Literature Review

n/a

Intellectual property rights (IPR) protection is an important incentive for green innovation and carbon reduction. A better understanding of the effect of IPR protection on carbon emissions (CEs) remains vital to carbon neutrality in China. An evolutionary game model was constructed to depict the multidimensional theoretical channels from IPR protection to CEs. Drawing from 284 Chinese cities’ data (2003–2019), this paper empirically identified the reduction effect of intellectual property city (IPC) construction on CEs with difference-in-differences (DID) method. IPC construction reduced the cities’ CEs by 10.34%. It curbed CEs by promoting green technology and reducing energy consumption but failed to optimize industrial structures. The instrumental variable (IV) constructed by the number of Confucius temples also reveals that the construction of IPC can significantly curb CEs. This effect shows an increasing trend over time. However, it also carries heterogeneity, presenting significantly negative coefficients in eastern (−0.0976) and western (−0.2554), resource-poor (−0.1303), highly marketable (−0.943), and environmentally friendly cities (−0.0786), but insignificant effects in other cities. For enabling China to meet its carbon-neutrality target, several improvements are needed. These include the implementation of differentiated IPR protection, strengthened supervision, and enhanced optimization of the basic green environment.

One of the most pressing issues of present times is climate change. With over 55% of the world population living in cities, the question is particularly relevant for urban settlements, and how to consolidate environmental justice in such scenarios. How shall the rule of law approach the matter? It will depend on each place's specific environmental, social and cultural elements, keeping in mind the most needed safeguard of fundamental rights. One of those is property. How does property, underpinning land use and urban planning law, relate to such challenges? This chapter aims to provide an introductory theoretical overview of real (land-related) property and climate change. (Henceforth, by “property” we will be referring to real property). We argue that the impact of property rights on mitigation and adaptation to climate change can be both positive and negative. These will differ across different property rights and planning law regimes in contending with the challenges of climate change.

In the face of climate crisis, rising inequity, and the ever- expanding commodification of urban space, the urban design discipline is confronted with challenges that often exceed its traditional design methods. State and market action shaped by capitalism continues to produce rising inequity, ecological destruction and imbalances of power in communities around the world.1 Normative urban design methods have focused on shaping urban form through scripting and projecting typo-morphological patterns of built form, choreographing experiences of the public realm, organizing systems of mobility, infrastructure and ecosystems, and regulating the city through policy regimes.2 However, the emergence and maturation of the discipline as response to the expansion and fragmentation of urban form during the late twen- tieth century has operated in parallel to ever intensified commodification of the city. While recent work has brought a renewed focus on ecosystems and sustainability oriented regimes of regulation, the challenges of access, equity and ecological crisis persist. An emergent discourse around urban commoning has identified the capacity of citizen-led resource sharing practices to respond to these challenges in ways that neither the state nor the market alone is able to.3 Processes of commoning create bottom-up transformations of political discourse, patterns of spatial use, management of resources, structures of ownership and value-capture, and the repositioning of productive and reproductive labor.4 This paper explores how normative urban design methods might be reoriented to advance urban commoning projects, learning from goals, practices and patterns of real-world case-studies of urban commoning. It builds on recent literature on urban commoning, and summarizes a range of commoning oriented design approaches selected from five years of student thesis projects.

In the view of most commentators, academic and otherwise, “free market environmentalism” is a veritable contradiction in terms. It is widely thought that to the extent that one favors protecting the environment, or, even, studying it, to that extent one must reject free enterprise and private property rights. The only scholars who wish to save the fauna and flora, ensure that we do not trash the planet, must eschew such right-wing considerations and pretty much embrace the polar opposite viewpoint. In the extreme, free market environmentalism is not only a logical contradiction, it reeks of fascism, profiteering, and destruction of this our third rock from the sun. Shahar does not at all fit this bill. Although a critic of free enterprise environmentalism, he treats this viewpoint sympathetically. He does not give it the back of his hand in derision. You will look in vain for contempt in his rejection of this philosophy. Rather, his critique is a careful, cautious, knowledgeable treatment of this perspective. All the more reason that his criticisms be examined critically, since in my view, the best last chance of saving the environment lies in exactly the direction opposite to the one he avers.

