The IACL Roundtable on “Environment, Climate Change and Constitutionalism”: Summary and Outcomes

Susanna Mancini & Selin Esen

University of Bologna & University of Ankara

It is common wisdom that climate change has turned into a global crisis. Its impact can be perceived in virtually every human field, including law. It raises the question: to what extent are existing legal instruments and concepts effective in combating the effects of climate change? On the 50th Anniversary of the Stockholm Conference, that represents the first international attempt to address the challenges to preserve and enhance the human environment, the IACL held a roundtable on “Environment, Climate Change and Constitutionalism” on 21-22 October 2022 in Ankara, Turkey. Experts on constitutional law and environmental law from different parts of the world discussed the issue from various perspectives. Below, we summarize the main topics dealt with at the Roundtable and we list a series of issues that we feel should be discussed in detail in future IACL events.

 Mr. Erinç Sağkan, President of the Union of Turkish Bar Associations, called attention in his opening speech to the “climate genocide” that we are faced with today and noted that rule of law, rights and freedoms, social justice, democracy and democratic mechanisms are the most important tools in hand in the fight against the climate crisis. Professor İbrahim Kaboğlu noted that in the past decades the world has witnessed the increasing constitutionalization of environmental rights, the proliferation of legislation and court engagement in this field, both domestically and internationally. In other words, legal action has become central in environmental protection. However, even though environmental rights are recognized by many constitutions and international human rights documents, environmental outcomes fall short. Indeed, one of the most important shortcomings is the absence of standards in constitutional and human rights law to combat the climate crisis and environmental issues.

Many speakers pointed out that conventional public law falls short of meeting the problems and necessities resulting from the environmental crisis. Moreover, global climate change and other environmental issues illustrate that the traditional human-oriented rights approach needs to be revisited. Specific difficulties arise from the structural transnational and inter-generational dimensions of climate related harm, which raise issues of extraterritoriality and ratione temporis. Unsurprisingly, many speakers showcased how courts often adjudicate climate cases indirectly, on grounds such the right to life and privacy. These, however, are not conceptualized to specifically address issues of climate, resulting in problematic enforcement and in difficulties related to remedies.  The same applies to judicial doctrines developed in other fields of law – such as domestic violence – to hold states responsible for their omissions. In sum, while climate policies should be designed to protect, respect, and implement core rights and principles, such as equality, dignity, health, and security, the peculiarities of climate crisis require a different, namely eco-centric, legal approach. In this respect, constitutions – such as those of Bolivia, New Zealand and Venezuela – which have integrated indigenous conceptualizations of the rights to nature, are increasingly regarded as promising alternative approaches to traditional Western-centric models. 

Another issue that emerged during the Roundtable was the disparate impact of climate change-related harm.  While climate change obviously impacts all people’s health, it disproportionately hurts the most vulnerable groups and individuals, such as indigenous people, who depend on biodiversity, ethnic minorities, and low-income populations, who often live close to industrial facilities, and in neighborhoods that are more prone to natural disasters. As pointed out by numerous speakers, this has profound democratic implications, in that groups, such as indigenous peoples, who are dependent on local biodiversity and ecosystems should be granted the right to be consulted and involved in decision-making procedures that affect the environment. 

Moreover, the destruction of the environment, and climate crisis resulting from this destruction, often negatively affect poorer countries globally. In other words, climate crisis and other environmental challenges raise issues of equality and justice both domestically and transnationally. Those least responsible for climate change often face the effects of the climate crisis the most. Climate justice thus has an important place in the discussions about the relationship between environmental protection and human rights, the protection of the rights of the most affected groups, and the fair and equitable distribution of climate change-related damages.

The Ankara Roundtable showcased how climate change is a multifaceted issue. In our two days discussions, it was not possible to discuss every aspect of this matter. 

The aforementioned issues of discrimination and vulnerabilities would greatly benefit from a future in-depth discussion, while the relationship between the climate crisis and democratic mechanisms was not sufficiently covered in this conference.

Additionally, the relationship between climate crisis and sustainable development needs to be closely analyzed. The state’s economic growth and development policies have a great part in the emergence and deepening of the environmental crisis. In this context, understandings of "just transition" based on a standpoint that environmental and social policies should not contradict, but reinforce each other, is increasingly being expressed in constitutional law, among other fields. 

Issues of mobilization should also be further addressed. While in the conference it emerged how the international community should be aware of the victimization of environmental activists, other issues remain to be discussed. These include the increasing polarization around issues of environmental protection, the spread of fake science by climate change denialists, cultural barriers to environmental mobilization, and the appropriation of environmental protection language and rhetoric by the far-right. 

Ultimately, it is our hope that the Ankara Roundtable will constitute the starting point for a growing discussion on environmental issues and constitutionalism and that numerous academic events will be dedicated to constitutional responses to climate change and environmental issues in the future. Given the complex and multifaceted nature of climate change implications, we encourage experts in environmental, administrative and international law, as well as scholars who work in the field of urban land use law and policy, to join us in the discussion. 

Susanna Mancini is Full Professor and Chair of Comparative Constitutional Law, School of Law, University of Bologna

Selin Esen is full Professor and Chair of Constitutional law, Faculty of Law,University of  Ankara

Suggested citation: Susanna Mancini and Selin Esen, ‘The IACL Roundtable on “Environment, Climate Change and Constitutionalism”: Summary and Outcomes’ (19 January 2023) https://blog-iacl-aidc.org/2023-posts/2023/1/19/the-iacl-roundtable-on-environment-climate-change-and-constitutionalism-summary-and-outcomes.