Figure 4 - uploaded by Helle Tegner Anker
Content may be subject to copyright.
Similar publications
Citations
... 209 y ss.) que se dedique exclusivamente a cuestiones medioambientales. Esta opción se ha mostrado factible y se ajustaría a una cultura jurídica que se basa en evitar litigios en la medida de lo posible (Anker y Nilsson, 2010), sobre todo porque el acceso a los tribunales es extremadamente costoso en Noruega. En promedio, los gastos para completar un litigio en primera instancia están alrededor de 10 000 euros (aproximadamente 100 000 coronas noruegas), lo que pone a Noruega en contra- Por otra parte, de acuerdo con una instrucción específica del Gobierno, la comisión de reforma de los tribunales examinó la posibilidad de un mayor grado de especialización en los tribunales para la protección de los intereses de los niños 23 . ...
En contraste con la creciente tendencia mundial de reconocer los derechos de la naturaleza, en los marcos legales noruegos no se les ha dado cabida hasta la fecha. En este artículo, exploramos la falta de reconocimiento de los derechos de la naturaleza en Noruega desde una perspectiva jurídico-cultural, ofrecemos algunas posibles explicaciones al enfoque reticente que han adoptado los legisladores noruegos y discutimos las posibles consecuencias de todo ello para el reconocimiento de estos derechos en el futuro. Dada su fuerte conexión con la gobernanza ambiental indígena alrededor del mundo, examinamos algunos aspectos de los derechos indígenas del pueblo sami y analizamos en qué medida estos podrían servir como base para los derechos de la naturaleza en Noruega. Argumentamos que, debido a su cultura legal, el país podría implementar, con más facilidad, deberes legales hacia la naturaleza —en lugar de derechos de la naturaleza— como una alternativa a y posible predecesor de los derechos como tales. Finalmente, proponemos algunas vías para plantar las semillas de los deberes legales hacia la naturaleza en los marcos jurídicos existentes sin causar una ruptura radical con las estructuras institucionales e intelectuales de la cultura jurídica noruega.
... 71-72. 97 Nylund (2019b and Anker et al. (2009) (2018), see also Sunde (2017). and sanctioned, although this was clearly against the requirements of EU/EEA law. ...
This chapter maps the structure of the Nordic justice systems and explores whether and why one could argue that there is a ‘Nordic’ structure. The aim is also to examine recent changes and to investigate whether these entail a cultural shift in some or all Nordic countries. It examines shifts in the intended functions of the courts; changes in the court structure; and the use of alternative dispute resolution outside courts. It argues that the while the private functions of Nordic courts have been accentuated in recent decades in that courts are increasingly expected to facilitate amicable solutions, while alternative dispute resolution outside courts has also been important. It also discusses how the ideal of the generalist judge has been important in consolidating the Nordic court structure. While most of these changes are congruent across the Nordic countries, and have hence strengthened the Nordic court culture, differences among the countries regarding recourse against administrative decisions are growing. New differences among the Nordic countries have emerged and these do not follow the existing divide between the East-Nordic and the West-Nordic countries.
This article revisits the overlooked field of comparative environmental law. It examines contributions to this field from the late 1960s to 2022, highlighting the methodologies proposed, their shortcomings, the main aspects and angles taken by the literature, and the curious lack of engagement by experts in comparative law proper with environmental law systems. On the basis of a structured examination of the literature, the article extracts four main aims or purposes that may guide this line of research: (i) clarifying the initial system by contrasting it with a foreign system; (ii) using the basic conceptual features of a known system to analyse and understand a foreign unknown system; (iii) evaluating and fine-tuning a system or an aspect thereof; and (iv) extracting analytical categories that can serve to map the entire field or areas of it.
This open access book examines whether a distinctly Nordic procedural or court culture exists and what the hallmarks of that culture are. Do Nordic courts and court proceedings share a distinct set of ideas and values that in combination constitute the core of a regional legal culture? How do Europeanisation, privatisation, diversification and digitisation influence courts and court proceedings in the Nordic countries? The book traces the genesis and formation of Nordic courts and justice systems to provide a richer comprehension of contemporary Nordic legal culture, and an understanding of the relationship between legal cultural stability and change. In answering these questions, the book provides models for conceptualising procedural culture.
Nordic procedural culture has partly developed organically and is partly also the product of deliberate efforts to maintain a certain level of alignment between the Nordic countries. Studying Nordic cooperation enables us to gain a deeper understanding of current regional, European and global harmonisation processes within procedural law.
The influx of supranational European law, increased use of alternative dispute resolution and growth in regulation density that produces a conflict between specialisation and coherence, have tangible impact on the role of courts in a democratic society, the form of court proceedings and court structures. This book examines whether and why some trends exert more tangible, or perhaps simply more perceptible, influence on procedural culture than others.
With only one case decided in climate change matters, Norway’s litigation landscape appears at its inception. Albeit a loss for the promoting NGOs and supportive civil society in terms of the remedies requested, the climate change lawsuit was effective in catalyzing public debate on fossil fuel policies and the role of courts. Yet, the subject matter of the case, a challenge to oil and gas licenses, proved fairly contentious as Norway’s economy is largely reliant on fossil fuel extraction. Such circumstance allows for an analysis of three clusters of climate change claims that individuals are in the position to lodge with Norwegian courts, against either public bodies or private actors, in either mitigation or adaptation matters. Notwithstanding some shortcomings, it appears that individuals can seek avenues of involvement in climate change matters through effective litigation. One of the most promising avenues rests with rights-based lawsuits, which would be buttressed by Norway’s constitutional protection of the right to a healthy environment, children’s rights, and the rights of future generations.
Europe still retains large areas which play host to numerous native and free-functioning ecosystems and lack roads, buildings, bridges, cables and other permanent manifestations of modern society. In the past such areas were considered wastelands, whose value lay only in their potential for cultivation and economic exploitation. Today, these wilderness areas are increasingly cherished as places for rest and recreation and as important areas for scientific research, biodiversity conservation and the mitigation of and adaptation to certain climate change effects. This book provides the first major appraisal of the role of international, European and domestic law in protecting the remaining wilderness areas and their distinguishing qualities in Europe. It also highlights the lessons that can be learned from the various international, regional and national approaches, identifies obstacles to wilderness protection in Europe and considers whether and how the legal protection of wilderness can be further advanced.
