Case Study 4: Shaping the development of international environmental law
Submitting Institution
University of EdinburghUnit of Assessment
LawSummary Impact Type
LegalResearch Subject Area(s)
Studies In Human Society: Policy and Administration
Law and Legal Studies: Law
Summary of the impact
A research programme led by Boyle in Edinburgh (with Birnie (LSE) and
Redgwell (UCL)) pioneered the discipline of international environmental
law. That work, in turn, informed the infrastructure for international
environmental law in practice. Through Boyle's work as legal counsel in
several high-profile international cases (2010-11), his proposed
subject-paradigm has been translated from theory to legal framework.
Crucially, it has been endorsed and applied by both the International Law
Commission and relevant international courts, including the International
Court of Justice.
Underpinning research
The construction of international environmental law is an exercise of
modern law-making. Historically, few legal academics gave much thought to
the problem of protecting the environment. Sceptics argued that the
subject was `soft' in character, lacking sufficiently widespread support
to generate binding rules of general international law. They believed that
relevant issues could be addressed by developing the law on responsibility
for trans-boundary damage. This was also the perspective adopted by the
United Nations International Law Commission (ILC) in its early work on
international environmental law.
Through his collaboration with Patricia Birnie from LSE (and later,
Catherine Redgwell at UCL), Boyle (appointed to Edinburgh in 1995)
challenged these positions as, at best, a questionable exercise in
reconceptualising an existing body of law, at worst, a retrograde step
which might weaken international efforts to secure agreement on effective
principles of international environmental law. Boyle was one of the
primary architects of the international environmental law as it is now
understood. The research was disseminated primarily through book chapters,
journal articles, and three editions of a seminal book, International
Law and the Environment. Boyle contributed 70% of all three editions
of the core text, the later editions of which, in 2002 and 2009, framed
the field as a legal discipline in its own right. The second edition (3.1)
was significantly expanded with new research to deal with the surge of
law-making in the field resulting from the major 1992 Rio Conference on
Environment and Development. The third edition was published in 2009
(3.2). Chapters 3-5, in particular, were substantially rewritten to take
account of burgeoning case law on trans-boundary environmental disputes
and the scope of overlap with human rights law. All three chapters were
written by Boyle.
Boyle's distinctive scholarship pushes the boundaries beyond existing law
to ask how international environmental law actually works — and
sometimes does not work. While other scholars proposed narrow theoretical
frameworks for the development of international environmental law as a
distinct subject area — for example, human rights approach,
intergenerational approach, policy-oriented approach — Birnie and Boyle
argued that:
- None of these frameworks in isolation provides an adequate
architecture for international environmental law, particularly against
the proliferation of international environmental litigation in the last
few decades.
- International legal obligations in the environmental sphere stem from
general principles of international law and not only from specific
Treaty-set obligations.
- Having started as a system of rules limited largely to liability for
trans-boundary damage, resource allocation, and the resolution of
conflicting uses of common spaces, international environmental law
should take a preventive and precautionary approach to the protection of
the environment.
- Much greater emphasis should be placed on regulation and control of
environmental nuisances by governments.
- Less prominence should be given to liability for damage as law's main
response to environmentally harmful activities.
References to the research
Publications
(3.1) P Birnie and A Boyle, International Law and the Environment
(2nd edn, OUP 2002) [to be supplied by HEI on request]
(3.2) P Birnie, A Boyle and C Redgwell, International Law and the
Environment (3rd edn, OUP 2009) [to be supplied by HEI on request]
(3.3) A Boyle `The Role of International Human Rights Law in the
Protection of the Environment' in AE Boyle and MR Anderson (eds), Human
Rights Approaches to Environmental Protection (OUP 1996) 43-65 [to
be supplied by HEI on request]
3.4) A Boyle, `Codification of International Environmental Law and the
International Law Commission: Injurious Consequences Re-visited' in A
Boyle and D Freestone (eds), International Law and Sustainable
Development: Past Achievements and Future Prospects (OUP 1999) 61-86
[to be supplied by HEI on request]
(3.5) A Boyle, `Globalising Environmental Liability: The Interplay of
National and International Law' (2005) 17 Journal of Environmental Law
3-26 [doi:10.1093/envlaw/eqi001]
Details of the impact
The background to impact began when the Rapporteur of the ILC enlisted
Boyle's expertise on codifying elements of international environmental
law. The ILC's work is generally regarded as highly authoritative by
governments and international courts, and is used by lawyers and
governments to influence judicial decisions. The second edition of Boyle's
monograph was cited extensively in its Report of 58th session (2006) (GAOR
A/61/10, pp.113ff). Critically, the ILC rethought its original findings.
Its final codifications (2001 and 2006) fully reflected the paradigm
advocated by Boyle's research.
As a result of Boyle's research being taken up by legal institutions his
work has had an impact on law and practice during the REF2014 period
because his analytical framework has been successfully channelled into the
international court arena and, in turn, adopted as the paradigm for the
evolving subject of international environmental law.
- The International Court of Justice's (ICJ) judgment in Pulp Mills
(2010) is the first decision of any international court to address the
core concepts of international environmental law. It deals with the
regulation of trans-boundary pollution and environmental impacts. Boyle
was counsel for Uruguay and based his written pleadings and oral
arguments mainly on material drawn from Chapter 3 of the (then
forthcoming) 3rd edition of his book — embodying the above research
findings. The ICJ judgment for Uruguay closely mirrors the analysis in
that chapter. Moreover, the work is cited expressly in the separate
opinion of Judge (Trindade): `...while a great part of that writing
continues, somewhat hesitantly, to refer to sustainable development as a
"concept", there are also those who seem today to display their
preparedness and open-mindedness to admit that it has turned out to be a
general principle of International Environmental Law'. [referencing
Boyle and Birnie] (5.3)
- The Advisory Opinion on the Responsibilities of States with respect to
Activities in the Deep Seabed Area (International Tribunal on the Law of
the Sea (ITLOS) 2011) (5.4), builds on the judgment given in the Pulp
Mills Case (5.2), and again confirms the analysis advanced by
Boyle in Chapter 3 of the 2009 edition of International Law and the
Environment.
The key findings of each court that support both the general
international law nature and preventative/precautionary themes of Boyle's
analysis are:
i. The ICJ confirms explicitly in Pulp Mills that in
international law governments must regulate and control trans-boundary
pollution to the highest applicable international standards (para 187).
See also ITLOS (para 111).
ii. Pulp Mills is the first occasion in which an international
court has held that prior assessment of trans-boundary environmental
impacts (EIA) is a requirement of general international law (para 204). It
is also the first occasion when any international court has considered the
specific requirements of an EIA.
iii. Both courts accept that governments must take a precautionary
approach to environmental risk management, but this does not operate as a
reversal of the burden of proof (Pulp Mills at para 164; ITLOS at
para 131).
Confirming Boyle's pivotal role, Sir Michael Wood, Member of the
International Law Commission, has said: `The International Court of
Justice in The Hague (which tends not to cite authors by name in its
judgments) has largely adopted his pragmatic approach, including in its
most recent judgment dealing with environmental matters, Pulp
Mills...(2010). Likewise, Professor Boyle's writings were cited in 2009 by
a number of the participants (including by me acting as Counsel for the
United Kingdom) before International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea in
Hamburg (established by the 1982 UN Law of the Sea Convention), in the
proceedings leading up to its first ever Advisory Opinion
(Responsibilities and Obligations of States Sponsoring Persons and
Entities with Respect to Activities in the Area). This seminal Advisory
Opinion follows the Pulp Mills judgment, and thus we have the beginning of
a solid case-law on the subjects such as environmental impact assessments
and the precautionary principle/approach'. (5.5)
The impact is reflected in the following honour citation: `The Jury has
decided to award the 2011 Elizabeth Haub Prize for Environmental Law to
Professor Alan Boyle in recognition of his exceptional accomplishments in
international environmental law. In reaching its decision, the jury has
noted that through his pioneering and outstanding scholarly works
Professor Boyle has played an important role in structuring and theorizing
this new field of international law. In addition to his great academic
achievements, he has also influenced the development of international
environmental law through his extensive practice as counsel in numerous
significant international environmental disputes.' (5.1)
Sources to corroborate the impact
(5.1) Elizabeth Haub Prize Citation: http://www.juridicum.su.se/ehp/news.html
or (http://tinyurl.com/ombvrt8).
This confirms recognition of both the reach and significance of Boyle's
research in developing international environmental law.
(5.2) Pulp Mills Case, Argentina v Uruguay, International Court of
Justice (ICJ) [2010] ICJ Rep. 14 at 135 [to be supplied by HEI on request]
This provides clear evidence of the adoption of the principles of the
underpinning research.
(5.3) Judgment of Judge Trindade, Pulp Mills case: available at:
http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/141/16003.pdf
or (http://tinyurl.com/qbxhctp).
Provides direct evidence of the uptake of the research within the
International Court of Justice.
(5.4) The Advisory Opinion on the Responsibilities of States with respect
to Activities in the Deep Seabed Area (International Tribunal on the Law
of the Sea (ITLOS) (2011) 50 ILM 455: available at:http://www.itlos.org/fileadmin/itlos/documents/cases/case_no_17/adv_op_010211.pdf
or (http://tinyurl.com/ojq5uoo).
This follows the Pulp Mills case and its endorsement of the principles
found in the underpinning research.
(5.5) Testimonial from member of the International Law Commission of the
United Nations [to be supplied by HEI on request]. Can corroborate the
role of Boyle's research in influencing international institutions in
developing and shaping an emerging area of international law.