• Energy Research
• law close

In the United States, today’s ranches are engaging in small-scale nature-based endeavors to diversify their income base. But the geographic boundary of the land they own creates a relatively small area within which to operate, and fragmented ownership diminishes the ability of any single landowner to produce nature-based income. Collective action among nearby landowners can produce a set of resources from which all members of the group can profit. Such action can enhance the economic, social, and environmental sustainability of grasslands and the populations that use them. This article shows that common-interest communities can be used to provide and allocate wildlife and other resources on ranchlands, enabling individual landowners to generate more income from selling nature-based experiences to customers. Common-interest communities are familiar in urban settings but they have not yet been used in this setting. Thus, the article proposes a new approach to ranchland management based upon a familiar set of largely private legal arrangements. More broadly, the article illustrates the relevance of private law and private property to sustainable development by explaining how property owners can use private law to engage in environmentally beneficial and economically profitable enterprises on the vast privately owned landscape of the U.S. Great Plains.

In the United States, today’s ranches are engaging in small-scale nature-based endeavors to diversify their income base. But the geographic boundary of the land they own creates a relatively small area within which to operate, and fragmented ownership diminishes the ability of any single landowner to produce nature-based income. Collective action among nearby landowners can produce a set of resources from which all members of the group can profit. Such action can enhance the economic, social, and environmental sustainability of grasslands and the populations that use them. This article shows that common-interest communities can be used to provide and allocate wildlife and other resources on ranchlands, enabling individual landowners to generate more income from selling nature-based experiences to customers. Common-interest communities are familiar in urban settings but they have not yet been used in this setting. Thus, the article proposes a new approach to ranchland management based upon a familiar set of largely private legal arrangements. More broadly, the article illustrates the relevance of private law and private property to sustainable development by explaining how property owners can use private law to engage in environmentally beneficial and economically profitable enterprises on the vast privately owned landscape of the U.S. Great Plains.

This Article examines the genesis and context of SE4All, placing the effort within both itshistorical and international policy contexts. It highlights the voluntary nature of the initiative andargues that its effective implementation and the achievement of its goals require the articulation ofan applicable international legal framework that aids the transformation of SE4All’s policy actionsinto binding international legal commitments. The article contends that such a transformation doesnot depend on the creation of entirely new legal rules or institutions. Instead, an effective frame-work for successful implementation of SE4All can be derived from existing rules of internationalhuman rights law and sustainable development law. Reliance on these twin bodies of interna-tional law will increase the prospects for SE4All to achieve energy access and related goals thatits predecessor initiatives have failed to accomplish

This Article examines the genesis and context of SE4All, placing the effort within both itshistorical and international policy contexts. It highlights the voluntary nature of the initiative andargues that its effective implementation and the achievement of its goals require the articulation ofan applicable international legal framework that aids the transformation of SE4All’s policy actionsinto binding international legal commitments. The article contends that such a transformation doesnot depend on the creation of entirely new legal rules or institutions. Instead, an effective frame-work for successful implementation of SE4All can be derived from existing rules of internationalhuman rights law and sustainable development law. Reliance on these twin bodies of interna-tional law will increase the prospects for SE4All to achieve energy access and related goals thatits predecessor initiatives have failed to accomplish

As a new form of regional multilateralism, the Belt and Road Initiative is China’s most significant strategic move for external engagement in international economic law, following its World Trade Organization accession. This paper analyses China’s approach towards the Belt and Road Initiative from a legal perspective, focusing on three questions: first, what is the proper scope of the Belt and Road Initiative? Second, is there an identifiable approach that China adopts in the Belt and Road Initiative context, and, if so, what is its key legal characteristic? Third, is China’s Belt and Road Initiative approach sustainable? Employing a functional approach in defining the Belt and Road Initiative, the article identifies three qualities to China’s approach to the Belt and Road Initiative: (i) that it is a hub-and-spoke network, (ii) it adopts a three-track institutional and mechanism approach, and (iii) a dual- track normative approach. Compared with the US trade approach (particularly the US–Mexico–Canada Agreement), these qualities reveal the key characteristic underpinning China’s Belt and Road Initiative approach: maximised flexibility regarding institutions and norms to address uncertainties and challenges in the Belt and Road Initiative. Such flexibility will likely assist in ensuring that China’s Belt and Road Initiative approach is sustainable by enabling trial-and-error, if properly managed. However, it also gives rise to concerns around China’s Belt and Road Initiative approach, especially as to its predictability, coherence, and transparency.

