.jpg)
Paper Details
Paper Code: AIJACLAV8RP2024
Category: Research Paper
Date of Submission for First Review: Nov 16, 2024
Date of Publication: December 21, 2024
Citation: Ms. Neelanksha & Ms. Nrupalaa Kumar, “Global Environmental Issues and Human Rights Violations", 4, AIJACLA, 75, 75-85 (2024), <https://www.aequivic.in/post/global-environmental-issues-and-human-rights-violations>
Author Details: Ms. Neelanksha, Student, Christ (Deemed to be) University &
Ms. Nrupalaa Kumar, Students, Christ (Deemed to be) University
Abstract
This research paper explores the complex connection between human rights atrocities and environmental challenges across the world. In the current era, the violations of rights of human beings are growing day by day as the global struggles with climate change are getting delayed in being managed. The study will focus on how communities are getting vulnerable by the deterioration of environment which exacerbates already existing disparities and infringes the basic fundamental rights available to us including right to access clean water, food security and health.
The research will be using an interdisciplinary methodology by examining case studies from several geographical areas by addressing the challenges relating to environment and how those are affecting lives of human beings by addressing and acknowledging environmental science, international law and human rights discourse. It looks at the ways that human rights issues such as forced relocation, loss of livelihood, and challenges to indigenous cultures intersect with environmental problems including deforestation, pollution, and resource depletion.
Therefore, critically evaluating the effectiveness of existing international institutions and agreements in tackling these interrelated issues. It makes the case for a rights-based strategy to environmental protection, highlighting the necessity of more robust legal frameworks, higher corporate responsibility, and more community involvement in decision-making.
At a moment when people and planet are in crisis like never before, we must embrace the interconnected nature of human rights and the environment and take coordinated actions for their protection. This study ends with policy recommendations meant to promote a more sustainable and fair future in which human rights and environmental preservation are acknowledged as complementary objectives.
Keywords: Climate, Communities, International, Strategy
Introduction
The environmental problems facing the world have gotten worse in recent years, negatively impacting communities all over the place. The effects of resource depletion, pollution, deforestation, and climate change are becoming more and more obvious, and they have a direct bearing on human rights. Not only does environmental degradation worsen already-existing disparities, but it also jeopardizes fundamental human rights including access to food, clean water, health care, and decent housing. This article examines the relationship between international environmental problems and abuses of human rights, emphasizing the ways in which environmental degradation has increased societal vulnerability and infringed upon fundamental rights. In order to solve these interconnected challenges, the research highlights the need for stronger legislative frameworks, corporate accountability, and increased community participation through case studies and multidisciplinary analysis.
Human rights violations and environmental challenges have a complicated and nuanced interaction. Ecosystem disruption brought on by environmental degradation has an impact on people's ability to support themselves, their health, and their access to basic resources like clean water, air, and fertile land. Degradation of the environment directly leads to abuses of human rights, especially in underprivileged groups. These violations include exposure to toxic waste and pollution, loss of livelihood, damage of cultural assets, and forced relocation.
Right to Healthy Environment
The "right to a healthy environment" has been acknowledged by the UN as a fundamental human right, highlighting the rising body of international agreement that environmental conservation is a prerequisite for safeguarding fundamental human rights. Human rights and environmental conservation are linked, as has been stated in several Numerous international agreements, such as the 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development and the 2015 Paris Agreement, have recognized the connection between environmental preservation and human rights; yet, enforcement mechanisms are still inadequate.
One of the most important environmental concerns of our day is climate change, which has serious implications for human rights. Vulnerable communities are disproportionately affected by rising global temperatures, changing weather patterns, and an increase in the frequency of natural disasters like hurricanes, floods, and droughts. These effects exacerbate already-existing disparities by frequently resulting in greater poverty, forced relocation, and food insecurity.
Rising sea levels, for instance, are forcing entire communities in the Pacific Islands to evacuate, endangering their right to a place of residence, a means of subsistence, and a sense of cultural identity. Similar to this, protracted droughts in sub-Saharan Africa have resulted in widespread food insecurity, which violates the right to sufficient food and endangers public health. These instances demonstrate how human rights rhetoric must incorporate climate action, acknowledging that the inability to solve it also means failing to defend basic human rights.
