Article Title: Human Rights and the Environment: a Reflection on the Formation and Evolution of “Environmental Human Rights” in International Law
Authors: Prof. Ali Mashhadi & Reyhaneh Hamedi
Journal: The Journal of Comparative Law
Publication Year: 2023
In view of the intensification of environmental crises at the global level and the increasingly evident direct impact of such crises on life, health, human dignity, and the quality of life of societies, the relationship between human rights and the environment has become one of the most significant and rapidly expanding areas of discussion in international law and domestic public law. While the classical discourse of human rights long paid no direct attention to environmental issues, the conceptual and documentary developments of recent decades have demonstrated that the realization of many fundamental human rights is impossible without access to a healthy, sustainable, and pollution-free environment.
The article “Human Rights and the Environment: a Reflection on the Formation and Evolution of “Environmental Human Rights” in International Law”, adopting a descriptive-analytical approach, examines this reciprocal relationship and shows how environmental issues have become part of human rights concerns and, conversely, how human rights have acquired environmental dimensions and requirements. In what follows, the most important findings of this research are reviewed in a structured manner.
Introduction
In the contemporary world, the environment is no longer merely a technical, natural, administrative, or managerial matter; rather, it has become one of the most fundamental contexts for the realization or violation of human rights. The expansion of environmental crises—from air and water pollution to the destruction of natural resources, waste crises, noise pollution, the decline in the quality of urban life, threats to public health, and harm to ecosystems—has demonstrated that environmental quality directly affects the life, health, human dignity, welfare, security, and development of societies.
From this perspective, human rights in the present century can no longer be understood solely within the framework of classical freedoms, political rights, social rights, or civil guarantees, because the realization of many of these rights in practice depends on human beings’ enjoyment of a healthy, sustainable, and habitable environment.
The concept of the “greening of human rights” acquires meaning within this context. This concept refers to a transformation through which human rights are reinterpreted in light of environmental considerations, and a healthy environment is recognized as one of the fundamental preconditions of human dignity. Accordingly, one can no longer speak of the right to life without also addressing air pollution, unsafe water, the destruction of natural resources, and biological threats.
Likewise, the rights to health, housing, food, development, welfare, and an adequate standard of living cannot be analyzed without regard to environmental quality. For this reason, the greening of human rights does not merely mean adding a new subject to the literature of human rights; rather, it indicates a profound transformation in the contemporary understanding of the relationship between human beings, nature, development, and the responsibilities of states.
The Reciprocal Relationship Between Human Rights and the Environment
One of the main axes of this discussion is the understanding of the reciprocal relationship between human rights and the environment. On the one hand, environmental issues may acquire clear human rights dimensions. For example, water pollution is not merely a health-related or technical issue; it may threaten the right to health, the right to an adequate standard of living, the right to food, and even the right to life.
Air pollution, likewise, is not merely an urban or managerial problem; rather, it is connected to citizens’ physical and mental health, quality of life, biological security, and the responsibility of states to protect the right to a healthy environment. Noise pollution may also affect the right to peace and comfort, the right to private life, the right to health, and human dignity. Moreover, the destruction of forests, rangelands, natural resources, and urban green spaces, in addition to its ecological consequences, entails broad social, economic, and human rights effects.
On the other hand, many traditional human rights issues also have environmental dimensions. The right to life, in a world confronted with biological crises, widespread pollution, and climate threats, loses its full meaning without attention to a healthy environment. The right to health is not limited merely to access to medical services; it also includes air quality, water safety, food security, urban living conditions, and the control of pollution.
The rights to work, housing, education, property, development, and peace are also each connected to the environment in one way or another. From this perspective, a healthy environment is not external to human rights; rather, it constitutes the context and condition for the realization of many fundamental human rights.
Theoretical Foundations: Between Anthropocentrism and Ecocentrism
In the analysis of environmental human rights, two principal theoretical approaches can be identified. The first is the anthropocentric approach. This perspective analyzes the environment from the standpoint of human needs, interests, health, welfare, and survival. Within this framework, human beings have the right to enjoy a healthy environment because environmental degradation directly threatens their life, health, security, and quality of life. Accordingly, the legal value of the environment arises primarily from the impact it has on human beings and their fundamental rights. This approach is compatible with many classical human rights instruments, since its central concern is the preservation of human dignity, life, and welfare.
