1 - Introduction
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 September 2025
Summary
The Introduction sets out the research question of the book viz: the question of whether future generations ought to be represented in the global legal order and institutions to address the climate change challenge and, assuming a positive answer to this, how best such representation should occur. The massive bias against the interests of future generations in current climate law and policy-making is demonstrated. This provides a powerful rationale as to why there is an urgent need to explore proxy-style mechanisms to represent future generations. The pragmatist methodology (in the tradition of John Dewey) of the book is explained. This involves analysing existing practices, and values which are incorporated into these values, and extending them to deal with new problems. The legal realism methodology of the book is also explained, including its application to the sources of international law. The strong links between the book and Earth System Governance scholarship are set out; finally, the structure of the book is explained.
Information
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Representing Future GenerationsClimate Change and the Global Legal Order, pp. 1 - 20Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2025
References
Angstadt, M. & Betsill, M. (2021). Non-state Actors. In Rajamani, L. & Peel, J., eds., Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 666–83.Google Scholar
Barry, B. M. (1977). Justice between Generations. In Hacker, P. & Raz, J., eds., Law, Morality, and Society. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 268–84.Google Scholar
Biermann, F., & Kalfagianni, A. (2020). Planetary Justice: A Research Framework. Earth System Governance, 6, 100049.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bodansky, D. (2015). Legal Realism and Its Discontents. Leiden Journal of International Law, 28, 267–81.Google Scholar
Bodansky, D., & van Asselt, H. (2024). The Art and Craft of International Environmental Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bray, D. (2009). Pragmatic Cosmopolitanism: A Deweyan Approach to Democracy beyond the Nation-State. Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 37(2), 683–719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buchanan, A. (2004). Justice, Legitimacy, and Self-Determination: Moral Foundations for International Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Capra, F., & Mattei, U. (2015). The Ecology of Law: Toward a Legal System in Tune with Nature and Community, Oakland, CA: Berrett-Koehler.Google Scholar
Cochran, M., ed. (2010). The Cambridge Companion to Dewey, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cotterrell, R. (2012). What Is Transnational Law? Law and Social Inquiry, 37(2), 500–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cotterrell, R. (2016). Authority in Transnational Legal Theory. Theorising across Disciplines, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Couvreur, P. (2012). Upholding the Rule of Law at the International Level: The Role of the International Court of Justice, UN Chronicle (31 December 2012). Available at: www.un.org/en/chronicle/article/upholding-rule-law-international-level-role-international-court-justiceCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Day, R. (2024). Coming Soon A UN Envoy for Future Generations, United Nations University (October 9, 2024). Available at: https://unu.edu/cpr/blog-post/coming-soon-un-envoy-future-generations.Google Scholar
Dewey, J. (1986). Logic: The Theory of Inquiry, Carbondale: South Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
Dewey, J. (2005). Democracy and Education. An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education, New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Dingwerth, K. (2014). Global Democracy and the Democratic Minimum: Why a Procedural Account Alone is Insufficient. European Journal of International Relations, 20(4), 1124–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drysek, J. (2021). The Politics of the Earth, 4th ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/hepl/9780198851745.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Etty, T., Heyvaert, V., Carlarne, C., et al. (2017). The Maturing of Transnational Environmental Law. Transnational Environmental Law, 6(2), 193–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Etty, T., Heyvaert, V., Carlarne, C., et al. (2018). Transnational Climate Law. Transnational Environmental Law, 7(2), 191–200. doi:10.1017/S2047102518000183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Festenstein, M. (2008). John Dewey: Inquiry, Ethics, and Democracy. In Misak, C., ed., The Oxford Handbook of American Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 87–109.Google Scholar
Festl, M. G. (2021). John Dewey. In Festl, M. G., ed., Handbuch Liberalismus. Berlin: J.B. Metzler, 99–106.10.1007/978-3-476-05798-3_13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franck, T. M. (1995). Fairness in International Law and Institutions, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gonzalez-Ricoy, I. & Rey, F. (2019). Enfranchising the Future: Climate Justice and the Representation of Future Generations. WIREs Climate Change, 10(4), e598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, J. (2008). Pragmatism and Social Hope: Deepening Democracy in Global Contexts, New York: Columbia University Press.10.7312/gree14458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hart, H. M., Sacks, A., Eskridge, W. N. & Frickey, P. P. (1994). The Legal Process: Basic Problems in the Making and Application of Law, New York: Foundation Press.Google Scholar
Heilinger, J.-C. (2020). Cosmopolitan Responsibility: Global Injustice, Relational Equality, and Individual Agency, Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Heyvaert, V. (2017). The Transnationalisation of Law: Rethinking Law through Transnational Environmental Regulation. Transnational Environmental Law, 6(2), 205–36.Google Scholar
Humphreys, S. (2023). Against Future Generations. The European Journal of International Law, 33(4), 1061–92.Google Scholar
Inter-American Court of Human Rights. (2017). Advisory Opinion on ‘The Environment and Human Rights’, Advisory Opinion OC-23/17 (15 November 2017).Google Scholar
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). (2023). Summary for Policymakers. Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, H. Lee and J. Romero (eds.)], Geneva: IPCC, 1–34.Google Scholar
Karlsson-Vinkhuyzen, S. I. & Vihma, A. (2009). Comparing the Legitimacy and Effectiveness of Global Hard and Soft Law: An Analytical Framework. Regulation & Governance, 3(4), 400–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koskenniemi, M. (2005). From Apology to Utopia, the Structure of International Legal Argument, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kotzé, L. J., Holley, C. & Kim, R. E., et al. (2022). Earth System Law: Exploring New Frontiers in Legal Science. Earth System Governance, 11(3), 100126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuyper, J. W. & Bäckstrand, K. (2016). Accountability and Representation: Nonstate Actors in UN Climate Diplomacy. Global Environmental Politics, 16(2), 61–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuyper, J. W., Linnér, B.-O. & Schroeder, H. (2018). Nonstate Actors in Hybrid Global Climate Governance: Justice, Legitimacy, and Effectiveness in a Post-Paris Era. WIREs Climate Change, 9(1), e497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lade, S. J., Steffen, W. & de Vries, W. et al. (2020). Human Impacts on Planetary Boundaries Amplified by Earth System Interactions. Nature Sustainability, 3, 119–28.Google Scholar
Lamalle, S. & Stoett, L. (2023). Representations and Rights of the Environment, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawrence, P. (2014). Justice for Future Generations: Climate Change and International Law, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Lawrence, P. (2021). Justifying Institutions for Future Generations Based on the Mitigation of Bias and Intergenerational Justice. In Linehan, J. & Lawrence, P., eds., Giving Future Generations A Voice: Normative Frameworks, Institutions and Practice. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 21–41.Google Scholar
Lawrence, P. (2022). Justifying Representation of Future Generations and Nature: Contradictory or Mutually Supporting Values? Transnational Environmental Law, 11, 553–79.Google Scholar
Lawrence, P. (2023). International Law Must Respond to the Reality of Future Generations: A Reply to Stephen Humphreys. European Journal of International Law, 34(3), 669–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawrence, P. & Köhler, L. (2017). Representation of Future Generations through International Climate Litigation: A Normative Framework. German Yearbook of International Law, 60, 639–66.Google Scholar
McGee, J. & Steffek, J. (2016). The Copenhagen Turn in Global Climate Governance and the Contentious History of Differentiation in International Law. Journal of Environmental Law, 28, 37–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meier, S. (2017). The Influence of Utopian Projects on the Interpretation of International Law and the Healthy Myth of Objectivity. German Yearbook of International Law, 60, 515–38.Google Scholar
O’Connell, M. E. & White, S. (2019). Transnational Legal Process and International Adjudication. Max Planck Encyclopaedia of International Law, https://opil.ouplaw.com/display/10.1093/law-mpeipro/e3276.013.3276/law-mpeipro-e3276Google Scholar
Ratner, S. R. (2015). The Thin Justice of International Law: A Moral Reckoning of the Law of Nations, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaffer, G. (2015). International Legal Theory, International Law and Its Methodology: The New Legal Realist Approach to International Law. Leiden Journal of International Law, 28, 189–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaffer, G. (2022). Legal Realism and International Law. In Dundoff, J. L. & Pollock, M. A., eds., International Legal Theory: Foundations and Frontiers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 82–100.Google Scholar
Stevenson, H. & Drysek, J. (2014). Democratising Global Governance, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Stoddard, I., Anderson, K., Capstick, S. et al. (2021). Three Decades of Climate Mitigation: Why Haven’t We Bent the Global Emissions Curve? Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 46(1), 653–89.Google Scholar
UN Environment. (2019). Global Environment Outlook – GEO-6: Healthy Planet, Healthy People, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
United Nations. (2024). Summit of the Future, Our Common Agenda. Available at: www.un.org/en/summit-of-the-future/pact-for-the-future.Google Scholar
United Nations General Assembly. (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Resolution adopted by the UN General Assembly, UN Doc. A/RES/217 (III).Google Scholar
United Nations General Assembly. (2022a). Modalities for the Summit of the Future. Resolution adopted by the UN General Assembly, UN Doc. A/RES/76/307.Google Scholar
United Nations General Assembly. (2022b). The Human Right to a Clean, Healthy and Sustainable Environment. Resolution adopted by the UN General Assembly, UN Doc. United Nations Secretary-General.Google Scholar
United Nations General Assembly. (2023). Request for An Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice on the Obligations of States in Respect of Climate Change. Resolution adopted by the UN General Assembly, UN Doc. A/77/L. 58.Google Scholar
United Nations Secretary-General. (2021a). Secretary-General’s Report, Our Common Agenda.Google Scholar
United Nations Secretary-General. (2021b). Secretary-General’s Address to the 76th Session of the UN General Assembly. Available at www.un.org/sg/en/node/259283.Google Scholar
United Nations Secretary-General. (2022). At ‘Our Common Agenda’ Talks, Secretary-General Says Summits on Future, Sustainable Development Goals ‘Last, Best Chance’ to Manage, Solve Global Challenges Press Release, SG/SM/21399 (4 August 2022).Google Scholar
Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT) (1969) (adopted 23 May 1969; entered into force on 27 January 1980) 1155 UNTS 331.Google Scholar
Accessibility standard: Unknown
Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this book is currently unknown
and may be updated in the future.