This article explores the links between international environmental law and the law of free trade. Democratic countries have tended to favor both environmental law and free trade more so than other countries. The more interesting question is whether the converse is true, that is, do environmental law and free trade aid democracy and the development of the rule of law? This article addresses that question.
Been, V., and Joel Beauvais. 2003. The global fifth amendment? NAFTA's investment protections and the misguided quest for an international regulatory takings doctrine. New York University Law Review78:30-143.
2.
Bowman, M., and David Hunter. 1992. Environmental reforms in post-communist Central Europe: From high hopes to hard reality. Michigan Journal of International Law13:921-980.
3.
Driesen, D. M.1998. Free lunch or cheap fix? The emissions trading idea and the climate change convention. Boston College Environmental Affairs Law Review26:1-87.
4.
Driesen, D. M.2000. Choosing environmental instruments in transnational legal context. Ecology Law Quarterly27:1-52.
5.
Driesen, D. M.2001. What is free trade? The real issue lurking behind the trade and environment debate. Virginia Journal of International Law41:279-366.
6.
Falk, R., and Andrew L. Strauss. 2001. Toward global parliament. Foreign Affairs80:212-220.
7.
Fischman, Robert L.1991. Global warming and property interests: Preserving coastal wetlands as sea levels rise. Hofstra Law Review19:565-602.
8.
Fox, G., and Brad Roth, eds. 2000. Democratic governance and international law. New York: Cambridge University Press.
9.
GATT Dispute Settlement Panel Report on U.S.-Restrictions on Imports of Tuna, Sept. 3, 1991, GATT B.I.S.D. (39th Supp.) (1993).
10.
GATT Dispute Settlement Panel Report on U.S.-Restrictions on Imports of Tuna, July 1994, 33 I.L.M. 839 (1994).
11.
Glennon, M.1990. Has international law failed the elephant?American Journal of International Law84:1-34.
12.
Heimert, A.1995. Note, how the elephant lost its tusks. Yale Law Journal104:1473-1506.
13.
Holbein, J. R.1992. The case for free trade. Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Journal15:19-32.
14.
Houghton, J. T., L. G. Meira Filho, B. A. Callander, N. Harris, A. Kattenberg, and K. Maskell, eds. 1996. Climate change 1995: The science of climate change. New York: Cambridge University Press.
15.
Hunter, D., James Salzman, and Durwood Zaelke. 2002. International environmental law and policy. New York: Foundation Press.
16.
Jackson, J. H.1967. The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade in United States domestic law. Michigan Law Review66:249-332.
17.
Karon, K.2001. When it comes to Kyoto, the U.S. is the “rogue nation.”Time, July 24.
18.
Neumayer, E., Scott Gates, and Nils Petter Gleditsch. 2003. Environmental commitment, democracy and inequality. A background paper to World Development Report 2003. Washington, DC: World Bank.
19.
Ozone Secretariat. 1993. Handbook for the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer. 3rd ed.Nairobi, Kenya: United National Environment Programme.
20.
Reeve, Rosalind. 2002. Policing international trade in endangered species: The cites treaty and compliance. London: Earthscan Publications.
21.
Spriggs, W. E., and James Stanford. 1993. Economists’ assessments of the likely employment and wage effects of the North American Free Trade Agreement. Hofstra Labor Law Journal10:495-536.
22.
Strauss, A. L.1998. From Gattzilla to the Green Giant: Winning the environmental battle for the soul of the World Trade Organization. University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Economic Law19:769-821.
23.
Strauss, A. L.1999. Overcoming the dysfunction of the bifurcated global system: The promise of a people's assembly. Transnational Law and Contemporary Problems9:489-511.
24.
United States v. Metalclad Corp., 2001. British Columbia Supreme Court664-664 (May 5, 2001).
25.
Watson, R. T., Marufu C. Zinyowera, and Richard H. Moss, eds. 1998. The regional impacts of climate change: An assessment of vulnerabilities. New York: Cambridge University Press.
26.
World Resources Institute. 2003. World resources 2002-2004: Decisions for the Earth: Balance voice and power. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute.
27.
WTO Appellate Body Report on U.S.-Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, Oct. 12, 1998, 38 I.L.M. 118 (1999).
28.
WTO Dispute Settlement Panel Report on E.C.-Measures Affecting Asbestos and Asbestos-Containing Products, 2000 WL 1449942 (Sept. 18, 2000).
29.
Zaharchenko, T., and Gretta Goldenman. 2004. Accountability and governance; the challenge of implementing the Aarhus Convention in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics4:229-251.
