| Allen L. Springer | Int'l. Environmental Policy- Exam 2- 1996 | |||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
| Instructions Be sure to put your name on every exam booklet used. Please skip every other line or leave some space at the end of your answers to make room for your corrections and my comments. You may answer the questions in any order you wish, but be sure to put the number of each question next to your answer. Please write legibly and using complete sentences! However, your answers/arguments need not be long. In some cases, a single carefully-written sentence will be sufficient to make each point. The approximate point score for each question is indicated in parentheses at the start of each. The total number of points on the exam is 38. 1) (4 points) What is the "problem of equity" in international environmental law? Describe how three different international regimes have attempted to respond to three different kinds of "equity" concerns. (1 point for definition of problem; 1 point for description of each description) 2) (4 points) Describe the three most significant changes made in London to the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer and explain the single most important reason why they were possible in London but not in Montreal. (1 point for each for 3 changes; 1 point for most important reason) 3) (3 points) Describe how two different multilateral regimes encountered in the second half of this course might be considered by some states to reflect the "tyranny of the majority" in the way each deals with the matters under their jurisdiction. (1/2 point for naming each of 2 regimes; 1 point for explanation of how each might be seen as contributing to this problem) 4) (5 points) At the 1992 Rio Conference, the United States received a great deal of international criticism. Give two reasons for this criticism tied specifically to two different legal "products" of the Rio Conference (other than the Rio Declaration itself), and explain clearly how the U.S. government responded to each of those criticisms. (1/2 point for naming each of the two relevant "products;" 1 point for each of two criticisms; 1 point for each of 2 response) 5) (5 points) Bemoans a fictional environmentalist, "The ruling of the GATT panel in the tuna-dolphin dispute signals the end of lawful unilateral state action in defense of endangered species." Respond fully, explaining clearly the logic of the panel's ruling and offering three additional reasons to question the speaker's judgment on the larger question of the impact of the ruling on the future of environmental unilateralism. (2 points for analysis of GATT panel ruling; 1 point for each of 3 additional arguments) 6) (3 points) Describe the two most important differences between the 1991 Madrid Protocol to the Antarctica Treaty and what had been negotiated in the 1988 Convention for the Regulation of Mineral Resource Activities (CRAMRA). Explain clearly what happened to make those changes possible. (1 point for each of two changes; 1 point for explanation) 7) (6 points) Explain was is meant by the "management" and "embargo" models in the context of the work of CITES. Explain the basic rationale behind each and describe how each was used in an attempt to protect the African elephant. (1 point for definition of each model; 1 point for rationale for each; 1/2 point for tying each to specific regulatory steps attempted by CITES to protect the elephant) 8) (4 points) Describe the basic approach taken by the 1989 Basel Convention in an attempt to control toxic waste. Give three reasons why, despite recent advances, an environmentalist might still be unsatisfied with the Basel Convention. (1 point for description of basic approach; 1 point for each of 3 criticisms) 9) (4 points) You are the Japanese representative at the next meeting of the International Whaling Commission. Explain clearly the four strongest legal arguments Japan could make to support continued, or even expanded whaling operations. (1 point for each of 4 arguments) |
||||||||||||||||
|
Allen L. Springer- aspringe@polar.bowdoin.edu Department of Government and Legal Studies Bowdoin College Brunswick, ME 04011-8498 Tel: 207-729-8502 Fax:- 207-725-3168 |
||||||||||||||||