Case Study: The Pacific islands and Rising Sea levels[1]
The nations of Kiribati, Tuvalu, and the Marshall Islands are among the Pacific Islands' most vulnerable areas to the effects of climate change. Entire islands could be submerged by rising sea levels, forcing inhabitants to evacuate and running the risk of losing their homes, means of subsistence, and cultural legacy. Significant human rights issues are brought up by the displacement of Pacific Islanders as a result of rising sea levels, especially in relation to the rights to cultural identity, self-determination, and property ownership. The inadequacy of international efforts, including the Paris Agreement, to tackle these concerns has resulted in calls for further global action on climate mitigation and stronger legal safeguards for climate refugees as the crisis continues to worsen.
Deforestation, overfishing, and mineral mining are examples of natural resource depletion that has disastrous effects on indigenous people whose survival, cultural traditions, and means of subsistence depend on these resources. Despite making the least contribution to the global environmental catastrophe, these communities frequently suffer the most from environmental degradation. Furthermore, the exploitation of resources frequently results in the appropriation of land, forced relocation, and the infringement on the rights of indigenous peoples to their ancestral territories.
For instance, illicit mining, logging, and deforestation pose a growing threat to indigenous people living in the Amazon rainforest. These activities not only degrade the ecosystem but also threaten the tribes' cultural identity and way of life. When environmental degradation is combined with the violation of indigenous rights, significant concerns regarding the balance are raised between disadvantaged communities' protection and economic growth.
Case Study: Indigenous Rights and the Amazon Rainforest[2]
Thousands of indigenous people, whose way of life and cultural traditions are inextricably linked to the environment, dwell in the Amazon jungle. However, the Amazon has been extensively destroyed as a result of illegal mining operations and deforestation, endangering both the ecosystem and the rights of indigenous peoples. President Jair Bolsonaro's actions in Brazil have drawn harsh criticism for their detrimental effects on indigenous rights since they have reduced environmental regulations and promoted deforestation. These policies have led to rising violence against indigenous leaders and activists who resist resource extraction, underlining the urgent need for better legal protections for both the environment and indigenous rights.
Human health and wellbeing are greatly threatened by environmental contamination, especially pollution of the air and water. Water sources are contaminated by industrial pollution, hazardous waste, and untreated sewage in many regions of the world. This contaminates water sources and causes respiratory and other widespread health issues. Although millions of people lack access to safe drinking water owing to pollution and environmental deterioration, the right to clean water is a fundamental human right. Water poisoning has caused public health emergencies in places like Flint, Michigan, and several parts of India. These areas disproportionately affect low-income and vulnerable groups. Human rights are violated when companies and governments fail to remove pollution and ensure access to clean water. This emphasizes the need for stricter environmental laws and corporate responsibility.
Case Study :Water Contamination and Flint, Michigan[3]
Human rights breaches can result from environmental degradation, as seen by the Flint, Michigan water crisis. 2014 saw the city's water supply tainted with lead as a result of cost-cutting initiatives that required the use of acidic Flint River water. The poisoning disproportionately impacted African American and low-income areas, leading to severe health issues, especially among children. The people' right to clean water and health was infringed by municipal and state officials' tardiness in addressing the situation, underscoring the need for more responsibility in environmental governance.
The Function of International Organizations and Law
The relationship between human rights and environmental conservation has gained recognition in international law. As part of international efforts to defend human rights, treaties like the Paris Agreement and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) emphasize how critical it is to combat environmental degradation and climate change. Nevertheless, numerous nations are not fulfilling their environmental obligations, making it difficult to enforce these agreements. Holding governments and businesses responsible for abuses of the environment and human rights is a critical function of international organizations like the United Nations and the International Criminal Court (ICC). For example, the adoption of ecocide as a recognized international crime may offer a legal foundation for the prosecution of individuals accountable for significant environmental damage. The international community's political will and the development of laws that uphold human rights and the environment, however, will be necessary for these initiatives to be successful.