By contrast, there is the ecocentric approach. This approach does not regard the environment merely as an instrument for securing human interests; rather, it recognizes an independent value for nature, ecosystems, natural resources, and other living beings. In this view, human beings are not the absolute owners of nature, but part of the ecosystem, and their rights must be understood in balance with the health of the ecosystem. According to this perspective, the right to a healthy environment is not intended only to protect human beings; it must also take into account the preservation of ecological balance, ecosystem sustainability, and the protection of future generations.
The significance of environmental human rights becomes evident precisely at this point: where the protection of human beings and the protection of nature are placed within a shared framework, and the concept of collective responsibility toward the environment comes to the forefront.
The Historical Evolution of Environmental Human Rights
The formation of environmental human rights has followed a gradual and historical process. In early human rights instruments, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenants, there was no explicit reference to the right to a healthy environment. Nevertheless, some of the fundamental concepts contained in these instruments—such as the right to life, the right to health, the right to welfare, the right to security, the right to rest, and the right to an adequate standard of living—had the potential to be interpreted later in light of environmental developments.
In fact, although the environment was not initially presented as an independent right within the international human rights system, many recognized human rights gradually demonstrated that their effective and genuine implementation would be impossible without a healthy environment.
The turning point in this transformation was the 1972 Stockholm Declaration. For the first time at the global level, this declaration highlighted the relationship between freedom, equality, human dignity, welfare, and the enjoyment of an adequate environment. The importance of the Stockholm Declaration lay in the fact that it brought the environment closer to the realm of fundamental human rights and demonstrated that the enjoyment of a healthy environment is an important condition for a dignified life.
Subsequently, the 1992 Rio Declaration continued this trajectory by emphasizing sustainable development, public participation, the responsibility of states, and the link between economic development and environmental protection.
Alongside these global instruments, regional instruments also played an important role in the consolidation of environmental human rights. The African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights recognized the right of all peoples to a satisfactory environment favorable to their development. The Protocol of San Salvador, within the Inter-American system, also addressed the right of every person to live in a healthy environment.
In the European system, although the European Convention on Human Rights did not expressly refer to the right to the environment, the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, through the interpretation of the right to private and family life, created the basis for indirect protection of the right to a healthy environment. Moreover, the Aarhus Convention, by emphasizing access to information, public participation, and access to justice in environmental matters, is regarded as one of the most important steps in the institutionalization of environmental procedural rights.
From International Law to Domestic Law
One of the important aspects of the evolution of environmental human rights is that this transformation has not remained confined to the international level; rather, it has gradually entered the domestic legal systems of states. Following international environmental developments, particularly after the Stockholm Declaration, many countries recognized the right to a healthy environment in their constitutions or ordinary legislation. This trend demonstrates that a healthy environment has been transformed from a moral or political demand into a legal claim capable of being pursued within national legal systems.
In Iranian law, Article 50 of the Constitution holds a special place. This article defines environmental protection as a public duty and prohibits economic and other activities that are associated with environmental pollution or irreversible environmental degradation. The significance of this article lies in the fact that it does not treat the environment merely as an administrative or executive matter; rather, it connects it with the growing life of both present and future generations.
In addition, instruments such as the General Environmental Policies, the Clean Air Act, regulations concerning water resources, laws related to pollution, and certain mechanisms of public participation and access to information indicate the gradual expansion of the components of environmental human rights within domestic law. From this perspective, the greening of human rights is not only a theoretical or international development; it has also entered the sphere of national governance, citizenship rights, and public responsibility.
Tangible Components of Environmental Human Rights
Environmental human rights manifest themselves through a set of specific and identifiable rights. One of the most important among them is the right of access to safe and clean water. Safe water constitutes the most fundamental biological necessity of human beings and serves as a prerequisite for the realization of many other rights. Without access to safe water, the rights to life, health, food, hygiene, development, and an adequate standard of living face serious challenges. Consequently, water is no longer regarded merely as a natural resource or a public commodity; rather, it has become a human rights and environmental issue with respect to which states bear responsibilities concerning protection, equitable distribution, and the guarantee of access.
