into our broad-brush descriptions.

The UNECE Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters – known ubiquitously as the Aarhus Convention – is having an ever-increasing influence on domestic and EU environmental law and procedure. Recent years have seen a steady flow of case law from the UK courts, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee, a raft of civil procedure reforms in response to concerns about whether the costs rules in domestic environmental litigation are compatible with the Convention and an infraction by the European Commission against the UK alleging various systemic breaches. Even the EU itself has been the subject of a ruling by the Compliance Committee that the CJEU's rules on standing for judicial review of EU legislation are too narrow to comply with the Convention. This book, written by several of the leading experts in the field, provides a comprehensive guide to the implementation of the Convention in each of the UK's jurisdictions, the three pillars of the Convention (access to information, public participation and access to justice) and the mechanisms by which the rights under the Convention can be enforced.

The right to a healthy environment has been the subject of extensive philosophical debates that revolve around the question: Should rights to clean air, water, and soil be entrenched in law? David Boyd answers this by moving beyond theoretical debates to measure the practical effects of enshrining the right in constitutions. His pioneering analysis of 193 constitutions and the laws and court decisions of more than 100 nations in Europe, Latin America, Asia, and Africa reveals a positive correlation between constitutional protection and stronger environmental laws, smaller ecological footprints, superior environmental performance, and improved quality of life.