Environmental Justice and Corporate Responsibility
Enterprise operations, specifically in sectors like mining, agriculture, and manufacturing, significantly contribute to the deterioration of the environment. But businesses frequently avoid taking accountability for how their operations affect human rights and the environment, especially in poorer nations where legal frameworks may be lax. The idea of environmental justice highlights the necessity of holding businesses responsible for the damage they do to the environment as well as vulnerable communities. There has been some progress in encouraging corporate accountability as a result of the growth of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) standards and corporate social responsibility (CSR) programs. These voluntary actions, however, frequently fall short of what is needed to stop abuses of human rights and environmental degradation. To guarantee that corporations adhere to human rights and environmental norms in their activities, more robust legislative frameworks and legally enforceable international agreements are required.
Recommendations for Policy Making
1. Fortifying Global Legal Structures: The Paris Agreement and the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights are two examples of agreements pertaining to the environment and human rights that should be better enforced by international organizations. Creating legally enforceable procedures to hold businesses and governments responsible for environmental infractions is part of this.
2. Identifying Ecocide as a Criminal Act: In order to prosecute people and companies accountable for significant environmental damage, the international community should endeavor to recognize ecocide as a crime against humanity.
3. Encouraging Corporate Liability: Governments ought to impose obligatory due diligence procedures on businesses, requiring them to evaluate and resolve the effects of their operations on the environment and human rights. Sanctions on businesses that violate human rights and environmental norms are part of this.
4. Empowering Communities: More local communities, especially marginalized and indigenous groups, should be included in environmental management decision-making processes. This entails giving environmental defenders legal safeguards and acknowledging indigenous peoples' rights to their ancestral territories.
5. Making Sustainable Development Investments: Investment in sustainable development programs that tackle environmental and human rights issues should be given top priority by governments. This entails supporting initiatives for climate resiliency, sustainable agriculture, and renewable energy.
International Legal Frameworks for Environmental Law
Treaties, conventions, and accords pertaining to international environmental law are designed to tackle worldwide environmental issues, including pollution, deforestation, climate change, and biodiversity loss. An outline of significant international frameworks alongside their flaws is given below:
1. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC, 1992)
The most prominent global agreement for addressing climate change is the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC, 1992). Stabilizing atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases (GHGs) to levels that would shield the climate system from harmful human meddling is the primary objective. It has promoted collaboration and aided successive conferences (COPs) where member nations discuss climate pledges over the years. The landmark Paris Agreement (2015), adopted under the UNFCCC, represents a significant evolution of global climate governance. This legally binding agreement compels countries to pursue efforts to limit global temperature rise to well below 2°C, while striving to cap the increase at 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. The desired outcomes and action plans of every nation are outlined in their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), which are reviewed and revised on a regular basis. The practicality of the Paris Agreement in containing the worsening climate disaster has been questioned due to its reliance on voluntary commitments and lax enforcement mechanisms, despite its lofty ambitions.
Drawbacks:The Paris Agreement is a significant step forward in the global climate governance process, but there are a number of noteworthy flaws that makes it less effective in addressing the climate catastrophe. Countries are allowed to establish their own Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), which describe their strategies for lowering greenhouse gas emissions, in accordance with the agreement. These NDCs, however, do not have legal force backing them, and many of them fall short of the minimum needed to achieve the more ambitious 1.5°C target, let alone the global ambition of keeping temperature rise to below 2°C. This results in notable disparities between the pledges made by different countries and the necessary global climate action. This issue is further made worse by the absence of an enforcement mechanism. The deal relies only on moral and political pressure, which has shown to be insufficient to maintain compliance, and does not impose sanctions on nations that do not fulfil their climate targets or NDCs. The financing gap in climate finance is another significant deficiency. Developed countries committed to raising $100 billion a year by 2020 to help developing nations cope with the effects of climate change and adapt to them. Nevertheless, the unfulfilled financial pledge hinders the capacity of susceptible countries to execute essential climate measures, thereby deepening the gap between developed and developing countries in the worldwide battle against climate change. These loopholes in the Paris Agreement underline the need for more rigorous, enforceable measures and improved financial support to drive genuine progress.
