Pluralismo jurídico como teoría para los desafíos en salud ambiental

Resumen

Este artículo pretende justificar la teoría del pluralismo jurídico para el estudio de la problemática de la salud ambiental. Aunque el derecho positivo ha presentado ciertos avances, existen algunas áreas de la salud ambiental que parecen encontrarse en estado incipiente. Las normas estatales han manifestado dificultades para lograr su cumplimiento en materia de contaminación industrial o del agua, a lo cual se suma el hecho de que las jurisdicciones nacionales tienden a privilegiar intereses económicos particulares. Este problema del positivismo fomenta su confrontación con la teoría del pluralismo legal, y se encuentra que dicha aproximación teórica permite la deliberación y la participación activa de actores no estatales en la esfera de la salud ambiental. Este documento también pone en discusión que un enfoque pluralista del derecho podría otorgar cierta flexibilidad debido a la poca jerarquización, la falta de reglas teóricas y la relajación
del principio de la soberanía estatal.

Descargas

La descarga de datos todavía no está disponible.
  • Biografía del autor/a

    Ronald Ralf Becerra Rodríguez, Corporación Universidad Republicana (Colombia).

    BA in Law, Universidad Libre (Barranquilla, Colombia). MA Degree in International Trade Law, London Metropolitan University. Lecturer-researcher, Corporación Universidad Republicana, Bogotá, Colombia. E  mail: rbecerra@urepublicana.edu.co

  • Referencias

    Ahrén, M. (2004). Indigenous People’s culture, customs, and Traditions and Customary Law- The Saami People’s Perspective. Arizona Journal of International & Comparative Law 21(1), 63-112.

    Bal, L. (2012). Le Myhte de la souveraineté en Droit International. La souveraineté des États à l’Épreuve des mutations de l’ordre juridique international. (tesis de doctorado). Strasbourg, France: University of Strasbourg.

    Berman, P. S. (2013). Le nouveau pluralisme juridique. Revue internationale de droit économique, XXVII(1), 229-256. doi: 10.3917/ride.259.0229

    Besson, S. (2011). Sovereignty, International Law and Democracy. The European Journal of International Law, 22(2), 373-387.

    Boyd, D. (2012). The right to a Healthy Environment. Revitalizing Canada’s Constitution. Vancouver: UBC Press. Retrieved from https://www.ubcpress.ca/asset/9095/1/9780774824125.pdf

    Broughton, E. (2005). The Bhopal disaster and its aftermath: a review.   Environmental Health, 4(6), 1-6. doi:10.1186/1476-069X-4-6

    Hull R. B. (2008). Environmental Pluralism. En Callicot, J. B. y Frodeman, R. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Environmental Ehtics and Philosophy (pp. 384-387). United States: Macmillan Reference, Gale Cengage Learning.

    Cicolella, A. (2013). Toxique Planète: Le scandale invisible des maladies chroniques. Paris, France: Éditions du Seuil.

    Departamento Nacional de Planeación (2008). Documento Conpes 3550. Lineamientos para la formulación de la política integral de salud ambiental con énfasis en los componentes de aire, calidad de agua y seguridad química. Retrieved from: http://www.minambiente.gov.co.

    Dilwyn, A. (2015). Legal pluralism and Human Rights in the idea of Climate Justice. Oslo Law Review, (3), 200-224. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.5617/oslaw2766

    Dunn, R. (2012). In retrospect: Silent Spring. Nature 485, 578-579. doi: 10.1038/485578a

    Gauthier-Clerc, M. & Thomas, F. (2010). Écologie de la Santé et biodiversité. Brussels: Éditions De Boeck.

    Gawel, A. (2017). Pollution is a silent killer. Here’s how we can stop it. Geneva: World Economic Forum. Retrieved from: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/11/pollution-how-to-stop-the-silent-killer/.

    Gruby R, Campbell L, Fairbanks L y Gray N. (2017). To succeed, Large Ocean Sanctuaries Need to Benefit Both Sea Life and People. Santa Cruz, California, United States: Island Conservation. Retrieved from: https://www.islandconservation.org/ocean-sanctuaries-benefit-palau-people/

    Griffiths, J.   (1986). What is Legal Pluralism? The Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law, 18 (24). 1-55. doi: 10.1080/07329113.1986.10756387

    Harrison, J. (2006). Significant International Environmental Law Cases. Journal of Environmental Law, 18 (3), 505-516.

