Sixteenth International Conference on Environmental, Cultural, Economic & Social Sustainability

Abstract

The emerging field of “green criminology” works to seek justice for both crimes and legal harms to the environment. One approach in green criminology is empowered by laws and regulations that protect the environment, thus making it possible to seek justice for crimes against the environment. A second approach is empowered by those who call out human actions that are legal yet harmful to the environment. This second approach can lead to environmental regulation and laws, even at the international level when consensus on harm is achieved, as was the case when the 1987 Montreal Protocol successfully set in motion the banning of chlorofluorocarbons that are harmful to the ozone layer. Today, the ozone layer is in recovery, and ozone-depleting-substances are regulated. In contrast, the 1994 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and its many extensions to regulate carbon emissions have proven to be a much more difficult task. Carbon dioxide is an essential part of the natural carbon cycle, but in excess, it can be viewed as serious anthropogenic harm to the environment. Greenhouse gas emissions are just one of many examples where humanity overloads naturals system with substances that should be harmless to the environment. This paper considers several questions. What are “legal harms” to the environment? Why do they often persist without regulation? What are the confounding factors that prevent the regulation of legal harms to the environment? How might leaders seek justice for human actions that are legal, yet harmful to the environment?