2. The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD, 1992)
The Convention on Biological variety (CBD), founded in 1992, is a comprehensive international framework aimed at the protection of biological variety, the sustainable use of its components, and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits emerging from the usage of genetic resources. These objectives are crucial in combating biodiversity loss and supporting the sustainable management of ecosystems. In order to safeguard species, ecosystems, and genetic variety, the CBD encourages international collaboration. Its main goal is to guarantee that biological resources are utilized in a way that benefits both the current and future generations. The Nagoya Protocol (2010), which particularly addresses concerns about access to genetic resources and the fair distribution of benefits arising from their exploitation, is a significant additional agreement under the CBD. Among the use of this protocol, a legal framework is established to guarantee that companies using genetic resources, including the pharmaceutical and agricultural sectors, share any financial or non-financial gains with the original nations and indigenous groups who produce and conserve these resources. In particular, it offers a major step toward correcting historical inequities in the usage of genetic materials from biodiversity-rich but economically underprivileged nations.
Drawbacks:
Although a crucial worldwide tool for protecting biodiversity, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) isn't functioning in the same way it could due to an array of serious shortcomings. Its inadequate compliance system is one of the main drawbacks. As a result of the lack of a globally enforceable enforcement mechanism to guarantee compliance, the CBD's rules are mostly implemented by national governments, which leads to uneven application everywhere. Inadequate finance is another critical concern. Substantial funding is still needed for biodiversity protection, especially for developing countries who find it difficult to fulfil their obligations under the Aichi Biodiversity Targets and the recently created Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework. The ability of nations to adequately safeguard biodiversity is hampered by this budget deficit. Furthermore, because the CBD lacks a worldwide framework for ecosystem preservation, vital habitats like wetlands, coral reefs, and forests are left open to exploitation and destruction. The biodiversity within these essential habitats is still being lost, and efforts to protect them are still insufficient without a focused, legally binding framework for ecosystems.
3. The Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs, 2001
The Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs), adopted in 2001, is a key international treaty aimed at protecting human health and the environment from the harmful effects of persistent organic pollutants (POPs). POPs are a category of dangerous substances that can linger in ecosystems for extended periods of time due to their resistance to environmental degradation. This allows them to build up in the food chain. These contaminants carry significant dangers, such as the potential to damage wildlife, cause cancer, and interfere with endocrine systems. The convention’s principal purpose is to eliminate and reduce the manufacture, use, and release of these harmful substances. It advocates for the global phase-out of many hazardous substances, such as some pesticides, industrial chemicals, and by-products of industrial operations. Furthermore, the Stockholm Convention supports the creation of safer substitutes as well as the proper disposal of POP stockpiles. The agreement is essential in reducing the transboundary impacts of persistent organic pollutants (POPs) and preserving ecosystems and human health because it promotes global collaboration.
Drawbacks:
The Stockholm Convention has shortcomings that restrict its overall efficacy, despite its crucial role in combating hazardous substances. Its narrow scope—the agreement originally addressed a limited list of persistent organic pollutants (POPs)—is one of the main concerns. Although the treaty allows for revisions that permit the addition of new compounds, the procedure is frequently cumbersome and bureaucratic. As a result, numerous dangerous compounds that continue to be produced and used and present serious hazards to both human health and the environment are left unchecked. Moreover, developing nations face more difficulties implementing the agreement since they typically lack the financial and technical means to properly phase out these dangerous substances. Without sufficient assistance, these countries find it difficult to comply with the convention's criteria, which include adopting substitute substances and safely disposing of their current stocks of POPs. This resource gap hampers global efforts to fully eliminate POPs and reduce their harmful impacts on ecosystems and public health.
4. The Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal (1989)
In order to control the cross-border movement of hazardous waste and guarantee its environmentally sound management, the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal was established in 1989. By limiting the production of hazardous waste and encouraging proper disposal techniques, its main goal is to safeguard the environment and public health from the risks that it poses. In order to guarantee that the recipient country has the infrastructure and ability to handle the waste safely, the Basel Convention established a regulatory framework requiring governments to get prior informed consent before exporting hazardous waste to another country. In addition, the convention fosters worldwide collaboration in the development of ecologically friendly technologies and practices and advocates the reduction of hazardous waste generation at its source. The Basel Convention plays an important role in reducing the risks to the environment and human health connected with the disposal of hazardous waste by emphasizing waste minimization and cross-border control.
