Eric Biber lately posted a sequence at Authorized Planet primarily based on his current Georgetown Regulation Journal article, "Regulation within the Anthropocene Epoch" (summary beneath). The Anthropocene, for individuals who have by some means missed this buzzword, is (in keeping with its proponents–it has but to be formally adopted) a brand new epoch, by which the indicators of human modifications to the planet are seen within the geologic document. The article and weblog posts comprise a helpful catalog of how by which present authorized doctrines and establishments do a poor job of coping with environmental challenges, and primarily argue for the desirability of main modifications in liberal conceptions of particular person rights and personal property. That sounds proper, however I'd prefer to quibble over three historic parts of the argument.
First, Biber's confidence within the route of future political and authorized change ("People will inevitably reply to the Anthropocene", "These responses will ineluctably result in larger authorities involvement", and so on.) appears to me problematic, reflecting an environmental-determinist and functionalist view of authorized improvement that I discover unconvincing. Most of the challenges recognized by Biber have been with us for a while, and the regulation has apparently not tailored to them. It isn’t clear that it should or will accomplish that sooner or later. I feel a extra tentative or perhaps a normative tone would have made for a extra convincing argument.
Second, Biber's use of "the Anthropocene" is idiosyncratic. Many proponents of the concept of an Anthropocene epoch appear to have settled on a begin date within the mid-twentieth century, although others (together with the originators of the concept) argue for an 1800 begin, and others would push it again even additional. In any case, if there’s an Anthropocene, we’re already in it, the challenges recognized by Biber are already upon us (with lots of them tons of of years previous), and so if, as he argues, the regulation will change in response to them, it ought to have already performed so. If the Industrial Revolution came about through the Anthropocene, it’s exhausting to make sense of his argument that "These modifications will parallel comparable revolutionary authorized modifications related to industrialization and the event of a nationwide financial system in the USA within the nineteenth and twentieth centuries."