CYIL vol. 11 (2020)

SILVANO DENEGA SOUZA CYIL 11 (2020) boundaries. Hurrel and Kingsbury still add other elements, pointing out that global environmental problems are ‘typically characterized by high levels of uncertainty in which the definition and boundaries of the “problem”, the costs of alternative policy responses, and the identity of the actors and their interests are all far from self-evident.’ 35 Certainly, in order to obtain expressive outcomes as well as provide enforcement to these international normative provisions, the state must adapt at the domestic level. The subject is not privily confined to public international law, but also has repercussion in private international law, and even in domestic law, public and private, wherein the efficacy of this domestic environmental norm has been reckoned as a major hindrance to the environmental normative setting process. 36 Nonetheless, it is not enough to simply legislate, once there is a need for a coherent and well-articulated normalization emanating from the very international level. The dramatic profusion of agreements which encompass the multiple environment-related aspects gave rise to a legitimate concern and created a debate among scholars. There already exists a predominance of ‘treaty congestion.’ 37 Not to mention the existence of numerous negotiations, inter se treaties, diversified mechanisms for each specialty, independent secretariats and others. Great is the influence of the subject’s subdivision by virtue of the specialty of the matters concerned, such as aerial, terrestrial, maritime and atomic pollution, which have given way to the fragmentation of the very international environmental law. This debate, even though precocious, simply serves to demonstrate the normative chaos that international environmental law has currently faced. It should be considered, though, that the endless coming out of several documents on international environmental law reveals the solidification of this system which is here recognized as self-contained. In effect, international environmental law […] evolves and grows in response to modern challenges. One of the areas where international law is developing is in the extension of its ambit to individuals, regional communities and the wider civil society. The repetitious references to sustainable development throughout a multitude of international and domestic laws, regulations, conventions and non-binding documents is evidence of its general acceptance as a normative concept. 38 It is necessary, however, to perform a more thorough analysis of the contributions of international environmental law and their relation to their own normative institutes (legal and principle-based), not to mention their contribution for a change in the environmental agenda and, in a more decisive manner, for the conservation of the environment in the international community.

35 Hurrel and Kingsbury (n 2) 13. 36 Sand (n 27) 30. 37 Edith Brown Weiss’ expression. LEARY, David and PISUPATI, Balakrishna (eds.) The Future of International Environmental Law (United Nations University 2010) 7. 38 VOIGT, Christina , Sustainable Development as a Principle of International Law: Resolving Conflicts Between Climate Measures and WTO Law (Brill 2009) 145-146.

170