Nowe paradygmaty ochrony ziemi jako zasobu środowiska w prawie rolnym

• Authors: Goździewicz-Biechońska Justyna

Title variants

EN

NEW PARADIGMS OF LAND PROTECTION AS AN ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE IN AGRICULTURAL LAW

IT

NUOVI PARADIGMI PER LA SALVAGUARDIA DELLA TERRA COME RISORSA AMBIENTALE NEL DIRITTO AGRARIO

Abstracts

EN

The aim of the deliberations was to answer two questions: (i) whether the modern model of legal land protection should take into account the aspect of globalisation and (ii) what is the effect of recognising land as an environmental resource on the model of its legal protection. The factors which contemporarily threaten the Earth being an element of the environment have been indicated and symptoms of paradigm shifts in the legal model of earth protection identified. Attention has been drawn to the progressive complementari-ty of EU policy (strategic documents) with an ecological economy based approach to land as a key natural resource and the concept of land footprint, which also allows taking into account the globalisation aspect of the issue of protection. It is concluded that the Polish legal system still lacks a holistic and multi-faceted, as well as complementary approach to the problem. Already the terminology and concepts of land as an environmental resource proposed in the Act are disputable and the concept of strategic resources introduced in it is inconsistent internally and does not meet the requirements of a rational legislator.

IT

L’articolo si propone di rispondere alla domanda se il modello contemporaneo di salvaguardia della terra debba prendere in considerazione la globalizzazione, e quale impatto possa avere il riconoscimento della terra come risorsa ambientale sul modello della sua tutela giuridica. L’autrice identifica fattori contemporanei di rischio per la terra concepita come elemento dell’ambiente e indica sintomi di cambio del paradigma nel modello di tutela giuridica in esame. Essa richiama l’attenzione sul processo di graduale progressione nel raggiungere la complementarietà tra la politica dell’UE (documenti strategici) e la nozione di terra come risorsa naturale chiave proveniente dall’ambito dell’economia ecologica, nonché la nozione di impronta ambientale (land footprint), il che consente di tenere conto anche del problema di globalizzazione nelle questioni riguardanti la tutela in oggetto. Constata inoltre che l’ordinamento giuridico polacco è tuttora carente di un approccio olistico e sfaccettato, al contempo complementare. I dubbi nascono già da questioni terminologiche e concettuali che riguardano la terra come risorsa ambientale, mentre l’atto giuridico che introduce la nozione di risorse strategiche è internamente incoerente e non soddisfa i requisiti posti davanti a un legislatore razionale.

• Publisher: Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu
• Journal: Przegląd Prawa Rolnego
• Year: 2017
• Issue: 2 (21)
• Pages: 77-92

Contributors

author

Goździewicz-Biechońska Justyna

References

• Aksoy E. i in. (2017), Assessing and analysing the impact of land take pressures on arable land, “Solid Earth” nr 8 (3).
• Attardi R. i in. (2015), The multidimensional assessment of land take and soil sealing, w: International Conference on Computational Science and Its Applications, red. O. Gervasi, i in., Springer.
• Bieluk J. (2016), Nowe zasady dziedziczenia gospodarstw rolnych po nowelizacji ustawy o kształtowaniu ustroju rolnego, „Studia Iuridica Agraria” t. XIV.
• Bruckner M. i in (2015)., Measuring telecouplings in the global land system: a review and comparative evaluation of land footprint accounting methods, “Ecological Economics” nr 114.
• Budzinowski R. (2008), Problemy ogólne prawa rolnego. Przemiany podstaw legislacyjnych i koncepcji doktrynalnych, Poznań.
• Budzinowski R. (2009), Przyszłość prawa rolnego, „Przegląd Prawa Rolnego”, nr 1.
• Fiedor B., Dokurno Z. Scheuer B., Status badawczy ekonomii ekologicznej jako współczesnej heterodoksji ekonomicznej, w: Nauki ekonomiczne. Stylizowane fakty a wyzwania współczesności, red. B. Fiedor.
• Foley J.A. i in. (2005), Global consequences of land use, “Science”, nr 309(5734).
• Geist H.J.,, Lambin E.F. (2004), Dynamic causal patterns of desertification, “Bioscience” nr 54.
• Godfray H. i in. (2010), Food security: the challenge of feeding 9 billion people, “Science” nr 327 (5967).
• Górka K. (2014), Zasoby naturalne jako czynnik rozwoju społeczno-gospodarczego, „Gospodarka w praktyce i teorii” nr 3.
• Górski M.(red.) (2014), Prawo ochrony środowiska, Warszawa.
• Górski M. (2009), Prawna ochrona powierzchni ziemi i odpowiedzialność za szkody wyrządzone w powierzchni ziemi, „Geologia”, nr 35.
• Güneralp B., Seto K.C., Ramachandran M. (2013), Evidence of urban land teleconnections and impacts on hinterlands, “Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability”, nr 5.
• Haber W. (2007), Energy, food, and land - the ecological traps of humankind, “Environmental Science and Pollution Research-International”, nr 14(6).
• Haładyj A., Trzewik J., Pojęcie strategicznych zasobów naturalnych - uwagi krytyczne, „Przegląd Prawa Ochrony Środowiska”.
• J. Jendrośka (red.) (2001), Ustawa z 27 kwietnia 2001 Prawo ochrony środowiska. Komentarz, Wrocław.
• Jaeger J. A. i in. (2010), Suitability criteria for measures of urban sprawl, “Ecological Indicators”, nr 10(2).
• Lambin E.F., Meyfroidt P. (2011), Global land use change, economic globalization, and the looming land scarcity. “Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America” 2011, nr 108(9).
• M. A. Król (1997), Instrumenty prawne ochrony jakościowej gruntów rolnych, Studia Prawno-Ekonomiczne, nr 55.
• Meyfroidt, P., Rudel T.K., Lambin E.F. (2010), Forest transitions, trade, and the global displacement of land use, „Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA”, nr. 107.
• Ruhl J. B. (2002), Farmland stewardship: Can ecosystems stand any more of it, “Washington University Journal of Law & Policy” nr 9.
• Schneider S. A.(2009), A Reconsideration of Agricultural Law: A Call for the Law of Food, Farming, and Sustainability, “William & Mary Environmental Law And Policy Review”, nr 34.
• Seto K.C. (2012), Urban land teleconnections and sustainability, „Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA” nr 109.
• Steciąg M. (2009), Słowa-klucze w ekologii i ich krytyka z perspektywy ekolingiwistycznej, „Problemy Ekorozwoju: studia filozoficzno-sozologiczne” nr 4(2).
• Turner K. G. i in. (2016), A review of methods, data, and models to assess changes in the value of ecosystem services from land degradation and restoration, “Ecological Modelling“, nr 319.
• Van den Bergh J. C., Verbruggen H. (1999), Spatial sustainability, trade and indicators: an evaluation of the ‘ecological footprint, “Ecological economics”, nr 29(1).
• Verkerk P. J. i in. (2016), Identifying pathways to visions of future land use in Europe, “Regional Environmental Change”.
• Wackernagel M. i in. (2004), Ecological footprint time series of Austria, the Philippines, and South Korea for 1961–1999: comparing the conventional approach to an ‘actual land area’ approach, "Land use policy” nr 21 (3).
• Weinzettel J. i in. (2013), Affluence drives the global displacement of land use," Global Environmental Change” nr 23 (2).
• Zrałek J. (2016), Ekonomia ekologiczna: rewizja teorii ekonomii w świetle koncepcji zrównoważonego rozwoju gospodarczego, „Studia Ekonomiczne” nr 303.