The ‘imbroglio’ of ecocide: A political economic analysis

IF 1.3 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW Leiden Journal of International Law Pub Date : 2023-09-26 DOI:10.1017/s0922156523000468
Eliana Cusato, Emily Jones
{"title":"The ‘imbroglio’ of ecocide: A political economic analysis","authors":"Eliana Cusato, Emily Jones","doi":"10.1017/s0922156523000468","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In this article we adopt a political economic lens to analyse the revival of the concept of ecocide in present international legal scholarship and practice. The current campaign to codify the crime of ecocide under international criminal law represents the epitome of a problem-solving approach, which conceives of the law as external to society and as a corrective to its evils. Yet, a large body of critical literature has drawn attention to the constitutive role of international law and to the problems with its depoliticized approach when it comes to tackling global injustices. We build upon this diverse scholarship to illuminate how the technical, acontextual, and ahistorical legal debate on the codification of ecocide ends up normalizing the violent structures of extractive capitalism and its hierarchies. Further, we situate the proposed crime within the wider context of how international law regulates and constitutes the natural world. Drawing on critiques of sustainable development and of business and human rights discourse, we argue that the ‘imbroglio’ of ecocide, in its current legal definition, lies in presenting ecological preservation and devastation as simultaneously legitimate aims. The article ultimately raises the question of the role of international law in progressive political agendas, a question that could not be more pressing in times of entangled socio-ecological-economic disruptions.","PeriodicalId":46816,"journal":{"name":"Leiden Journal of International Law","volume":"90 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Leiden Journal of International Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0922156523000468","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract In this article we adopt a political economic lens to analyse the revival of the concept of ecocide in present international legal scholarship and practice. The current campaign to codify the crime of ecocide under international criminal law represents the epitome of a problem-solving approach, which conceives of the law as external to society and as a corrective to its evils. Yet, a large body of critical literature has drawn attention to the constitutive role of international law and to the problems with its depoliticized approach when it comes to tackling global injustices. We build upon this diverse scholarship to illuminate how the technical, acontextual, and ahistorical legal debate on the codification of ecocide ends up normalizing the violent structures of extractive capitalism and its hierarchies. Further, we situate the proposed crime within the wider context of how international law regulates and constitutes the natural world. Drawing on critiques of sustainable development and of business and human rights discourse, we argue that the ‘imbroglio’ of ecocide, in its current legal definition, lies in presenting ecological preservation and devastation as simultaneously legitimate aims. The article ultimately raises the question of the role of international law in progressive political agendas, a question that could not be more pressing in times of entangled socio-ecological-economic disruptions.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
生态灭绝的“纠葛”:政治经济分析
摘要本文从政治经济学的角度分析生态灭绝概念在当前国际法律学术和实践中的复兴。目前将生态灭绝罪编入国际刑法的运动代表了一种解决问题的方法的缩影,这种方法认为法律是社会之外的,是对其罪恶的纠正。然而,大量的批评文献已经提请人们注意国际法的构成作用以及在处理全球不公正问题时其非政治化方法的问题。我们以这些不同的学术成果为基础,阐明关于生态灭绝编纂的技术、背景和非历史的法律辩论是如何最终使掠夺性资本主义及其等级制度的暴力结构正常化的。此外,我们将拟议的罪行置于国际法如何规范和构成自然世界的更广泛背景中。根据对可持续发展以及商业和人权话语的批评,我们认为生态灭绝的“混乱”,在其当前的法律定义中,在于将生态保护和破坏同时作为合法目标。这篇文章最终提出了国际法在进步政治议程中的作用问题,在社会生态经济混乱的时代,这个问题是最紧迫的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
6.70%
发文量
67
期刊最新文献
International law in the minds: On the ideational basis of the making, the changing, and the unmaking of international law BinaryTech in motion: The sexgender in the European Court of Human Rights jurisprudence Rewriting the law of international organizations: Whither the Asia Pacific? Beyond the machinery metaphors: Towards a theory of international organizations as machines The Committee on the Rights of the Child and Article 12: Applying the Lundy model to treaty body recommendations
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1