How to Overcome Impotence of Environmental Law in the Age of Anthropocene: Foundations of Ecocentric Law

INTRODUCTION. This scientific article discusses the reaosns for inefficiency (“impotence”) of modern environmental law as a normative reaction to the “destruction of Nature”. The scope of the destruction of Nature has been broadening. The environmental protection law has thus not influenced the resurrection of “destroyed Nature”.
MATERIALS AND METHODS. Consistent with explanatory and theory–building research, the methods used are those of historical legal research as well as general scientific methods, such as analysis, synthesis, analogy, description, and deduction. 
RESEARCH RESULTS. The essential reasons for the current excessiveness (intemperance) of man's interaction with Nature (the reasons for the “destruction of Nature”) and/or reasons for the inefficiency of the modern environmental law should be sought for in the dominant anthropocentric cultural paradigm of the western cultures oriented towards an un-limited material progress. If anthropocentrism (exploitativeness) as the basis of human utilitarian interaction with nature has led to the “destruction of nature,” there is no doubt that the ecological reason remaining within the anthropocentric construction of Nature can not lead to its “resurrection”. Only the setting-up of the ecocentric construction of Nature may lead to the “resurrection” of Nature. This orientation must be followed by the nomos of the western cultures. A new law of nature on the basis of the new, ecocentric ontology and ethics is therefore necessary.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. In this article, the basics of a new ecocentric legal philospohy as the foundation of modern environmental law have been proposed. The scientific realisation of man's equality in the network of co-dependent natural entities in the last decades shows man his initial position – that is his (equal) postition in Nature. The determination of the rules of conduct which man must respect in interaction with Nature implies an expansion of the idea of law itself (justice and correctness) towards the interaction between man and Nature and not only the interaction within human community. Consequently, the economic interaction has to be maintained within the framework ensuring the vitality of other biotic communities. Also, incorporation of Nature in the very essence of law inevitably triggers a redefinition of legal values. The natural equilibrium, i.e., the equilibrium of life (including human life) becoming a legal value, we could speak of the expansion of the legal subject, i.e. the expansion of values which are the subject of legal protection. The initial position of the natural equilibrium addresses the issue of relationship of the new legal value towards the existing fundamental legal values of the western cultures. The enforcement of the maintenance of natural equilibrium may also demand a limitation of another legally protected value, for example, the right to the freedom of movement or some other human right. The new value, i.e., the maintenance of natural equilibrium, must be incorporated in the “contracts of statehood”, that is in the constitutions of the western countries as one of main legal values, next to “freedom”,“democracy” and “private property”. The entry of Nature in the western (legal) value system is a conditio sine qua non for an efficient change in the legal order and, most importantly, for a change in man's attitude towards Nature in everyday's life.

1. Brooks R. Coercion to Environmental Virtue: Can and Should Law Mandate Environmentally Sensitive Lifestyles?. – The American Journal of Jurisprudence. 1986. Vol. 31. Issue 1. P. 21-54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ajj/31.1.21

2. Buck S. Understanding Environmental Law and Administration. Washington, D.C.: Island Press. 1996. 225 p.

3. Capra F. The Web of Life. A New Scientific Understanding of Living Systems. New York: Anchor Books. 1997. 368 p.

4. Charting Environmental Law Futures in the Anthropocene. Ed. by M. Lim. Singapore: Springer. 2019. 245 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-9065-4

5. Contemporary Political Philosophy: An Anthology. Ed. by R. Goodin and Ph. Pettit. 3rd ed. Oxford: Wiley and Blackweel. 2019. 736 p.

6. Dryzek J. The Politics of the Earth: Environmental Discourses. Oxford ; New York:Oxford University Press. 1997. 220 p.

7. Earthly Goods: Environmental Change and Social Justice. Ed. by O. Hampson and J. Reppy. Ithaca; London: Cornell University Press. 1996. 272 p.

8. Eder K. The Social Construction of Nature (A Sociology of Ecological Enlightenment). London: SAGE Publications. 1996. 256 p.

9. Environmental Planning and Sustainability. Ed. by S. Buckingham-Hatfield and B. Evans. Chicester: John Wiley & Sons. 1996. 208 p.

10. Fletcher G.P. Basic Concepts of Legal Thought. New York; Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1996.226 p.

11. Forbes J. Columbus and Other Cannibals: The Wetiko Disease of Exploitation, Imperialism and Terorism. New York: Autonomedia. 1992. 160 p.

12. Foundations of Environmental Law and Policy. Ed. by R. Revesz. New York: Foundation Press. 1997. 375 p.

13. Fredericks S. Ethics in Agenda 21. – Ethics, Policy and Environment. 2014. Vol. 17. Issue 3. P. 324-338. DOI: 10.1080/21550085.2014.955312

14. Hardin G. The Tragedy of the Commons. – Science. 1968. Vol. 162. No. 3859. P. 1243-1248.

15. Hart H.L.A. The Concept of Law (Slov. ed.: Hart H.L.A. Koncept prava. Ljubljana: Študentska organizacija Univerze v Ljubljani Publ. 268 p.)