Drawbacks:
The illicit trade in hazardous waste continues to pose a serious threat notwithstanding the Basel Convention's regulatory framework, especially in poor nations that lack the means and expertise to handle such material responsibly. Several affluent countries persist in taking advantage of these weaknesses by exporting dangerous goods to areas with laxer environmental laws. The goals of the treaty are compromised since hazardous waste can be deposited in nations that are unprepared to handle it due to the inconsistent execution of its provisions. The problem is made worse by the inconsistent application of policies in different countries, which puts the health and environment of the impacted communities at risk.
5. The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (1987)
The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, adopted in 1987, is considered as one of the most effective international environmental agreements. Its main goal is to gradually phase out the production and consumption of ODS, or ozone-depleting substances, as they cause the ozone layer that shields Earth from ultraviolet (UV) radiation to deplete. The protocol requires that important ODS, like halons and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), be gradually reduced and eventually eliminated. The ozone layer has successfully recovered as a result of almost universal acceptance of the Montreal Protocol, highlighting the possibility of concerted international action to address environmental disasters.
Drawbacks:
The Montreal Protocol has significant flaws despite its achievements. A particular issue is the use of high-impact replacements for greenhouse gases that contribute significantly to climate change, including hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), which do not destroy the ozone layer but are nevertheless powerful greenhouse gases. HFCs are addressed by the Kigali Amendment (2016), yet its applicability is limited because not all nations have ratified it. Global advancement has been hampered by compliance concerns as well, with certain countries reporting illicit manufacture and usage of compounds that are prohibited, such as CFCs.
6. The Kyoto Protocol (1997)
The Kyoto Protocol, adopted in 1997 and entering into force in 2005, marked a significant milestone in international climate policy by establishing the first legally binding targets for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. It was adopted in 1997 and went into effect in 2005. Its main goal was to mitigate climate change by requiring industrialized nations to cut their overall emissions between 2008 and 2012 by an average of 5% below 1990 levels. In order to assist nations in meeting their commitments more economically, the protocol incorporated a number of cutting-edge instruments, including emissions trading, the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), and Joint Implementation (JI). The Kyoto Protocol had obstacles despite being a ground breaker, such as minimal participation from significant emitters and issues meeting its targets, which underscored the need for a more inclusive global climate governance.
Drawbacks:
The Kyoto Protocol had several serious drawbacks, most notably its limited reach, which placed legally binding carbon reduction objectives only on Western nations, leaving large growing economies like China and India free from such duties. The introduced market mechanisms, most notably the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), also made carbon trading and offset projects possible, but their overall efficacy was weakened by criticism of their lax regulations and inadequate environmental integrity in certain initiatives.
7. United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS, 1982)
The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which addresses a wide range of important subjects acts as the comprehensive legal framework controlling the world's oceans. It methodically supervises marine activity by establishing territorial waters, exclusive economic zones, and the continental shelf, while balancing national interests with international commitments. UNCLOS plays a crucial role in protecting marine biodiversity by establishing marine protected zones and promoting sustainable fisheries management. It also has a significant impact on pollution prevention by putting strict regulations in place to lessen pollution from land-based and maritime sources. When taken as a whole, these actions guarantee a fair and sustainable use of the ocean's resources and represent the international agreement on ocean governance.
Drawbacks:
Despite its comprehensive framework, UNCLOS faces significant challenges. Overfishing persists, especially in poorly regulated international waters. Despite current regulation, deep-sea mining carries a danger of seriously harming marine ecosystems in the long run. Furthermore, UNCLOS does not adequately address the crucial problem of plastic pollution, which persists in endangering marine biodiversity in the absence of explicit measures for mitigation or control.
Potential Solutions for drawbacks:
1. Weak Enforcement and Compliance Mechanisms
There is a voluntary adherence to international environmental agreements rather than mandatory responsibilities is a common outcome of weak enforcement and compliance frameworks. The effective execution of vital environmental protections is hampered by this discrepancy.
Challenge: The effectiveness of these accords is undermined overall because nations and corporations can disregard their environmental obligations without worrying about facing significant consequences in the absence of binding enforcement mechanisms.
Solution : In order to tackle this, it is imperative to create autonomous global organizations that possess the power to enforce penalties on non-compliant organizations. Furthermore, strengthening the jurisdiction of international courts—like the International Court of Justice (ICJ)—to decide cases involving environmental harm can offer a strong legal foundation for enforcement and accountability.
