자연의 권리
Nature’s Rights
0
조회
0
다운로드
19
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Christopher D. Stone teaches law at University of Southern California in Los Angeles. The publication of “Should Trees Have Standing?” in 1972 was an important influence on the development of the field of environmental ethics. Stone is author of Earth and Other Ethics. Stone proposes giving legal rights to natural objects. While such an extension of rights may seem unthinkable, he points out that such extensions have always seemed unthinkable before they occurred, and that there are currently a number of inanimate legal persons, such as railroads and corporations. Stone summarizes what it means for something to have legal standing and how natural objects currently do not possess legal standing. He proposes an extension of the legal guardianship model for legal incompetents, and explains some of the advantages of such a strategy. Can an animal or a plant raise a lawsuit to a court? Environmental law is the regulation that was established in order to protect the public interest, that is the profit of mankind, the Earth, an ecosystem, etc. However, the current lawsuit system is the system that was prepared in order to protect personal profit. Therefore, I think that an existing lawsuit system cannot contribute to the realization for the purpose that environmental law aims at. So I insist that an existing lawsuit system should be revised in order to realize the purpose of an environmental law effectively. This paper is composed as follows. 1. Introduction 2. Historical Development of the Theory of Nature’s Rights 3. Case Study on Nature’s Right Litigation in Several States 4. The Possibility of Nature’s Right Litigation 5. Conclusion
Abstract
Christopher D. Stone teaches law at University of Southern California in Los Angeles. The publication of “Should Trees Have Standing?” in 1972 was an important influence on the development of the field of environmental ethics. Stone is author of Earth and Other Ethics. Stone proposes giving legal rights to natural objects. While such an extension of rights may seem unthinkable, he points out that such extensions have always seemed unthinkable before they occurred, and that there are currently a number of inanimate legal persons, such as railroads and corporations. Stone summarizes what it means for something to have legal standing and how natural objects currently do not possess legal standing. He proposes an extension of the legal guardianship model for legal incompetents, and explains some of the advantages of such a strategy. Can an animal or a plant raise a lawsuit to a court? Environmental law is the regulation that was established in order to protect the public interest, that is the profit of mankind, the Earth, an ecosystem, etc. However, the current lawsuit system is the system that was prepared in order to protect personal profit. Therefore, I think that an existing lawsuit system cannot contribute to the realization for the purpose that environmental law aims at. So I insist that an existing lawsuit system should be revised in order to realize the purpose of an environmental law effectively. This paper is composed as follows. 1. Introduction 2. Historical Development of the Theory of Nature’s Rights 3. Case Study on Nature’s Right Litigation in Several States 4. The Possibility of Nature’s Right Litigation 5. Conclusion
참고문헌 (38)
- 강재규, "자연보호소송", 부산법조논집 2007 제2호, ~ (2007)
- 강재규, "생태주의 환경법" (2002), 세종출판사
- 강재규, "미국환경법과 법원" (1998), 세종출판사
- 강재규, "자연을 위한 환경법인가", 작은 것이 아름답다(2004. 1, 녹색연합), ~ (2004)
- 강재규, "자연과 인간의 공생을 위한 환경사상" (2001), 지산
- 알도 레오폴드, "모래땅의 사계" (1999), 도서출판 푸른 숲
- 이상돈, "환경정책기본법" (1985), 아세아문화사
- 천병태, "미국행정법" (1992), 부산대학교출판부
- 허범, "법정에 선 나무들" (2003), 아르케
- 홍성방, "환경보호의 법적 문제" (1999), 서강대학교 출판부
- 홍준형, "'자연의 권리’ 소송은 가능한가?", 대한변협신문, ~ (2004)
- 岡島成行, "アメリカの自然保護運動", 岩波新書, ~
- 關根孝道, "日米“種の保存法”の比較法的考察", 環境法學の生成と未來 信山社, ~ (1999)
- 鬼頭秀一, "自然保護を問いなおす" (1996), ちくま新書
- 籠橋隆明, "“自然の權利” 訴訟と市民の權利", 公害環境法理論の新たな展開 日本評論社, ~ (1997)
- 北村喜宣, "公害ㆍ環境の行政判例-戰後の步みと展望", ジュリスト제1015호, ~ (1993)
- 山田隆夫, "奄美自然の權利訴訟の提起するもの", 自由と正義, 49(10) (1998)
- 山村恒年, "環境法入門", pp.44~ (1999), 昭和堂
- 山村恒年, "公害ㆍ環境判例百選" (1994), 有斐閣
- 山村恒年, "環境保護の法と政策" (1996), 信山社
- 森島明譯, "野生のうたが聞こえる", 森林書房
- 阿部泰隆, "國土開發と環境保全" (1989), 日本評論社
- 硏究會, "公害ㆍ環境判例の軌跡と展望", ジュリスト제1015호, ~ (1993)
- ?山武道, "自然保護の訴訟", 公害環境法理論の新たな展開 日本評論社, ~ (1997)
- ?山武道, "環境行政判例の總合的硏究", 北海道大學圖書刊行會, ~ (1995)
- 芝池義一, "公共事業と行政訴訟 - 處分性と原告適格", ジュリスト제925호, ~ (1989)
- 芝池義一, "環境法의 性格", 自治硏究, 1(3) (1991), 한국지방자치연구소
- 志村富壽, "運命の風景-日光があぶない" (1983), 日本經濟評論社
- Carolyn Merchant, "Radical Ecology : The Search for a Livable World" (2001), 이후
- J. R. DesJardins, "Environmental Ethics : An Introduction to Environmental Philosophy" (1999), 자작나무
- John Passmore, "Man’s Responsibility for Nature", G. Duckworth & Co. Ltd, ~ (1974)
- R. F. Nash, "The Rights of Nature : A History of Environmental Ethics", ~ (1993)
- Zygmunt J. B. Plater, "Enviromental Law and Policy : a Coursebook on Nature, Law, and Society", West Pub. Co., ~ (1992)
- Cass R. Sunstein, "What’s Standing After Lujan? of Citizen Suits, “Injuries,” and Article Ⅲ, 91 Mich. L. Rev.", ~ (1992)
- Harold J. Krent, "Ethan G. Shenkman, Of Citizen Suits Sunstein, 91 Michi. L. Rev. 1773, 1793-1823", 1793~1823
- . S. Shrader-Frechette, "Environmental Ethics" (1991), The Boxwood Press
- John Passmore, "Man’s Responsibility for Nature", G. Duckworth & Co. Ltd, ~ (1974)
- Roderick F. Nash, "The Rights of Nature" (1989), The University of Wisconsin Press