Selected articles & reports
Selected contributions to books & journals 2007 – 2011
|SCOTT, J||‘In Legal Limbo: Post-Legislative Guidance as a Challenge for European Administrative Law’ (2011, forthcoming) 48 Common Market Law Review|
|SCOTT, J||‘The Multi-Level Governance of Climate Change’. In: P. Craig and G. de Burca, The Evolution of EU Law (OUP, 2011)|
|PURDY, R||‘The Impact of Satellite Technologies in the International Legal Sector: The Story So Far and Implications For the Future’, in Derecho Espacial, Vol. XVII, Plus Ultra Press, Argentina (forthcoming)|
|HOLDER, J||With Antonia Layard, ’Seeking Spatial and Environmental Justice for People and Places within the EU’ in A. Philippopoulous-Mihalopoulos (ed) Law and Ecology: New Normative Foundations (Routledge, 2011)|
|HOLDER, J||With Antonia Layard, ’Drawing out the Elements of Territorial Cohesion’ in (2011) Yearbook of European Law (forthcoming)|
|LEE, M||‘Hunter v Canary Wharf.’ In: Paul Mitchell and Charles Mitchell, Landmark Cases in the Law of Tort (Hart Publishing, 2010)|
|HOLDER, J||With Antonia Layard, ‘Relating Territorial Cohesion, Solidarity and Spatial Justice’ in M. Ross and Y. Borgmann-Prebil (eds) Promoting Solidarity in the European Union (OUP, 2010)|
|ARMENI, C||‘The Copenhagen Accord and Beyond’, Environmental Law Review 12 (2010) 132-139|
|LEE, M||‘Beyond Safety? The Broadening Scope of Risk Regulation’ in Colm O’Cinneide Current Legal Problems 2009 ( Oxford University Press, 2010)|
|LEE, M||‘New Environmental Liabilities: The Purpose and Scope of the Contaminated Land Regime and the Environmental Liability Directive’ 2010 Environmental Law Review forthcoming|
|LEE, M||‘EU Multi-level Governance of GMOs: Ambiguity and Hierarchy.’ In: Michael Cardwell and Luc Bodiguel Regulation of GMOs ( Oxford University Press, 2010) – draft available on Committee of the Regions website, http://www.cor.europa.eu/pages/EventTemplate.aspx?view=folder&id=da6bea72-bb09-4bed-aa19-5eca8feb24dd&sm=da6bea72-bb09-4bed-aa19-5eca8feb24dd|
|SCOTT, J||The Hidden World of WTO Governance. (co-authored with Andrew Lang) (2009) 20 European Journal of International Law 575-614|
|LEE, M||‘Agricultural Biotechnology in the UK: Expanding the Scope of the Debate?’ In: Michelle Everson and Ellen Vos, Uncertain Risks Regulated (Routledge, 2009)|
|MACRORY, R||‘Capturing the Legal Arguments’: European Lawyer|
|MACRORY, R||‘Maturity and Methodology’: A Personal Reflection Journal of Environmental Law Vol 21 No 2 251-254|
|MACRORY, R||with MAURICI, J Rethinking regulatory sanctions – Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Act 2008 – an exchange of letters (2009) 21 ELM 4 183-6|
|PURDY, R||‘Intellectual Property Rights and Problems in the Protection of Indigenous Knowledge: A Case Study of the Philippines in Legal Reforms’ (with Swanson, T and Uy, AL), Chapter 14, in Ninan, K.N. (ed) Conserving and Valuing Ecosystem Services and Biodiversity – Economics, Institutional and Social Challenges, pp 299–330, Earthscan.|
|PURDY, R||‘Governance Reform of the Clean Development Mechanism After Poznan, Carbon and Climate Law Review, Vol. 3(1).|
|PURDY, R.||‘The Impact of Satellite Technologies in the International Legal Sector: The Story So Far and Implications For the Future’, forthcoming, Derecho Espacial, Vol. XVII, Plus Ultra Press, Argentina.|
|PURDY, R||‘Using Earth Observation Technologies for Better Regulatory Compliance and Enforcement of Environmental Laws’, forthcoming, Journal of Environmental Law.|
|LEE, M||“Personal Injury, Public Nuisance and Environmental Regulation” 2009 King’s Law Journal 129|
|LEE, M||‘Law and Governance of Water Protection Policy’, in Joanne Scott (ed), Environmental Protection: European Law and Governance (OUP).|
|LEE, M||EU Multi-level Governance of GMOs: ambiguity and hierarchy in Michael Cardwell and Luc Bodiguel (eds) Regulation of GMOs (OUP forthcoming) – draft available on Committee of the Regions website|
|HOLDER, J||‘Building Spatial Europe: An Environmental Justice Perspective’ in Joanne Scott (ed) Environmental Protection: European Law and Governance (OUP).|
|SCOTT, J||From Brussels with Love: The Transatlantic Travels of European Law and the Chemistry of Regulatory Attraction’ forthcoming American Journal of Comparative Law, available at: SSRN|
|WESTAWAY, N||‘The New European Marine Strategy Directive’, Environmental Law Review, 218|
|REDGWELL, R||‘International Legal Responses to the Challenges of a Lower-Carbon Future’ in D. Zillman, C. Redgwell, Y.Omorogbe and L K Barrera-Hernandez (eds) Beyond the Carbon Economy Energy Law in Transition (OUP).|
|REDGWELL, R||‘Article 2: Definition of Natural Heritage’ and ‘Relationship to other Conventions’ in F. Francioni and F. Lenzerini, (eds) The 1972 World Heritage Convention: A Commentary (OUP).|
|REDGWELL, R||‘Das Recht der Natur’, in I Richter (ed), Transnationale Menschenrechte (Verlag Barbara Burdich) (translation by the editor).|
|MACRORY, R||Environmental Public Law and Judicial Review, Judicial Review Vol 13(2) 115-125|
|MACRORY, R with Jans, J, Kramer, L and Winter, G||Weighing Up the EC Environmental Liability Directive, Journal of Environmental Law Vol 20(2) 163-192|
|MACRORY, R||Public Consultation and GMO Policy – A Very British Experiment, Journal of European Environmental and Planning Law 5(1) 95-107.|