1. Lack of Integration Between Environmental Law and Human Rights
Despite the influence of environmental harm on fundamental human rights, many international agreements fail to appropriately address the confluence of environmental degradation and human rights.
Challenge: There are insufficient comprehensive measures to address the twin dangers of environmental and human rights violations since human rights protections are not completely integrated within environmental frameworks.
Solution: Creating a legally enforceable international convention that specifically enshrines the human right to a healthy environment is essential to closing this gap. In order to ensure a coordinated effort to protect human rights and the environment, this treaty should hold states responsible for transgressions that impact both.
2. Slow Adaptation to New Environmental Challenges
As a result of their static character, international agreements frequently lag in addressing new environmental risks, such as plastic pollution, electronic waste, and deep-sea mining.
Challenge: These accords' slow response to emerging environmental problems prevents prompt and efficient action, leaving large gaps in regulation and protection.
Solution: Dynamic treaties that are made to react quickly are crucial to getting around this restriction. Regular updates of prohibited substances and activities, together with expedited procedures for revising agreements, ought to be a feature of these treaties. This strategy would improve international environmental governance's responsiveness and make it easier to quickly incorporate new environmental issues.
3. Fragmentation of International Environmental Law
There are many overlapping agreements and jurisdictions in the sphere of international environmental law, which leads to uneven implementation and enforcement.
Challenge: As a result of this fragmentation, different environmental treaties and institutions lack coherence, which creates gaps in regulations, redundant efforts, and inefficiencies in resolving global environmental challenges.
Solution: Improving coordination and coherence across various environmental treaties and international bodies is essential to addressing this situation. A more coordinated and successful approach to environmental protection may be ensured by creating a broad, all-encompassing global environmental governance framework that would simplify operations, eliminate redundancies, and promote enhanced cooperation between nations and international organizations.
In order to achieve a balance between environmental preservation and human rights, the international community must address these gaps and improve international environmental governance. These enhancements would contribute to making international law more successful in preventing environmental deterioration and preserving human welfare.
Conclusion
The relationship between human rights breaches and global environmental challenges is becoming more and more evident. Vulnerable groups are disproportionately affected by environmental deterioration, which exacerbates already-existing disparities and violates fundamental rights including access to food, clean water, and health care. In order to solve these issues, this research has emphasized the necessity of more robust legislative frameworks, corporate accountability, and community involvement. The international community may work toward a more sustainable and just future where environmental preservation and human rights are acknowledged as compatible goals by embracing a rights-based approach to environmental protection. Coordinated action is necessary in this era of unparalleled social and environmental challenges to protect people's rights as well as vulnerable communities.
References
1. Geneva Environment Network, 'Human Rights and the Environment' (Geneva Environment,Network,2024)https://www.genevaenvironmentnetwork.org/resources/updates/human-rights-and-the-environment/
2. Global Network for Human Rights and the Environment, 'Human Rights and the Environment' (Global Network for Human Rights and the Environment, 2024) https://gnhre.org/?page_id=16649
3. Eena Heinämäki, 'Human Rights and the Environment' (2021) 32 Yearbook of International Environmental Law 33
4. UNDP, 'The Critical Connection Between Human Rights and Our Natural World' (UNDP, 2024)https://www.undp.org/blog/critical-connection-between-human-rights-and-our-natural-world
5. About human rights and the environment | OHCHR. (n.d.)https://www.ohchr.org/en/special-procedures/sr-environment/about-human-rights-and-environment
6. What is Kyoto Protocol? What is the Kyoto Protocol? | UNFCCC
7. About Monreal Protocol About Montreal Protocol (unep.org)
8. IUCN, 'Right to a Healthy Environment' (IUCN, 2021)
[1] Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat, The Impact of Rising Sea Levels on Pacific Island Nations (Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat 2023) https://www.pacificislandsforum.org/rising-sea-levels accessed 12 September 2024.
[2] Human Rights Watch, Indigenous Rights and the Amazon Rainforest (Human Rights Watch 2023) https://www.hrw.org/report/indigenous-rights-amazon accessed 12 September 2024.
[3] American Civil Liberties Union, Water Contamination and Flint, Michigan: A Crisis of Human Rights (ACLU 2022) https://www.aclu.org/report/water-contamination-flint-michigan accessed 12 September 2024.