Resolving North America`s environmental disputes
Seventeen years ago John E. Carroll and Newell B. Mack analyzed the then-current status of environmental protection mechanisms used between Canada and the United States. They criticized the ad hoc nature of North America`s history of environmental dispute resolution, which they dubbed ``ad hockery,`` and believed the present ambiguity hurt business, diplomatic relations, and the citizenry`s environment. Since that publication, increasing efforts to incorporate environmental concerns into Conventions have resulted in several multilateral agreements focusing on environmental protection and dispute resolution. Part 2 of this paper introduces a few of these recent agreements and the mechanisms they have established to monitor environmental damage and to enforce the goals of the agreements. The agreements discussed include: Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer; Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer; Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer; Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal; Canada-United States: Agreement on Air Quality; Rio Declaration on Environment and Development; Framework Convention on Climate Change; Convention on Biological Diversity; and the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation. Part 3 discusses the general concern related to economic development (with the need to maintain ``sustainable development``), the possible environmental impact of NAFTA, and the Supplemental Agreement`s strengths and weaknesses.
- OSTI ID:
- 352517
- Journal Information:
- Denver Journal of International Law and Policy, Vol. 26, Issue 5; Other Information: PBD: Win 1998
- Country of Publication:
- United States
- Language:
- English
Similar Records
Montreal protocol: Business opportunites
Who'll stop the rain: resolution mechanisms for US-Canadian transboundary pollution disputes