|LEE, M||‘The Governance of Coexistence between GMOs and Other Forms of Agriculture’ Journal of Environmental Law 198|
|MACKENZIE, R||‘Monitoring and reporting processes under the Convention on Biological Diversity’, chapter for A. Lawrence (ed.), Taking Stock of Nature: participatory biodiversity assessment for policy planning and practice, Cambridge University Press, forthcoming|
|SWANSON, T (with Sarr and Goeschl)||The Value of Genetic Resources for R&D: A Survey, Ecological Economics|
|HOLDER, J (with Flessas, T)||Emerging Commons 18(3) Social and Legal Studies|
|PURDY, R||Contributor to the latest edition of the Oxford Companion to Law and wrote entry on ‘Climate Change’, Oxford University Press, UK|
|SWANSON, T||Re-Telling the Tale of the Commons: Governance Problems as Commons Problems, International Review of Environmental Economics, 1(1)|
|HOLDER, J (with McGillivray, D)||Locality, Environment and Law: the Case of Town and Village Greens 3(1) International Journal of Law in Context, 1-17|
|PURDY, R and HAVERCROFT, I||Carbon Capture and Storage: Developments under European Union and International Law, Journal for European Environmental and Planning Law, Volume 4(5), pp353-366|
|MACRORY, R (with Dunseath)||Should the UK be taxing aviation fuel? New Law Journal Vol 157 p.727|
|MACRORY, R||Consistency and Effectiveness – Strengthening the New Environment TribunalConsistency And Effectivenessexamined over fifty examples of appeals provisions in contemporary British environmental legislation, and found a complete lack of coherence – appeals concerning licences or the service of enforcement notices went to a wide range of different bodies including magistrates courts, the planning inspectorate, and the Secretary of State. Often there was no right of appeal.Professor Macrory argues that it would be far more effective if most of these appeals went to the new Environment Tribunal set up in 2010 to determine appeals against a civil penalties now available to environmental regulators. The report identifies a set of priorities for transfer.
The proposals are entirely consistent with the current regulatory reform agenda. Professor Macrory noted, “Over the years we have developed a system of environmental appeals which is complex and confusing. There is now a unique opportunity to make the current structure more coherent,
simple, and effective.”Download full report
|PURDY, R||Satelite Monitoring of Environmental Laws: lessons to be learned from Australia
The study, ‘Smart Enforcement in Environmental Legal Systems: A Socio-Legal Analysis of Regulatory Satellite Monitoring in Australia,’ was funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (UK), during 2009 and 2010. This report is a direct output of this study and examines whether modern satellite technologies could provide a rigorous, legally reliable, and cost effective tool in inspection and compliance regimes in environmental regulatory systems. It considers these issues in the context of relevant experience and expertise in Australia, which is the only sustained comparative example where satellites have been used to monitor an environmental law. Satellite monitoring is used to monitor compliance with vegetation clearing legislation in Australia. This report seeks to demonstrate lessons learnt from this cutting-edge practice in Australia and to identify how best to build on this experience if satellite monitoring is to be used in new regulatory strategies.
|SWANSON, T, and LIO, X||Aquastress(2003-2008)
Interdisciplinary analysis of water management problems, focusing on collective action problems in Tunisia and water demand management in Portugal. Xiaoying Liu is the research assistant involved.
|MACRORY R, and others||
Ensuring Access to Environmental Justice – Working Group on Access to Environmental Justice
The Working Group was established at the end of 2007 under the chairmanship of Mr Justice Sullivan. Richard Macrory was the sole academic member of the group and the principal drafter of its final report, Ensuring Access to Environmental Justice in England and Wales which was published in May 2008.
The focus of the report was on current judicial review procedures in this country, and the extent to which they satisfy the requirements of the Aarhus Convention concerning access to justice in environmental matters. The Convention came into force in 2001, and was ratified by the UK in 2005. Under the Convention members of the public and non-governmental organisations are entitled to access to the courts or other independent bodies to question the legality of a large range of licencing decisions as well as the right to challenge acts or omissions of public bodies contravening national laws relating to the environment.
Art 9(4) provides that any such procedures must be “fair, equitable, timely and not prohibitively expensive.” For claimants in judicial review not entitled to legal aid (the vast majority of the members of the public) the Group doubted whether the current practices concerning costs and potential exposure to costs in environmental judicial review cases could be said to be consistent with Aarhus.
The Report makes a series of recommendations designed to reduce the risks and uncertainties concerning exposure to costs, as well as improvement the case management of judicial review cases.