Kingportable
Member
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2011
- Messages
- 172
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2012
We have to answer this question using recent media articles in order evaluate the effectiveness of legal and non legal methods in balancing between the demands of resources and global environmental protection.
We need to incorporate the themes
*The impact of state sovereignty and international cooperation and the resolution to conflict in regard to environmental protection.
*The issue of compliance and non-compliance
*The impact of law reform in protecting the global environment
*The effectiveness of legal and non-legal responses in protecting the environment.
==So this is my general interpretation for Legal Methods==
*Legal methods revolve around State sovereignty and the effectiveness of international law.
*So this includes the effectiveness of the Kyoto protocol and the Rio conference
*We can also see the issue of compliance and non-compliance through the use of state sovereignty (two birds in on stone)
*I say we can see through the issue with the Bel Monte Dam and the Australia/New Zealand v. France nuclear test case
*The lack of options that can be taken by neighbouring countries and Brazil's breach of its obligation from the Rio conference highlights the
the limitations presented by state sovereignty. The Bel Monte Dam provides more renewable energy than needed to run New York city,
which demonstrates the responses's failure to balance environmental sustainability and economic needs. Similarly the Nuclear Test case,
with France's use of state sovereignty to avoid its obligations to the ICJ's decision is another example of the failures of Environmental Legal measures.
==This is my interpretation for Non-Legal methods==
*This was the hard part form and one i didn't quite get down pack. Where do i start?
*I have this one document where the labour party is criticised for only taking action against Japanese whaling as a result of election pressures in 2011. Which marks the effectiveness of non-legal measures like the media, which pressure governments to comply with Environmental responsibility.
Any ways anyone wanna extend from what i have?
We need to incorporate the themes
*The impact of state sovereignty and international cooperation and the resolution to conflict in regard to environmental protection.
*The issue of compliance and non-compliance
*The impact of law reform in protecting the global environment
*The effectiveness of legal and non-legal responses in protecting the environment.
==So this is my general interpretation for Legal Methods==
*Legal methods revolve around State sovereignty and the effectiveness of international law.
*So this includes the effectiveness of the Kyoto protocol and the Rio conference
*We can also see the issue of compliance and non-compliance through the use of state sovereignty (two birds in on stone)
*I say we can see through the issue with the Bel Monte Dam and the Australia/New Zealand v. France nuclear test case
*The lack of options that can be taken by neighbouring countries and Brazil's breach of its obligation from the Rio conference highlights the
the limitations presented by state sovereignty. The Bel Monte Dam provides more renewable energy than needed to run New York city,
which demonstrates the responses's failure to balance environmental sustainability and economic needs. Similarly the Nuclear Test case,
with France's use of state sovereignty to avoid its obligations to the ICJ's decision is another example of the failures of Environmental Legal measures.
==This is my interpretation for Non-Legal methods==
*This was the hard part form and one i didn't quite get down pack. Where do i start?
*I have this one document where the labour party is criticised for only taking action against Japanese whaling as a result of election pressures in 2011. Which marks the effectiveness of non-legal measures like the media, which pressure governments to comply with Environmental responsibility.
Any ways anyone wanna extend from what i have?