16. Holterman T., van Maarseven H. Law and Anarchism. Montreal: Black Rose Books. 1984. 215 p.

17. Hribar T. Ekologija in ekozofija [Ecology and ecosophy]. – Glasnik slovenske Matice. 1991. No. 1-2. P. 11-16. (In Slovenian)

18. Johnston R. J. Nature, State and Economy. A Political Economy of the Environment. New York: John Wiley&Sons.1996. 274 p.

19. Kaufmann A. Uvod v filozofijo prava [Introduction to Philosophy of Law]. založba, Ljubljana: Cankarjeva. 1994. 281 p. (In Slovenian)

20. Kelley D.R. The Human Measure. Soacial Thought in the Western Legal Tradition. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. 1990. 358 p.

21. Kirn A. Ekološka (okoljska) etika [Environmental Ethics]. Maribor: Aram. 1992. 43 p. (In Slovenian)

22. Kotzé L. Earth System Law for the Anthropocene. – Sustainability. 2019. Vol. 11. No. 23. P.1-13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su11236796.

23. Kuhn Th. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1962. 172 p.

24. Law and the Environment: A Multidisciplinary Reader. Ed. by R. Percival and D. Alevizatos. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. 1997. 464 p.

25. Lévi-Strauss Cl. The View from Afar. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1992. 311 p.

26. Lucia V. de. Towards an Ecological Philosophy of Law: A Comparative Discussion. – Journal of Human Rights and the Environment. 2013. Vol. 4. Issue 2. P. 167-190. DOI: 10.4337/jhre.2013.02.03

27. McCormick J. The Global Environmental Movement. 2nd ed. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. 1995. 312 p.

28. Meadows D.H., Randers J., Meadows D.L. Limits to Growth: 30-year update. The USA: Chelsea Green Publishing Company. 2004. 338 p.

29. Merchant C. The Death of Nature. Women, Ecology and the Scientific Revolution. San Francisco: Harper and Row. 1980. 348 p.

30. Natural Resources Policy and Law: Trends and Directions. Ed. by L. MacDonnell and S. Bates. Washington, D.C. :Island Press. 1993. 241 p.

31. Ortolano L. Environmental Regulation and Impact Assessment. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 1997. 620 p.

32. Palmer D. Looking at Philosophy: The Unbearable Heaviness of Philosophy Made Lighter. Mountain View: Mayfield Publishing Company. 1994. 412 p.

33. Philosophy and the Natural Environment. Ed. by R. Attfield and A. Belsey. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1994. 250 p.

34. Ponting Cl. A Green History of the World.The Environment and the Collapse of Great Civilizations. New York: Penguin Books. 1993. 430 p.

35. Posner R. The Problems of Jurisprudence. Cambridge Mass.: Harvard University Press. 1990. 485 p.

36. Przeworski A. Sustainable Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1995. 156 p.

37. Sagoff M. Ethics, Ecology, and the Environment: Integrating Science and Law. – Tennessee Law Review. 1988. Vol. 56. P. 77-229.

38. Sax L. J. The Search for Environmental Rights. – Journal of Land Use and Environmental Law. 1990. Vol. 6. No.1. P. 93-105.

39. Schoenbaum T., Rosenberg R. Environmental Policy Law: Problems, Cases, and Readings. 2nd ed. Westbury: Foundation Press. 1273 p.

40. Sinha S. Jursiprudence (Legal Philosophy) in a Nutshell. St. Paul: West Academic Publishing. 2006. 379 p.

41. Solomon R., Higgins K. A Short History of Philosophy. New York; Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1996. 352 p.

42. Stone Chr. The Environment in Moral Thought. – Tennessee Law Review. 1988. Vol. 56. P. 1-13.

43. Stone D. Chr. Should Trees Have Standing? - Toward Legal Rights For Natural Objects. – Southern California Law Review. 1972. Vol. 45. P. 450-501.

44. Tarlock D. Earth and Other Ethics: The Institutional Issues. – Tennessee Law Review. 1988. Vol. 56. P. 43-77.

45. The Ecological Community. Ed.by R. Gottlieb. New York: Routledge. 1997. 406 p.

46. The Politics of Sustainable Development: Theory, Policy, and Practice within the European Union. Ed. by S. Baker [et al.]. London: Routledge. 1997. 292 p.

47. Toulmin St. The Case for Cosmic Prudence. – Tennessee Law Review. 1988. Vol. 56. P.29-43.

48. Vido S. de. Quest for an Eco-centric Approach to International Law: the COVID-19 Pandemic as Game Changer. – Jus Cogens. 2021. Vol. 3. Issue 2. P. 105-117. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42439-020-00031-0

49. Weatherford J. Indian Givers: How Native Americans Transformed the World. New York: Three Rivers Press. 2010. 368 p.

50. Words of Power:Voices from Indidan America. Ed. by N. Hill, Jr. Golden, CO: Fulcrum Publishing. 1994. 64 p.

51. Zimmerman M. Contesting Earth’s Future. Radical Ecology and Postmodernity. Berkeley: University of California Press. 1997. 447 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520919228