Exploring Environmental Governance And Justice

1. Describe Brown Weiss’s notion of a planetary trust and discuss whether it could help align state sovereignty with ecological stewardship.

2. Describe and discuss the social license concept in environmental governance and justice. What challenges are associated with its use?  

3. Describe, discuss and compare environmental justice claims and rights of nature principles to preventing environmental injustices. 

Brown Weiss's notion of a planetary trust

1. The status quo of the world has changed in a substantial manner in the recent times not only in terms of the power held by the individuals and also the national governments of the different nations but also in terms of the natural resources as well (Varuzzo and Harvey 2017). Klein et al. (2018) are of the viewpoint that the rampart usage of the natural resources and other attributes of the environment for various developmental activities, is taking a toll on the ecosystem. As opined by Worrell, Allwood and Gutowski (2016), it is likely that the fast pace at which the present day generation is depleting the natural resources a time would come when the future generations might not have access to the natural resources that the present generation had. In this regard, Aldo Leopold’s notion of environmental stewardship has gained prominence which offers a medium through which the present generation can not only use the natural resources but also ensure that the future generations have access to them as well (Tietenberg and Lewis 2016).

Brown Weiss’s notion of a planetary trust has gained special prominence in the light of the depleting natural resources of the earth and also the unethical manner in which it is being used by the present generations for their selfish desires. Brown states that “Man inhabits two worlds. One is the natural world of plants and animals…The other is the world of social institutions and artifacts. environment obedient to human purpose and direction” (Weiss 1983). More importantly, he argues that the present generation along with the national governments of the different nation needs to establish some sort of planetary trust whereby they will use the resources of the earth in an ethical manner (Weiss 1983). Furthermore, Brown (1983) is of the viewpoint that the present generation needs to ensure the fact that the future generation also has access to the same kind of resources which they themselves had inherited from the earlier generations. In this regard, it can be said that the present generation of individuals can be seen as both trustees and also stewards. In their role as trustees, the present generation needs to ensure the fact that the future generations have the opportunity to enjoy the same kind of resources which the present generation is enjoying (Weiss 1983). On the other hand, in their role as the stewards of the natural resources of earth, the present generation needs to ensure the fact that they utilize the natural resources of the planet not only in an ethical manner but at the same time morally as well (Klein et al. 2018). Moreover, for the achievement of this purpose both the social as well as national institutions along with the human beings needs to come together and establish various laws (Weiss 1983). These laws need to be formulated in such a manner that the heritage resources of the planet will be utilized in an effective manner and not for catering to the selfish desires of the individuals.

Social license concept in environmental governance and justice

As per Brown (1983), for the achievement of the stage of planetary trust, the notions of state sovereignty and ecological stewardship will have to be merged together and more together and more importantly work together. Klein et al. (2018) are of the viewpoint that the impetus for such a trust is unlikely to come from the end of the individuals of the present generations and thus the state sovereignty would have to take the initiative for the same. The state governments would have to foster the kind of environment wherein the use of the land and other kinds of natural resources will not only be done in an ethical manner but also through sustainable as well as conservation practices (Tietenberg and Lewis 2016). More importantly, this is likely to align the state sovereignty of the various nations with the notion of ecological stewardship since to make the individuals of the present generation practice such a notion the sovereignty would themselves have to follow it. In addition to this, the realization of the fact that they are stewards of the natural resources of the planet would not only enable to sovereignties of the different nations to take the help of various sustainable but also conservation practices which in turn would promote the idea of ecological stewardship. Moreover, the Brown (1983) is also of the opinion that the present generation needs to realize their responsibility not only towards the future generations but at the same time towards the mankind itself. In this regard, the alignment of the state sovereignty with the notion of ecological stewardship becomes all more important as well as necessary for them.

