Cookies Policy
X

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

Socio-environmental Disputes within MERCOSUR: Lack of a More Meaningful Cooperation

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this article

+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

Global environmental degradation is but one aspect of a crisis in human rationality, resulting from anthropocentric and unsustainable paradigms. Increasing awareness towards the need for sustainability promotes rationality standards founded in holistic and interdisciplinary approaches that encourage participatory governance at various levels. Within this context, the peaceful settlement of cross-border, socio-environmental conflicts represents a challenge to the unilateral exercise of jurisdiction, owing to issues such as enforceability, effectiveness and the granting of provisional measures. Hence, international, regional and/or sub-regional entities must become meaningful vehicles for institutional environmental cooperation, in order to establish higher levels of participatory governance among relevant local, regional and global players. MERCOSUR’s Environmental Framework Agreement (Decision CMC nº 2 of June 22, 2001), its Additional Protocol on Cooperation on Environmental Emergencies (Decision CMC nº 4 of July 8, 2004) and the Summit of Environmental Ministers of MERCOSUR (Decision CMC nº 19 of December 15, 2003) represent important steps towards the promotion of socio-environmental, cultural, political, economic, ecological and geographical sustainability. However, its dispute settlement system is still lacking in additional institutional cooperation principles and rules to achieve these goals. It can be argued that Member States should engender the additional regulatory framework to reduce asymmetries between local socio-environmental public policies and, thus, inspire stronger confidence in the effectiveness of its dispute settlement system.

Affiliations: 1: Federal Rural University of Rio de Janeirobra1278@gmail.com; 2: Rio de Janeiro State UniversityFederal Rural University of Rio de Janeiroraphael_vasconcelos@hotmail.com

10.1163/15718034-12341299
/content/journals/10.1163/15718034-12341299
dcterms_title,pub_keyword,dcterms_description,pub_author
10
5
Loading
Loading

Full text loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/15718034-12341299
Loading

Data & Media loading...

http://brill.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1163/15718034-12341299
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/15718034-12341299
2015-12-09
2017-12-11

Sign-in

Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Subscribe to ToC alert
  • Get permissions
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
     
    The Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals — Recommend this title to your library
  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation