Magister Legum - LLM / The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa ‘despite being one of the world’s most liberal constitutions, South Africans still have no transparent and participatory mechanisms for deciding democratically on the uptake of new technologies or development projects, even those which impact on millions of lives and livelihoods. There are limited opportunities for intervention in very circumscribed public participation processes, which are often derisory in the sharing of any sovereignty with citizens in the name of producing better public policy. When citizens are left out of debates confined to government and the business community, the only means of influencing policy is to petition, protest, or litigate, usually after the horse has bolted.’ Public participation is a very delicate issue in South Africa due to the history of the exclusion of certain people from the process of governance. When governments and business sectors make decisions about land development and natural resources, they certainly impact on the health, livelihoods and quality of life of local communities.

Is it possible to achieve ecological sustainability with our current democratic system? This question constitutes the democracy-environment nexus which has been a core theme in both the public debate as well as in research ever since the climate issue gained status of being a social problem in the 1970s. We are constantly presented with increasingly alarming science about the consequences of global warming. Yet, the coordinated political responses for effective measures against such consequences, are still missing. The question therefore remains highly relevant. One actor in society that certainly raises frustration about the neglected climate change responses, are the social movements. With a new wave of climate movements, we have seen key figures like Greta Thunberg take a seat at the tables during UN Climate summits. Fridays for Future among many other climate movements are criticizing the current democratic system’s lack of effective environmental policies. It is important to analyze their critique to understand if we need to change the current democratic system in order to tackle climate change. This paper aims to make a contribution to this debate by analyzing statements made by the new Swedish climate movement Återställ Våtmarker. For my analysis I use an analytical chart of the ideal types “ecological democracy” and “environmental democracy”, constructed by Jonathan Pickering, Karin Bäckstrand and David Schlosberg. These ideal types are used as a systematic concept of the democracy-environment nexus. The statements are found in my in-depth interview with one of the organization’s press contacts, on their website as well as in media. By categorizing the statements as either ecological democratic or environmental democratic I intend to conclude whether Återställ Våtmarker has an idea of democracy that poses systemic criticism towards our current system. The findings of this study support that Återställ Våtmarker’s view of democracy has more tendencies towards ecological democracy. In this paper, I have therefore found empirical evidence suggesting that Återställ Våtmarker pose systemic criticism towards our current democratic system.

ForumCiv is an international development organization working to create a just and sustainable world where all people have the power to effect change. Through this online action research, a novel method to engage with for Environmental Justice (EJ) was introduced to ForumCiv.   A first iteration of the novel online methodology known as the Environmental Rights Toolkit (ERT) was carried out.  As action research, this project is concerned with theory and practice, understanding and change. The aim is to produce knowledge informing ForumCiv how to unpack EJ. The online method embraces a participatory paradigm, which is rights-based and equipped with the content from the three pillars of environmental democracy. Throughout this action research, the connection between key aspects of environmental democracy and environmental justice was outlined.  The results indicate a connection between environmental democracy and environmental justice.  Environmental democracy facilitates EJ in its different forms. EJ can be perceived as distributive environmental justice, procedural environmental justice, and environmental justice as recognition. These different forms are highly interrelated, therefore acting for one supports the realization of the other. Similarly, the decline of one lead to the decline of the others.  Engaging with the access rights can serve to modify power dynamics in certain contexts facilitating the fulfilment of one or more aspects of EJ. The insights from this action research can be seen under two perspectives, theory, and practice. The practice is supported by theory. A novel practice was introduced to ForumCiv and at the same time, this practice comes together with  visions from EJ. To further mainstream EJ in the work of the organization it is necessary that some key areas further integrate the conceptualizations made.

The focus of this master thesis is the concept of environmental democracy at the level of the Aarhus convention. Environmental democracy rights which are the rights to access to information, public participation in decision-making and access to justice in environmental matters were mentioned for the first time at the global level in Principle 10 of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development in 1992. With this Principle the main role of public participation in decision-making in environmental matters was acknowledged and it had a significant impact on fulfillment of sustainable development goals. To these days the most important elaboration of Principle 10 in international law is Aarhus Convention signed within the framework of United Nations Economic Commission for Europe in 1998. Main research question of this thesis is if it is possible to measure environmental democracy on the level of the region of UNECE, so the implementation of the Aarhus Convention provisions by its member states. Therefore, the research problem is the creation of the theoretical framework and the methodological procedure for building of composite indicator which will measure environmental democracy rights at the level of Aarhus convention. That will be demonstrated on the first pillar of the Convention. This thesis...

Notion faisant l’objet de nombreuses occurrences dans les textes des différents ordres juridiques, le développement durable est difficilement saisissable en droit. Son sens même est hétérogène. D’une part, ce terme peut se référer à la recherche d’une finalité de solidarité mettant l’accent sur les droits des générations futures, et par conséquent, sur la protection de l’environnement en tant que patrimoine commun. D’autre part, le développement durable est aussi défini comme un objectif de conciliation dans le cadre duquel l’exigence environnementale doit s’articuler avec d’autres piliers relatifs au développement économique et au progrès social. Le droit résultant de l’organisation institutionnelle territoriale n’échappe pas au problème de l’appréhension et de la définition de cette notion à contenu variable, qu’il s’agisse de l’encadrement l’action administrative, ou de la réforme des collectivités et de leurs groupements.Pour autant, le développement durable est incontestablement en voie de consolidation juridique, tant sur le plan de sa finalité que sur le plan de la méthode pour y parvenir. À ce propos, on peut relever le renforcement du principe de responsabilité environnementale ou l’émergence d’un principe de non-régression de la protection de l’environnement.Les différents principes relatifs au développement durable ont une influence certaine sur le fonctionnement même des collectivités territoriales. La démocratie environnementale est significative d’une certaine autonomisation juridique de la démocratie par rapport au concept classique de la représentation. Réciproquement, les mutations relatives à la recompositionterritoriale posent la question de leurs influences sur les politiques publiques promouvant cette notion-clé de la Charte de l’environnement. / Despite its numerous uses in many juridical orders : sustainable development has differents meanings. On one hand, it means that the environment needs to be protected in order to guarantee rights of future generations. On the other hand, sustainable development is equally defined as the conciliation between environmental policies, economical development and social progress. Territorial restructuring drafts are confronted at this polysemous concept.In spite of this difficulty, sustainable development is consolidated by french public law in his finality as far as its means. About that, standstill principle and environmental responsability enhance this theory.Other principles contibute to sustainable development realization. Environmental democracy takes an independence compared to the classical reprensentative democracy’s concept. In reciprocity, territorial restructuring keeps an influence on public policies about this constitutionnalized notion since the 2005’s Environnemental Carta.