As a new form of regional multilateralism, the Belt and Road Initiative is China’s most significant strategic move for external engagement in international economic law, following its World Trade Organization accession. This paper analyses China’s approach towards the Belt and Road Initiative from a legal perspective, focusing on three questions: first, what is the proper scope of the Belt and Road Initiative? Second, is there an identifiable approach that China adopts in the Belt and Road Initiative context, and, if so, what is its key legal characteristic? Third, is China’s Belt and Road Initiative approach sustainable? Employing a functional approach in defining the Belt and Road Initiative, the article identifies three qualities to China’s approach to the Belt and Road Initiative: (i) that it is a hub-and-spoke network, (ii) it adopts a three-track institutional and mechanism approach, and (iii) a dual- track normative approach. Compared with the US trade approach (particularly the US–Mexico–Canada Agreement), these qualities reveal the key characteristic underpinning China’s Belt and Road Initiative approach: maximised flexibility regarding institutions and norms to address uncertainties and challenges in the Belt and Road Initiative. Such flexibility will likely assist in ensuring that China’s Belt and Road Initiative approach is sustainable by enabling trial-and-error, if properly managed. However, it also gives rise to concerns around China’s Belt and Road Initiative approach, especially as to its predictability, coherence, and transparency.

In June 2020, China unilaterally announced two seasonal closures on squid fishing in certain areas of the high seas that apply to the Chinese distant water fishing fleets. Such closure refers to the withdrawal of the Chinese distant water fishing fleet from part of the high seas where they regularly operate. It is an innovative conservation measure initiated by a nation-state with the significance for global ocean governance and meeting the requirements from the UN Sustainable Development Goals. This paper is designed to seek the possibility, through a qualitative study and interpretive analysis, of whether such an innovative conservation measure can be introduced into the fishery management in the Southern Ocean, currently mainly under the framework of CCAMLR. This paper attempts to answer some questions with this new introduction. First, whether this kind of seasonal closure is applicable or feasible within the framework of CCAMLR. Second, whether this kind of seasonal closure would infringe upon or disrupt existing regimes, such as marine protected areas (MPAs) created by CCAMLR. Third, how and to what extent such a measure is supported by best scientific evidence so as to reach optimal effectiveness. In this regard, firm support from contracting parties is necessary to enforce the seasonal closure within the coverage of CCAMLR. The paper concludes that the seasonal closure feasible under the CCAMLR legal framework, which, like the measures of MPAs, will facilitate the fulfillment of best scientific evidence and eventually contribute to the SDG-14 progressively in the Southern Ocean.

In June 2020, China unilaterally announced two seasonal closures on squid fishing in certain areas of the high seas that apply to the Chinese distant water fishing fleets. Such closure refers to the withdrawal of the Chinese distant water fishing fleet from part of the high seas where they regularly operate. It is an innovative conservation measure initiated by a nation-state with the significance for global ocean governance and meeting the requirements from the UN Sustainable Development Goals. This paper is designed to seek the possibility, through a qualitative study and interpretive analysis, of whether such an innovative conservation measure can be introduced into the fishery management in the Southern Ocean, currently mainly under the framework of CCAMLR. This paper attempts to answer some questions with this new introduction. First, whether this kind of seasonal closure is applicable or feasible within the framework of CCAMLR. Second, whether this kind of seasonal closure would infringe upon or disrupt existing regimes, such as marine protected areas (MPAs) created by CCAMLR. Third, how and to what extent such a measure is supported by best scientific evidence so as to reach optimal effectiveness. In this regard, firm support from contracting parties is necessary to enforce the seasonal closure within the coverage of CCAMLR. The paper concludes that the seasonal closure feasible under the CCAMLR legal framework, which, like the measures of MPAs, will facilitate the fulfillment of best scientific evidence and eventually contribute to the SDG-14 progressively in the Southern Ocean.