| 1. |
- Chapron, Guillaume, et al.
(författare)
-
Bolster Legal Boundaries to Stay within Planetary Boundaries
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Nature Ecology & Evolution. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 2397-334X. ; 1:3
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The mounting threats posed to the global environment by harmful human activities cannot be averted without effective legislation controlling those activities. However, the environmental laws designed for this purpose are themselves under global attack. Because it is binding and enforceable, legislation is a unique and essential instrument in the overall effort to keep humanity’s impacts on the planet from transgressing critical thresholds. For instance, biodiversity laws do so by designating and protecting natural areas and controlling the exploitation of wildlife populations. Yet, due to short-term economic and other interests, such laws face constant pressures aimed at weakening their regulating impact on human activities. This new study reveals and illustrates the staggering number and diversity of tactics used to weaken biodiversity legislation across the globe. This ‘taxonomy of tactics’ encompasses dozens of categories, ranging from the creative re-definition of terms to the ‘fast-tracking’ of environmentally harmful projects, and from limiting concerned citizens’ access to court, to the silent or even express refusal of appointed authorities to enforce biodiversity laws.Whereas the predicament of the planet’s wild fauna and flora would have been even worse without the legal protection they have received so far, the onslaught against biodiversity laws has prevented these from fully performing their assigned function. The global acceleration of wildlife population declines bears witness to this. To stem the tide, strategic approaches are needed to anticipate and counter attacks on biodiversity legislation; to make the most of existing laws, including in court if need be; and to develop new or improved laws where necessary.
|
|
| 2. |
- Chapron, Guillaume, et al.
(författare)
-
European Commission may gut wolf protection
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Science. - : American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). - 0036-8075 .- 1095-9203. ; 382:6668, s. 275-275
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)
|
|
| 3. |
- Epstein, Yaffa, et al.
(författare)
-
EU Court : Science must justify future hunting
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Science. - : American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). - 0036-8075 .- 1095-9203. ; 366:6468, s. 961-961
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)
|
|
| 4. |
- López-Bao, José Vicente, et al.
(författare)
-
Legal obligations regarding populations on the verge of extinction in Europe: Conservation, Restoration, Recolonization, Reintroduction
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Biological Conservation. - : Elsevier BV. - 0006-3207 .- 1873-2917. ; 227, s. 319-325
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- After more than two decades of implementation of the Habitats Directive (Directive 92/43/EEC), some fundamental aspects of the directive are still unclear, and subject to interpretive uncertainty, which limit its correct implementation. For example, obligations for Member States in situations where a protected population has almost, or has just, gone extinct are unclear. The isolated and protected population of wolves (Canis lupus) in the Sierra Morena region in Spain - the only wolf population in the southern half of the Iberian Peninsula - has been steadily declining to the point where it is doubtful whether any wolves are left. Using this illustrative example, we provide clarifications on the obligations by Member States in situations where populations are on the verge of extinction. Our analysis shows that Articles 6 and 12 of the Habitats Directive require Member States to restore populations that are quasi extinct. From a legal perspective, even the complete extinction of the species would not exonerate Member States from its obligations regarding the species in the Natura 2000 sites concerned. In this line, we argue that the Spanish authorities should not wait with recolonization, reinforcement and/or reintroduction actions until the complete absence of wolves in the Sierra Morena is conclusively proven. Two scenarios appear to meet legal requirements: i) active reinforcement/reintroduction, or an active and effective policy towards a rapid natural recolonization of Sierra Morena by northern wolves. However, based on the observed wolf trends in Spain and Portugal during the past five decades, a reconnection between northern and Sierra Morena wolves seems unlikely in the foreseeable future even if actively promoted. Considering the urgency of actions required to avoid that this population will be the first wolf population to become extinct in Europe in modern times, in order to comply with European obligations, the adopting and carrying out a reintroduction/reinforcement scheme to restore the Sierra Morena wolf population is required. Such a scheme needs to be accompanied by a comprehensive enforcement plan to assure that reintroduced wolves will thrive.
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
- Epstein, Yaffa, et al.
(författare)
-
A legal-ecological understanding of Favourable Conservation Status for species in Europe
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Conservation Letters. - Chichester, West Sussex : Wiley-Blackwell. - 1755-263X. ; 9:2, s. 81-88
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Legislation for the preservation of biodiversity has been instrumental to the recovery of multiple species and habitats. The European Habitats Directive 92/92/EEC is one of the strongest legal tools in nature conservation. This Directive seeks to achieve its biodiversity goals by requiring EU Member States to take measures to reach or maintain Favourable Conservation Status (FCS) of natural habitats and species in Europe. FCS is a legal concept, but must be understood and applied by scientists, managers and policy makers, and therefore a proper interpretation of this concept is crucial for biodiversity conservation and wildlife management. However, its definition contains several aspects that can lead to misinterpretation, being the core of controversies in determining whether or not populations have reached FCS. In this review, we provide legal and ecological clarifications of the most contested aspects of FCS that have not yet been conclusively settled by analyzing and weighting a variety of sources.
|
|
| 7. |
- Trouwborst, Arie, et al.
(författare)
-
Europe’s biodiversity avoids fatal setback
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Science. - : American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). - 0036-8075 .- 1095-9203. ; 355:6321, s. 140-140
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- The European Commission has finally buried its controversial plan to revise the EU's biodiversity conservation legislation in order to make it more "business-friendly". Such a revision would have meant a fatal setback for European wildlife conservation. The 1979 Birds Directive and the 1992 Habitats Directive set out strict, enforceable obligations for EU member states to protect and restore vulnerable species and areas, and impose real limits on potentially harmful human activities. This legislation has the potential to actually do what it is supposed to do: protect vulnerable nature. Some governments and other stakeholders consider the Directives unduly restrictive, however, and in 2014 the new European Commission announced its wish to “modernize” the Directives as part of its broader deregulation agenda. The Directives have survived this most serious assault since their inception thanks to clear evidence of their effectiveness and an unprecedented public mobilisation campaign. The focus now shifts from revising the legislation to its effective application, including through litigation where necessary. Cooperation between lawyers and other conservation professionals will be crucial to achieve this.
|
|
| 8. |
- Trouwborst, Arie, et al.
(författare)
-
International Wildlife Law : Understanding and Enhancing Its Role in Conservation
- 2017
-
Ingår i: BioScience. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0006-3568 .- 1525-3244. ; 37:9, s. 784-790
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Many conservation professionals are familiar with the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), the Convention on Migratory Species (CMS), the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the Ramsar Convention, and the World Heritage Convention. Regional instruments, such as those focusing on Africa, Antarctica, or Europe, are also conspicuous features of the conservation arena. Other international wildlife agreements focus on particular species, such as polar bears or albatrosses, or particular transboundary protected areas, such as the huge Kavango-Zambezi Transfrontier Conservation Area (see table 1). These agreements are collectively known as international wildlife law (Bowman et al. 2010). The binding agreements themselves are typically accompanied and informed by an evolving set of nonbinding instruments, such as Conference of the Parties (COP) decisions and action plans.
|
|
