Our biosphere is sick and is behaving like an infected organism. As carbon has been collecting in our atmosphere it has also been collecting in the ocean, and as time has passed, soil erosion, deforestation, and dramatic losses in biodiversity have continued unabated.
We face a convergence of crises, all of which jeopardise life on Earth. There is a growing recognition that our current approach to environmental law is insufficient and that the situation is worse now than it was forty years ago when the first environmental protection legislation was passed.
The reasons why our current system of environmental law is failing are complex. But one important reason is inherent to law itself. The law does not protect the natural world from destruction, but supports its destruction. The effect of regulation is that if a company has ticked the appropriate boxes and stays within the prescribed legislative boundaries, its activity is acceptable. As a result environmental lawyers generally try to protect communities by monitoring corporate activity and checking license applications.
So the only things regulated by environmental law are environmentalists. The laws regulate the way environmentalists respond, and make them predictable. In addition, corporations often set aside money for appeals which in any case are tax-deductable.
Companies may also have 'indenture acts' that permit them legally to override of environmental laws. The most obvious and harmful example of this is the Roxby Downs Indenture Ratification Act 1982 (SA) that exists over BHP Billiton's Olympic Dam lease and overrides the States Environmental Protection, Aboriginal Heritage, Natural Resource Management, Water Resources and Freedom of Information Acts.
The regulatory framework for environmental protection is defensive in nature and actually impedes our ability to protect the environment. Environmental 'movements' are driven by communities that are unwilling to accept such a defensive role for themselves. They try to address the problems of governance that confine them to this defensive position.
Environmental law remains trapped in a regulatory framework because it regards nature as a legal object, that by definition can be bought, sold, exploited or destroyed to satisfy human preferences. Nature receives its protection through the property rights of human beings, not because it possesses recognised value or legal rights.
People were once treated in the same way. In response to slavery abolitionists did not ask for a 'slave protection agency' — they sought recognition of their rights in law. To secure rights