In recent years much jurisprudential affection has coalesced around the concept of the Anthropocene. International lawyers have enlisted among the ranks of humanities and social science authors... Show moreIn recent years much jurisprudential affection has coalesced around the concept of the Anthropocene. International lawyers have enlisted among the ranks of humanities and social science authors embracing this proposed scientific time category, and putting it to work. This essay draws on sources from a range of fields including legal anthropology and critical legal theory in re-examining the reception of the Anthropocene in international law, focusing on its mythical qualities. We demonstrate how the Anthropocene both reinforces and meshes perfectly with the three narrative pillars of contemporary international environmental law: evolutionary progress; universal evaluations of nature and constructions of legal subjectivity; and legal monism. The Anthropocene, like few ideas in modern scholarship, is quite expressly a tale of origins explaining and legitimating its narrators’ place in the universe. Joining signposts such as The Tragedy of the Commons, the Myth of the Anthropocene embeds collective memories eclipsing the need to reconsider complex and contested histories in understanding the contemporary roles of law in mediating people’s relations with nature. In response, we call for a more inclusive account of environmental law that draws on diversity rather than universality, with particular sensitivity to those perspectives that are inadvertently excluded from the Anthropocene discourse. Show less
More than three quarters of Indonesians do not have access to piped water. They depend on river water for bathing and sometimes also for drinking water. But the vast majority of rivers are... Show moreMore than three quarters of Indonesians do not have access to piped water. They depend on river water for bathing and sometimes also for drinking water. But the vast majority of rivers are severely polluted, many of them by industrial waste. This book explains why it has been so difficult for both the government and citizens to act against industrial river pollution. This socio-legal research looks at regulation and explains how government institutions have set norms to polluting behaviour, and how they have detected and responded to violations. It also analyses how citizens have participated in this process and how they seek redress for the wrongdoings they are faced with. Does victim involvement offer better chances for adequate environmental problem solving? The author illuminates the complex interrelations between the processes of regulation and redress seeking. Two extended case studies on Rancaekek in West Java and Kao-Malifut in North Maluku demonstrate illustrate how in practice these interrelations can lead to losing sight of stopping the actual pollution problem, shifting focus to compensation and increased social tensions and inequality within communities. This study’s theoretical contribution lies mainly in expanding the insights into the mutual influence of regulation and redress seeking. Show less