Applying the classical theory of ‘Doctrine of Public Trust’ – that is natural resources either owned by no one (res mullions) or by everyone in common (res communions) is to understand the sovereignty of resources. The nature of ‘the State or the central government or the Federal state property’ concerning the ownership, extension or to occupy natural resources as a frontier is vested in the capital interest as per the authority or investors’ high-ticket value or an asset; Natural Resources recognition and stakeholders’ possession over these, while availing the right to property is mostly controversial in the periphery of national jurisdiction. Category of citizens decide the value and price of the property rights of the environmental resources. Supporting the recognition of some forms of community property rights depends upon the charges of value and profits over natural resources. The invested price is bargained to extract, explore, and exploit the sources of nature that are available as organic and inorganic, as renewable, and non- renewable, as bio-gradable and bio-degradable. The investment in harnessing all sorts of energies that are strategically a value ladder of advancement of human existence and civilization based on the natural elements of stratosphere and atmosphere. The connection between property rights and natural resources is not just coercion of the maximum by way of investment, but it is also a matter of law and rights as the most common of the commonest depends upon the charged position of high tickets that make money from natural resources as investors by way of return stocks. In the pretext of investment law, most of the low-ticket entities such as commoners’ privacy and dependency both get at stake, because natural resources as value ladders are treated as private property by private entities. In view of this present scenario of the environmental aspirations and mismanagement, the accountability and liability are at risk to pay back security, safety, and protection not only to the local, indigenous, landless, rural and the most affected ones, but also to maintain the habitat of natural experience with environmental justice and protection.

In contemporary parlance, the environment and its preservation have emerged as a principal focus and concern for the global populace. This phenomenon is known to escalate during times of armed conflict. Armed conflicts directly impact the environment (such as destroying natural resources or pollution resulting from military operations). The investigation into the ecological destruction inflicted upon the natural world during the two world wars demonstrates that the emphasis on safeguarding the environment is no longer a theoretical notion but a concrete actuality encapsulated within the framework of legal doctrines. The protection of the environment encompasses a diverse array of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and International Criminal Law (ICL). This study scrutinized the safeguards and preservation of environmental rights in times of armed conflicts, whether domestic or international, through the lenses of ICL and IHL.

New fossil fuel developments are inconsistent with keeping global warming below 1.5 °C, and while most climate policies focus on reducing demand for fossil fuels, an emerging transversal consensus promotes efforts to simultaneously reduce supply. In this article, we discuss the obstacles to effective supply-side climate policies posed by international investment treaties that protect corporations against state interventions through investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS). We focus on two recently concluded ISDS cases (Rockhopper v Italy and Lone Pine v Canada) that concern prohibitions on fossil fuel development in ecologically sensitive areas. Italy was ordered to pay a British firm approximately € 250 million in compensation for a ban on offshore oil developments along the coastline, whereas Canada successfully defended Québec’s ban on gas development in the St. Lawrence River. Arbitrators in both cases reasoned that investors should be compensated when oil and gas exploration permits are revoked (even if such a remedy is not available under domestic law) and expressed antipathy towards civic engagement in the policy process. As companies can seek lost future profits through ISDS, these cases show that the system can engender material costs for states enacting supply-side policies. The threat of ISDS can generate a chilling effect, limiting the potential for supply-side initiatives, particularly in the Global South. Initiators of global efforts to limit further fossil fuel developments must consider the obstacles posed by international investment treaties, support efforts to abolish ISDS, and as an interim measure, promote the interpretation of treaty protections in line with climate objectives.

This study investigates how forestland property rights, established under the Chinese Collective Forest Tenure Reform (CFTR) from 2003, were affected by the emergence of the “Ecological Civilization” discourse in the 2010s. It does so through the lens of environmental justice. Case studies were conducted in four counties in Fujian and Yunnan provinces. The results show outright injustice in the Fujian cases which originate from the government's authoritarian approach to Ecological Civilization, including severe restrictions on timber harvest, lack of recognition of decentralized forestland property rights, and only limited compensation for people affected. Those who heavily invested in forestry activities encountered the most unjust treatment. Meanwhile, despite a similar authoritarian policy in Yunnan, injustice in these cases were less salient because restrictions on timber harvest (for the sake of conserving natural forests) already existed there before the introduction of CFTR, thus deterring private actors from investing in forestry. The results highlight the necessity of upholding justice of distribution, participation, and recognition for all engaged actors, particularly when environmental conservation is prioritized and needs to be sustained.

