The future of international environmental law - Introduction to International Environmental Law - page 186

International environmental law has also widened the concept of the 'actor'
from the classical international law understanding, which is strongly based on
states and their domination in international politics and law-making. States are
the main actors in international environmental law as well, but their status has
become inevitably more relative. Scientifi c institutions play an important role
in defi ning the political alternatives that are open to states in resolving an
international environmental problem. Today, a variety of groups of actors
affected by international environmental problems can, in different ways, infl u-
ence the decision-making process in environmental treaty negotiations. Access
of these types of actor groups to the functioning of international environmen-
tal regimes is now increasingly considered a human right - the right to infl u-
ence environmental decisions internationally.
Classic international law has signifi cantly infl uenced international environ-
mental protection through its principles. It is important to remember that classic
international law maintains a world in which sovereign states are at the heart
of international politics and law. On the basis of the principles of international
law, states are entitled to implement the environmental law and politics of their
choice within their own territory within the limits of international law.
The environment in the areas beyond state jurisdiction is not defended by
anyone, except for the International Seabed Authority in its own limited Area
and within the scope of its own limited mandate (to ensure protection of the
Area from the harmful effects of seabed mining activities). The UN
Environment Programme (UNEP) has no such mandate, and individual states
seem reluctant to protect the environment within these common areas unless
their own interests are at stake. It is typical for serious environmental problems
such as climate change or loss of biodiversity to be managed according to the
principle of 'common concern of humankind'. This principle is based on state
sovereignty: it obligates states only to do something to avert these threats, not
even to bind themselves to an international treaty.
Nonetheless, new principles, approaches and guidance methods are being devel-
oped in international and national environmental law at an accelerating pace to
meet the challenges revealed by scientifi c research into environmental problems.
International environmental law has not been able to make any signifi cant
advances in creating responsibility and liability rules for environmental damage
beyond general international law. The principle of no-harm is still the most
important principle, even though some specifi c strict-liability treaties have
been concluded. Classical international law is also refl ected in the settlement of
environmental disputes between states, which are still principally being decided
on the basis of the same rules as were applied in the 1941 Trail Smelter case.
International environmental regimes have managed thus far, however, to
avoid the kind of disputes that might threaten inter-state relations; hence, only a
few regimes have developed an obligatory dispute settlement system. Instead,
they have set up compliance committees to support or delicately pressure the
parties in order to comply with their treaty obligations. A few international envi-
ronmental regimes even contain an article on liability for environmental damage.