    Hertogh, M. (2007). What is Non-State Law? Mapping the Other Hemisphere of the Legal World. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.1008451

    Hsiao, E. (2012). Whanganui River Agreement –Indigenous Right and Rights of Nature-. Environmental Policy and Law 42(6), 371-375.

    Idechong, N. (n. d.). Micronesian Sea Traditions-Palau’s Marine Protected Areas. United States: United Nations. Retrieved from:
    http://www.un.org/Depts/los/consultative_process/documents/7abstract_idechong.pdf

    Institute of Medicine. (2007). Global Environmental Health in the 21st Century: From Governmental Regulation to Corporate Social Responsibility: Workshop Summary. doi: https://doi.org/10.17226/11833.

    Jackson, S. (2005). Legal pluralism and the Nation State: Romantic Medievalism or Pragmatic Modernity. Fordham International Law Journal, 30(1), 158-176.

    Johannes, R. E. (1978). Traditional Marine Conservation Methods in Oceania and their Demise. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics. 9, 349-364.

    Kelsen, H. (1962) Théorie pure du droit. Traduction française de la 2e édition de la «Reine Rechtslehre» par Charles Eisenmann. Paris: Dalloz.

    Koivurova, T. (2014) Introduction to international environmental law. New York: Routledge.

    Kothari, A., Margil, M. & Bajpai, S. (2017). Now rivers have the same legal status as people, we must uphold their rights. London: The Guardian. Retrieved from: https://www.theguardian.com/global-development-professionals-network/2017/apr/21/rivers-legal-human-rights-ganges-whanganui

    Landringan P., Fuller R. Acosta N., Adeyi O., Arnold R., Basu N., …. Zhong M. (2018). The Lancet Commission on pollution and health. Lancet 2018, 391, 462-512. Retrieved from: https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736(17)32345-0.pdf.

    Maguire, R., Lewis, B. & Sampford, C. (2013). Shifting global powers and International Law. Challenges and Opportunities. London and New York: Routledge.

    Mc Arthur, J. (2013). International Environmental Law: Can it overcome its Weaknesses to Create an Effective Remedy for Global Warming? Santa Clara Journal of International Law, 10(2), 253-282.

    McGuire, Ch. J. (2014). Environmental Law from the Policy Perspective: Understanding How Legal Frameworks Influence Environmental Problem Solving. Boca Raton, United States: CRC Press.

    Merry, S. E. (1988). Legal Pluralism. Law & Society Review, 22(5), 869-896.

    Menski, W. (2006). Comparative law in a global context: the legal systems of Asia and Africa. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Moeller, D.W. (2011). Environmental Health. Cambridge, United States: Harvard University Press.

    Mol, A. P. J. (2016). The environment nation state in decline. Environmental Politics, 25 (1), 48-68. doi  : 10.1080/09644016.2015.1074385

    Morrison, D. & Tyree, C. (2017). Invisibles. El plástico dentro de nosotros. Washington: Orb Media. Retrieved from: https://orbmedia.org/stories/El_pl%C3%A1stico/data

    Ozone Secretariat, (2015). Montreal Protocol- Achievements to date and challenges ahead. Nairobi, Kenya: UNEP. Retrieved from: http://42functions.net/en/MP_achievements_challenges.php.

    Perez, O. (2004). Ecological sensitivity and global legal pluralism. Rethinking the Trade and Environment Conflict. Oxford and Portland: Hart Publishing.

    Pomade, A. (2012). Penser l’interdisciplinarité par l’internormativité. Illustration en droit de l’environnement. Revue Interdisciplinaire d’études juridiques, 68 (1), 85-106.