2. The emergence of different kinds of technologies has substantially changed the world and also the manner in which the diverse business enterprises operate or regulate their affairs. One of the most important ones in this regard is the information and communication technology (ICT) which has much simplified the social exchange between the business enterprises and the societal actors (Leventakis and Haberfeld 2018). It is pertinent to note that within the framework of the contemporary business world, the societal actors or the various interests are wielding a much larger influence than they used to in the earlier times. As opined by Cullen?Knox et al. (2017), the net result of this process is the fact that the various business enterprises more than ever are required to take into effective consideration the interests of these diverse societal and other interests groups. More importantly, recent researches have shown that the organizations which take into effective consideration the interests of these diverse societal groups have a far greater chance of attaining sustainability and also success than the ones which completely disregard them (Leventakis and Haberfeld 2018). In this context, the notion of social license is an important one that the organizations of the modern era need to take into effective consideration.

Cullen-Knox et al. (2017) are of the viewpoint that the notion of social license can be defined as the process through the various societal actors or the diverse influence groups exert influence on the business operations of an organisation. More importantly, in the majority of the cases it is seen that the demands or the influence wielded by these societal actors are in synchronicity with the demands of the environment and also the manner in which the damage towards the environment can be mitigated (Lakin and Scheubel 2017). Furthermore, at the same time, it is also seen that the business enterprises had been forced to modify or change the style of their business operations on the score of the influence wielded by these societal actors. In addition to these, the emergence of ICT as a mode of communication between the organisations and the societal actors, stakeholders and others who are associated with them has also helped in the process in a substantial manner (Cullen?Knox et al. 2017). The net result of this process is the fact that a much larger population are contesting the traditional practices held by them on the score of which the organisations are required to adopt a transnational model wherein it is being able to take into consideration the perspective of different people (Cullen?Knox et al. 2017). More importantly, it has given rise to a situation wherein not only the organisations but also the societal groups and also the stakeholders are being able to share information as well as resources in an effective manner (Demuijnck and Fasterling 2016). Furthermore, this process has made it imperative for the various organisations to adopt the kind of corporate governance style wherein it will be able to take into consideration the different value, demands, customs and other aspects of the societal groups and also the stakeholders.

Environmental justice claims and rights of nature principles

Lakin and Scheubel (2017) are of the viewpoint that the primary focus of the different business enterprises in the contemporary times is to maximise the amount of profit earned by them. Furthermore, it is seen that for the attainment of this objective the organisations often disregard the demands of the various societal as well as influence groups and focus on the ways through which profit can be maximise (Leventakis and Haberfeld 2018). However, the process under discussion here requires the organisations to take into effective consideration the demands of the societal groups as well. It is pertinent to note that the demands of these societal groups are often contradictory to the business aims of the organisations and thus taking them into effective consideration might hamper their profitability as well. Another significant challenge that the organisations often face for the effective utilisation of this notion is the fact that this requires them to modify the corporate governance policy that they have been following. Demuijnck and Fasterling (2016) have stated that the corporate governance style of an organisation is formulated on the basis of the values and culture of an organisation. Thus, changing it to incorporate the demands of the societal groups is likely to cause problems for the organisations.

3. Hall (2016) is of the viewpoint that the increasing amount of damage that human beings and their activities are causing to the environment and biodiversity has given rise to the notion of environmental justice. In this regard, some have even argued about the need to incorporate a healthy environment as one of the fundamental rights of the human beings (Bosselmann 2015). More importantly, it is seen that many nations, including some of the states of USA offer “right to a healthy environment” as one of the most basic rights to its citizens (Bruckerhoff 2008). However, having said this, these rights are not more than just façade since these rights cannot be contested in the court of law. Furthermore, in the recent times, many individuals have even gone ahead and filed complaints in the courts regarding the violation of this particular right of theirs but to no aid (Bruckerhoff 2008). Moreover, the courts refute these claims of the individuals on the ground that the curbing the damage to the environment is likely to restrict the business operations of various organizations which are major source of their revenue (Bruckerhoff 2008).

