Environmental Policy and Law

The article examines to what extent the adverse effects of climate change can be considered triggering factors of public insecurity. Against this background, it explores the growing environmental conflicts involving water resources in Brazil, including the Amazon region. In addition to the introduction and conclusion, the paper is structured around three topics. The first one outlines how the concept of public security has evolved to the present state, in which climate change is taken into account. Next, climate change is discussed as a factor that magnifies vulnerabilities, an argument supported by a discussion of historical events. The third topic highlights the main threats, vulnerabilities and conflicts involving water resources in Brazil, taking a scientific view of systemic risks and precaution. Finally, we propose rethinking the concept of public security in Brazil from a perspective of parameters involving regulations, principles and state initiative. The article suggests that the immediate and future effects of climate change do have a profound impact on social systems and on the environment, and may be a triggering factor of public insecurity. If institutions and governments do not address existing effects, and invest in adaptations to meet future scientific forecasts on climate change, social stability and the development of a culture of peace will be less likely in Brazil. A fundamental step in this process is the reformulation of the conventional concept of public security in the Brazilian legislation, in order to expressly incorporate the variable of climate security among its stated objectives. In addition, we point out a set of actions and principles with the potentital to promote not only adaptation and resilience, but also contribute to building peace. In terms of methodology, the study is descriptive, exploratory, legislative, bibliographical and documentary.

Climate change has increasing visible effects on the environment, particularly in the Arctic, where the sea-ice melted faster in 2020 than any time before. It directly threatens the Inuit people’s survival, whose livelihood is mainly based on traditional modes of subsistence (hunting, fishing and gathering). In light of the environmental crisis, this paper carries out a critical analysis of the Nunavut (Canada) legal framework, granting Inuit specific rights regarding their traditional way of life. While recognizing that this framework implements international human rights legal standards, we argue that the human right lens presents limitations in addressing climate change impacts on Inuit livelihood. By acknowledging the developments following the adoption of the United Nations Declarations on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and on the Rights of Peasants and Other Peoples Living in Rural Areas, leading to the recognition of some collective rights to communities and people living of the land, we address the gaps of human rights –which are mainly individual –to reflect the importance of recognizing collective rights in the adaptation to the global climate change challenge. Indeed, the paper argues for the necessity to recognize the community level in the climate international governance scene.

The increasing pollution in oceans, especially of the plastics litter, has degraded health of the oceans in many parts of the world. As plastic degrade very slowly, its accumulation in oceans expected to rise exponentially in coming decades and critically affect marine ecosystems, ocean fauna and humans. Microplastics, generated due to mechanical breakdown of plastic waste, is particularly affecting the pelagic ecosystems and can even alter them. It is necessary to generate and update scientific knowledge about production, transport, sinks of plastics and their impacts, develop innovative approaches to manage plastic waste, and bringing awareness about effects of plastic pollution to communities. The issue of plastic pollution needs be tackled at local as well as regional levels through effective policy and multi-national cooperation.

Regulation (EU) 2021/57, banning the use of lead gunshot in wetland hunting, and adoption of the proposed European Union (EU) restriction on lead ammunition use by civilians in other types of hunting and target shooting, would complete the transition to non-lead ammunition use in the EU and ensure major compliance among hunters and shooters. The transition is possible since non-lead substitutes for all types of shotgun and rifle ammunition are produced already by leading European manufacturers. To ensure ammunition non-toxicity, EU standards are needed for lead substitutes to accompany both existing and potential future lead ammunition restrictions. Meat from wild game birds and mammals is a large and important commodity in the EU. Setting a maximum lead level in all marketed game meats under Regulation (EC) 1881/2006, aided by mandatory food labelling, would add extra health protection to human consumers. This regulatory step would help ensure that all wild game destined for retail markets were taken with non-lead ammunition, would complement existing and proposed European Commission restrictions on lead hunting ammunition and aid monitoring and enforcement. Increased public awareness of the risks posed by lead from ammunition to the health of humans, wildlife, and the environment, and especially their associated externalized costs to society, would promote and facilitate the passage of regulation to protect human and environmental health from toxic lead ammunition.

In recent years, the precautionary principle has begun to enter legal decision-making in Indonesian civil courts. This introduction is in line with environmental cases that often involve much scientific evidence. This article aims to describe theoretical elaboration and, to a certain extent, legal developments in the application of the precautionary principle in the settlement of civil environmental cases in Indonesia. The precautionary principle provides a framework for environmental decision-making in the event of scientific uncertainty. The theoretical elaboration shows a wide dimension of influence of the precautionary principle on the system of liability and proof. In comparison, the court cases also show the application of the precautionary principle in the liability system and proof despite still in its weak version.

Plastic pollution has become a major environmental concern around the world due to the rapidly increasing production, consumption of single-use plastic products, and our inability to manage it properly. Plastic production increased exponentially, from about 2 million metric tonnes in 1950 to 348 million metric tonnes in 2017, and it is expected to double in capacity yet again by 2040. However, only 9 percent of the 8.3 billion metric tonnes of plastic produced since the early 1950s, has been recycled, and that most plastic ends its life in landfills, dumps and the environment is an increasing cause of concern. Plastic pollution is a major challenge in developing nations like India, where garbage collection systems are often informal with low recycling rates. The COVID 19 pandemic has exacerbated the use of plastic through personal protective equipments (PPEs). Management of this biomedical plastic waste is an addition to this existing challenge. Tackling plastic pollution is high up on UNEP’s global agenda to enhance the political visibility of this concern, UNEP along with the Government of India designated it as the theme of World Environment Day 2018. UNEP also provides technical assistance through its partners to support India towards its national and sub-national initiatives. This paper highlights the magnitude of the problem and the role UNEP is playing in addressing some concerns.