For the methodology, five sources shall be discussed to conclude their creditability for essay use. Firstly, the authorship, and for what reason Stephen Tromans and others, Environmental Law Encyclopaedia shall be discussed. In terms of authorship, the source is creditable to be used as the main editor of the encyclopedia is Stephen Tromans QC. He studied at Cambridge University and graduated with a 1st class MA Law (Hons) degree in 1981. He has held a number of respected positions, and his environmental expertise is highly regarded amongst many.
Additionally he has been involved in many significant environmental cases. The loose-leaf publication was published by Sweet & Maxwell. However, although they are a well established legal publisher; interestingly their parent company is Thomson Reuters. The parent company is not in itself lacking in creditability but, they own another legal publisher – the Scottish branch of their corporation – W. Green. Indeed, consider W. Green and its parent company in discussing Francis McManus and others, Environmental Law in Scotland.
In fact, in terms of authorship, the encyclopedia should not be flawed, McManus is Professor of Environmental Law and Delict at the University of Napier; and has sound academic origins and expertise. The query of creditability lies again with the publisher – W. Green. As aforementioned, Thomson Reuters is their parent company. These two encyclopedias are very comprehensive sources of environmental law and would be the first access to anyone wanting to learn about the topic.
Perhaps there is too much of a monopoly of information as the sources are very similar in content despite having different authors. The information should not be taken as true. Furthermore, Jonathon Porritt’s blog for example generally takes a more level headed look at environmental problems. Porritt is the chairman of Sustainable Development Commission UK, his blog is self funded and the argument he presents is clear and equitable to the circumstances he comments on; despite his passion perhaps getting in the way of that clarity sometimes.
In addition, the case of Cambridge Water Company Ltd v Eastern Counties Leather Plc is creditable because it continues the ‘Rylands rule’ precedent. This relates to other sources such as Hunter v Canary Wharf Ltd in that it provides a firm link of establishing precedent of ‘nuisances’, and perhaps as consequence of the series of cases applying the Rylands rule, to an extent the notion of ‘sustainable development’ was encouraged to try and find a proportionate answer to both our environmental problems and the concerns of man.
Such encouragement might be seen in the World Commission’s, Our Common Future. Indeed it was produced as consequence of UN General Assembly 38/161, a creditable development from the initial consensus of realising sustainable development at the Rio Conference in 1992. Its authorship contains commissioners from across both the developed and developing world. This is positive and largely creditable because the 2 main objectives of sustainable development are for poorer economies to grow sustainably so that there might be environmental and economic equity across the globe where there is not so at present.
In addition, rich economies are to scale down their pollution, and to aid the development of other economies by their environmental protection policies. Therefore, the broad spectrum of commissioners is a good indicator that such aims are being upheld.
Bell Stuart and MacGillivray Donald, Environmental Law, (7thedn, Oxford University Press Inc. , New York, 2008). Connor R and Dovers S in Richardson B and others, Environmental Law of Sustainability, (edn, Hart Publishing, North America, 2006). Department for Environmental, Food, and Rural Affairs, ‘Sustainable Development in Government’ (28 February 2011), <http://sd. defra. gov. uk/2011/02/embedding-sustainability-in-government/? ref=mostread> accessed 05 February 2011, Government department. Department for Communities and Local Government, Planning Policy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable Development, (edn, The Stationary Office, London, 2005).