    Pring, G. & Pring, K. (2016). Environmental Courts & Tribunals: A guide for policy makers. United States: Environmental Law Alliance Worldwide. Retrieved from: https://www.elaw.org/environmental-courts-tribunals-guide-policy-makers-unep

    Rae, I. & Gabriel, A. (2012). Saving the ozone layer: why the Montreal Protocol worked. Melbourne, Australia. The Conversation. Retrieved from: https://theconversation.com/saving-the-ozone-layer-why-the-montreal-protocol-worked-9249

    Rahim, M. (2013). Legal Regulation of Corporate Social Responsibility: A Meta- Regulation Approach of Law for Raising CSR in a Weak Economy. New York, United States: Springer.

    Richardson, B. J. (2008). The Ties that Bind: Indigenous Peoples and Environmental Governance. Comparative Research in Law & Political Economy, 4(5), 1-47. Retrieved from: http://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/clpe/197

    Rodríguez, G. A. (2014). El Sistema Nacional Ambiental quedó reducido a una utopía. La Silla Vacía. Retrieved from: https://lasillavacia.com/elblogueo/blog/el-sistema-nacional-ambiental-quedo-reducido-una-utopia-47232

    Rouland, N. (1994). Legal Anthropology. London: A&C Black.

    Sievers, J. M. (2015). A Philosophical Reading of Legal Positivism. (tesis de doctorado). Lille: Université de Lille 3.

    Tamanaha, B. (2008). Understanding Legal Pluralism: Past to Present, Local to Global. Sydney Law Review, 30(3), 374-411.

    Tamanaha, B. (1993). The folly of the “social scientific’ concept of legal pluralism. Journal of Law and Society, 20(2), 192-217.

    Taylor, A. L. (2008). International Law and Public Health Policy. In Heggenhougenand, K. & Quah, S. (Eds.), International Encyclopedia of Public Health, 3. (pp. 667-678). San Diego, United States: Academic Press. Retrieved from: http://oneill.law.georgetown.edu/media/2008_International-Law-and-Public-Health-Policy.pdf

    Techera, E. (2010). Legal Pluralism, Customary Law and Environmental Management: The Role of International Law for the South Pacific. Macquarie University Law School Legal Studies. Working Paper No. 2010-01. Retrieved from: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1545527.

    Teubner, G. (2012). Constitutional fragments: Societal Constitutionalism and Globalization. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199644674.001.0001.

    Teubner, G. (1997). Global Bukowina: Legal Pluralism in the World Society. En Teubner, G. (Ed.) Global Law without a State. (pp. 3-28). Darmouth: Aldershot. Retrieved from: https://is.muni.cz/el/1422/podzim2008/MP504Z/um/Bukowina_english.pdf.

    Teubner, G. (1991).   The Two Faces of Janus: Rethinking Legal Pluralism. Cardozo Law Review, 13, 1443–1462

    Vanderlinden, J. (1989). Return to legal pluralism: Twenty years later. The Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law, 21(28), 149-157.

    Ventsel, A. (2008). Punx and Skins United: One Law for Us One Law for Them. The Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law, 40 (57), 45-100. doi: 10.1080/07329113.2008.10756618

    Vick, D. (2004). Interdisciplinarity and the Discipline of Law. Journal of Law and Society, 31 (2). 163-193.

    Von Schirnding, Y., Onzivu, W. y Adede A. (2002). International environmental law and global public health. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 80 (12), 970-974.

    Weidner, H. (1997). Performance and Characteristics on German Environmental Policy. Overview and Expert Commentaries from 14 countries. Social Science Research Centre Berlin. Discussion Paper FS II 97-301. Retrieved from: https://bibliothek.wzb.eu/pdf/1997/ii97-301.pdf

    World Health Organization. (2011). New WHO report  : deaths form noncommunicable diseases on the rise, with developing hit hardest. New York. Retrieved from  : http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2011/ncds_20110427/en/

    Wijsman, K. (n.d.). State Sovereignty in a Time of global Environmental Problems: a Move towards Dynamism?” Retrieved from: https://www.academia.edu/14771977/State_Sovereignty_in_a_Time_of_Global_Environmental_Problems_a_Move_towards_Dynamism.
Publicado
2019-08-16
Cómo citar
Becerra Rodríguez, R. (2019, agosto 16). Pluralismo jurídico como teoría para los desafíos en salud ambiental. OPINIóN JURíDICA, 18(36), 233-256. https://doi.org/10.22395/ojum.v18n36a10
Sección
Artículos