Bruckerhoff (2008) is of the viewpoint that the various rights offered to the individuals are anthropocentric in nature, that is, they are solely restricted to the human beings. As opined by Hall (2016), this is primarily done with the idea that if there is any dispute then it can be settled in an effective manner. However, in case of the environmental rights, the contesting parties are the human beings and the environment and this is one of the major reasons why the disputes cannon be settled like the disputes in the case of other rights (Gellers 2017). The net result of this is the fact that the notion of environmental justice rights is being followed and allowed by the justice systems of the different only up to the point wherein it does not hamper the business of the organizations located in that nation (Bruckerhoff 2008). This is done not only because of the fact that the business organizations pay the maximum amount of taxes to the national governments but also because of the fact their business activities are the major contributors to pollution. In this regard, the notion of restorative justice which requires the national governments of the various nations to formulate the kind of laws and rights that will help them to minimize or mitigate the damage which their activities are causing towards the environment (Bosselmann 2015).

As opined by Gellers (2017), the activities of the human beings are not causing damage to the environment but at the same time are infringing or causing injustices to the environment. One of the most important precepts of the notion of environmental justice is the fact that the individuals not only need to utilize the resources of the environment in an ethical manner but at the same time need to ensure the fact that their activities are not causing damage to the same (Bosselmann 2015). In the recent times, this is generally considered to be one of the major rights of environment and on the basis of this fact the concept of justice or injustice regarding the aspects of environment is decided (Hall 2016). The constitutional protection which some of the nations of the world are trying to give to nature becomes important in this regard since in the absence of any stringent norms or regulations natural and its resources are being used as per the discretion of the human beings. In order to prevent these environmental injustices, the national governments of various nations needs to incorporate the “right to safe environment” within the gamut of rights offered by them to the citizens (Bruckerhoff 2008). In addition to this, formulation of stringent regulations which will punish the individuals or the organizations which disregard the environmental regulations would also benefit the environment in a substantial manner.    

References

Bosselmann, K., 2015. Global environmental constitutionalism: Mapping the terrain. Widener L. Rev., 21, p.171.

Bruckerhoff, J. J. 2008. Giving nature constitutional protection: a less anthropocentric interpretation of environmental rights. Texas Law Review, 86, pp. 615- 646.

Cullen?Knox, C., Eccleston, R., Haward, M., Lester, E. and Vince, J., 2017. Contemporary Challenges in Environmental Governance: Technology, governance and the social licence. Environmental Policy and Governance, 27(1), pp.3-13.

Demuijnck, G. and Fasterling, B., 2016. The social license to operate. Journal of Business Ethics, 136(4), pp.675-685.

Gellers, J.C., 2017. The Global Emergence of Constitutional Environmental Rights. Routledge.

Hall, C., 2016. A Right Most Dear: The Case for a Constitutional Environmental Right. Tulane Environmental Law Journal, 30(1), pp.85-109.

Klein, C.A., Cheever, F., Birdsong, B.C., Klass, A.B. and Biber, E., 2018. Natural resources law: a place-based book of problems and cases. Wolters Kluwer Law & Business.

Lakin, N. and Scheubel, V., 2017. Corporate community involvement: The definitive guide to maximizing your business' societal engagement. Routledge.

Leventakis, G. and Haberfeld, M.R. eds., 2018. Societal Implications of Community-Oriented Policing and Technology. Springer International Publishing.

Tietenberg, T.H. and Lewis, L., 2016. Environmental and natural resource economics. Routledge.

Varuzzo, A. and Harvey, D.C., 2017. Disproportionalities in the urban forest: Analyzing the role of stewardship agencies in dictating the distribution of an urban environmental resource. Landscape and Urban Planning, 167, pp.232-239.

Weiss, E.B., 1983. The Plantetary Trust: Conservation and Intergenerational Equity. Ecology LQ, 11, p.495.

Worrell, E., Allwood, J. and Gutowski, T., 2016. The role of material efficiency in environmental stewardship. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 41, pp.575-598.