{"title":"Environmental Autonomy","authors":"Zerrin Savaşan","doi":"10.1163/15718115-bja10127","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThis article aims to get a new brand start to the autonomy debate by examining environmental autonomy (ea) as a new concept under international law (il). In this respect, firstly, it focuses on establishing why such a notion is needed, where the idea comes from, so, on which basis the article’s analysis has been built. Secondly, to conceptualise ea in legal terms, it makes research on two sub-debates involving the principle of self-determination and nonhuman rights approach. Finally, it concludes that although there is no tangible certain legal basis to apply such a concept under current il other than the terms of indigenous rights; developments in recent decades show that, ea debate, testing the boundaries of law, might truly have the potential to the development of literature beyond the anthropocentric paradigms; but also underlines the need for further work on its potential legal framework under il.","PeriodicalId":44103,"journal":{"name":"International Journal on Minority and Group Rights","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal on Minority and Group Rights","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718115-bja10127","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This article aims to get a new brand start to the autonomy debate by examining environmental autonomy (ea) as a new concept under international law (il). In this respect, firstly, it focuses on establishing why such a notion is needed, where the idea comes from, so, on which basis the article’s analysis has been built. Secondly, to conceptualise ea in legal terms, it makes research on two sub-debates involving the principle of self-determination and nonhuman rights approach. Finally, it concludes that although there is no tangible certain legal basis to apply such a concept under current il other than the terms of indigenous rights; developments in recent decades show that, ea debate, testing the boundaries of law, might truly have the potential to the development of literature beyond the anthropocentric paradigms; but also underlines the need for further work on its potential legal framework under il.