Comprehensive research on conflict resolutions in the field of international environmental civil disputes

Research Project

Project/Area Number	07620022
Research Category	Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C)
Allocation Type	Single-year Grants
Section	一般
Research Field	International law
Research Institution	Kyushu University
Principal Investigator	KONO Toshiyuki Faculty of Law, Kyushu University, Prf., 法学部, 教授 (80186626)
Project Period (FY)	1995 – 1996
Project Status	Completed (Fiscal Year 1996)
Budget Amount *help	¥1,800,000 (Direct Cost: ¥1,800,000) Fiscal Year 1996: ¥700,000 (Direct Cost: ¥700,000) Fiscal Year 1995: ¥1,100,000 (Direct Cost: ¥1,100,000)
Keywords	international environmental disputes / negotiation / civil litigation / adjustment of interests / cost performance / HNS条約 / 国際民事訴訟法的 / Federal Clearn Act / 国際環境紛争仲裁制度 / 交渉学 / Federal Clean Water Act / Trail Smelter / US-Canadian Uniform Transboundary Reciprocal Access Act / Nordic Environment Convention / Handelswerkerig Bier v. Mines de Potasse d'Alsace / 「有害物質の海上輸送中に生じた損害についての民事責任に関する条約」
Research Abstract	As one of the possible resolutions for international environmental disputes, the state may take responsibility. However the state tends to avoid its responsibility clear and it leads to the unclear legal basis in the international environmental law. Then it discourage the state to make its positive commitment to the matters. Vicious circle. Civil litigation, along with class action and legal positivism, playd an important roll to secure the human rights. The weakest point of this system is that it rarely turns into the concrete right as the title to enforce. Due to the tecnical problems under the current national legal systems, the civil litigation is not the best resolution system. Therefore we need to examine how useful the solution through negotiation would be. Compared with the litigation, the biggest advantage for the parties should be the costs including the cost of litigation and time. However when we look at the big scale environmental disputes, the solution through negotiation is not always the quickest and cheapest way. Rather the advantage could be the point that the negotiation offers more acceptable resolution for the both parties. The inevitable thing is that the both parties are well represented and that the chance to attend the negotiation is secured. For the environmental disputes, professional and specialized knowledge for complicated matters are requested. Since the litigation has an outlook that it clarifies the truth, the parties tend to use the litigation. Because the negotiation is just a adjustment of the conflicting interests, not as the real answer.