The right to clean air is likewise one of the essential components of environmental human rights. Air pollution can threaten individuals’ physical and mental health, reduce the quality of urban life, expose vulnerable groups such as children, older persons, and patients to significant risks, and impose heavy burdens on public health systems. Therefore, the right to clean air is closely connected to the right to health, the right to life, the right to a healthy environment, and the state’s duty to control pollutants. Within this framework, legislative measures such as the Clean Air Act may be viewed as part of broader efforts to transform the demand for clean air into a legally protected right.
Another important component of this field is the right to a peaceful and tranquil environment. Unlike many visible forms of pollution, noise pollution often receives less attention; however, its effects on mental health, peace of mind, sleep, concentration, privacy, and the quality of urban life are substantial. This right is particularly significant in residential, medical, educational, and public settings and is closely linked to concepts such as the right to comfort and well-being, the right to health, the right to private life, and human dignity.
Alongside these substantive rights, procedural rights occupy a prominent position. The right of access to environmental information enables citizens to become informed about the condition of their surrounding environment, sources of pollution, potential risks, public decisions, and projects affecting their living environment. Without access to information, meaningful public participation and effective advocacy are impossible.
Similarly, the right to participate in environmental decision-making processes allows citizens and stakeholder groups to take part in decisions concerning environmental matters. Such participation can prevent many environmental disputes, conflicts, and harms, while simultaneously improving the quality and legitimacy of public decision-making.
The Collective, Intergenerational, and Interdependent Nature of Environmental Human Rights
Environmental human rights differ from classical human rights in several important respects. First, these rights are generally collective in nature. Unlike certain individual rights that concern the freedom or interests of a particular person, a healthy environment ordinarily belongs to all members of society, and its degradation produces widespread and public consequences.
Second, these rights possess an intergenerational character. They are not limited to the present generation; future generations are also beneficiaries of environmental protection. From this perspective, environmental protection constitutes a historical and ethical responsibility owed to the future.
Another significant characteristic of these rights is their interdependence with other human rights. The right to a healthy environment is closely linked with the rights to life, health, housing, food, work, development, information, participation, and access to justice. This interdependence means that environmental degradation frequently results in a chain of human rights violations.
Conversely, the neglect of human rights may also hinder the effective implementation of environmental rights. Without public participation, transparency, access to information, governmental accountability, and effective access to justice, environmental protection is likely to become an incomplete and unsustainable policy. Consequently, environmental protection and human rights protection reinforce one another and should be understood as mutually supportive dimensions of a comprehensive framework for human well-being.
Conclusion
The outcome of this discussion is that, in today’s world, a complete separation between human rights and the environment is neither possible nor desirable. Environmental crises have demonstrated that human dignity is not realized solely through political freedoms or social guarantees; rather, it also depends on the quality of life, the health of ecosystems, access to vital resources, biological security, and the sustainability of the living environment. Therefore, environmental human rights should be regarded as one of the most important manifestations of the evolution of human rights in the contemporary era.
On the one hand, the effective implementation of human rights is impossible without respect for the principles of environmental protection, because the rights to life, health, housing, food, work, welfare, and development are directly or indirectly dependent on a healthy environment. On the other hand, environmental law also requires human rights guarantees for its more effective implementation, including transparency, participation, access to information, access to justice, state accountability, and citizens’ ability to make rights-based claims.
Accordingly, the “greening of human rights” does not simply mean adding a few new rights to the body of human rights. Rather, it signifies a paradigmatic transformation in the understanding of human beings, nature, development, justice, and the responsibilities of states. In this sense, environmental human rights remind us that the future of human dignity is, more than ever before, tied to the future of the environment.
Note
Mashhadi, Ali & Hamedi, Reyhaneh. (2023). Human Rights and the Environment: a Reflection on the Formation and Evolution of “Environmental Human Rights” in International Law. The Journal of Comparative Law, 7(2), 150–175.