In Ethiopia, resettlement schemes have been widely implemented in response to famine and food insecurity. Since 2003, planned resettlement initiatives have been carried out, considering farm households’ willingness as a pivotal factor. To enhance the attractiveness of the resettlement program, the Amhara regional state attempted to offer resettlers dual landholding rights. These rights encompassed perpetual landholding in the new settlement and a three-year guarantee against losing their landholdings in the old settlement if they chose to leave due to discomfort. This study aimed to address conceptual and empirical gaps in understanding the relationship between the resettlement process, land rights/tenure, and changes in land use and land cover (LULC) within this new approach. The goal was to provide policy directions. Employing a socio-spatial research methodology, data was generated using GIS techniques, questionnaires, and focus group discussions. The study found that unrestricted encroachment into woodlands and grazing lands has led to severe LULC changes in the study area. The land use land cover change analysis between 2003 and 2016 indicated that the forest cover and bushland decreased by 3,879.18 ha and 2,810.16 ha respectively, and conversely farmland has increased by 5,814.09 ha. Furthermore, due to the absence of clear property rights definitions and the provision of dual land rights, many resettlers opted to maximize benefits from both land possessions rather than establishing a settled life in the new settlement area. Despite the innovative nature of the resettlement program with its focus on providing dual land rights to relieve pressure in degraded highlands and transform livelihoods in more productive lowland areas, the initiative faced challenges in controlling land rights and management issues in both the old and new resettlement areas. Observations in these areas contradicted the presumption of the new resettlement policy, aiming to bolster farmers' livelihood security and environmental protection. This study underscores the intricate and multi-dimensional nature of the relationship between resettlement, land rights/tenure, and LULC changes in Ethiopia. To ensure the success of innovative resettlement programs, robust institutions supported by policy frameworks that comprehensively consider social, economic, political, and technical elements impacting resettlement are imperative. The study also recommends the implementation of a consolidated land governance system from the outset, complemented by a strong monitoring and evaluation system, to effectively address resettlers' land rights and obligations, thereby improved livelihoods and efficient land use and management could be advanced in the settlement areas.

Considering the global issues of resource depletion and climate change, the need for sustainable development is more significant than ever. This study focuses on China and examines the complex dynamics of green growth and natural resourceexploitation through the prism of intellectual property conflicts and prospects to strike a balance between sustainable development and economic growth from 2000 to 2020. Advanced econometric techniques are essential to this research, such as the Cross-sectional Augmented Dickey-Fuller (CADF) test, the Cross-sectional Im, Pesaran, and Shin (CIPS) test, and the Cross-sectionally Augmented Distributed Lag (CS-ARDL) model. The study clarifies how important it is for intellectual property rights to spur innovation in environmentally friendly resource extraction techniques. It also evaluates the impact of taxes on the energy sector on China's energy transition rate, weighing the need for economic growth against environmental protection. This study thoroughly explains the opportunities and challenges related to intellectual property in green growth. It also offers important insights and strategies for academics, industry stakeholders, and policymakers who navigate the intricate landscape of sustainable resource exploitation.

Land stands as a fundamental aspect of human existence, serving as a cornerstone for meeting diverse needs and holding considerable economic significance. Its limited capacity often becomes a trigger for societal conflicts, spanning both vertical and horizontal dimensions. A well-crafted land policy holds the potential to foster community prosperity and ensure environmental sustainability. However, the imposition of state-driven evictions often leads to agrarian conflicts, undermining customary rights. This study examines the intricate relationship between land and humanity through the lenses of legal philosophy and the concept of land property rights within legal culture. Employing a formative juridical research approach, the authors aim to uncover a comprehensive human understanding rooted in philosophical perspectives, legal theory, dogmatic legal norms, and legal culture. From a philosophical standpoint, land represents a space where the spiritual connection between humans and their divine entities takes form. Furthermore, within the realm of legal culture, land is perceived as an integral part of the human essence, symbolizing the place of birth, growth, mortality, and final resting.