标题:Presupuestos mínimos de protección ambiental en Argentina. Una comparación entre los procesos de las leyes de Bosques Nativos, Glaciares y Humedales
其他标题:FEDERAL MINIMUM ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS IN ARGENTINA.
COMPARING THE PROCESSES OF THE NATIVE FORESTS,
GLACIERS AND WETLANDS ACTS
摘要:In this article we explore the processes of debate, sanction and implementation of three minimum environmental protection standards laws in Argentina, in the context of growing disputes for the conservation of the environment. The constitutional reform of 1994 established a scheme of concurrent powers in environmental matters between the national government and the provinces, according to which the latter hold the original domain of natural resources, while the Nation enacts norms assuring a common environmental protection for the entire territory. Within this general framework the roles and functions of each level of government are defined on a case-by-case basis. This happens through processes that are at the same time conflictive, negotiated and creative, resulting in each case in different institutional arrangements. At each level of government these processes involve different tensions and conflicts of interest, as the stakeholders acting on different scales are not the same; for the same reason, different discursive constructions of the problems prevail in each setting. Here we propose a comparison between the processes of debate, passing and and implementation of the Native Forests Act (Law Nr. 26.331, of 2007), the Glaciers Act (Law Nr. 26.639, of 2010), and the bills currently under discussion for an act on wetlands. Our analysis is based on the analysis of primary and secondary sources of information. We concentrate on the national level and on certain provinces taken as examples, and we focus on two aspects. First, the normative-institutional dimension; we explain how each norm has distributed functions and powers between the national and provincial levels through the provisions of the normative texts and the structure of enforcement authorities. Second, we compare the conflict scenarios that emerge around the enacting and implementation of the different laws: the actors involved, the interests affected and the discourses mobilized in each case.
其他摘要:In this article we explore the processes of debate, sanction and
implementation of three minimum environmental protection standards laws in
Argentina, in the context of growing disputes for the conservation of the
environment. The constitutional reform of 1994 established a scheme of
concurrent powers in environmental matters between the national government
and the provinces, according to which the latter hold the original domain of
natural resources, while the Nation enacts norms assuring a common
environmental protection for the entire territory. Within this general framework
the roles and functions of each level of government are defined on a case-bycase basis. This happens through processes that are at the same time
conflictive, negotiated and creative, resulting in each case in different
institutional arrangements. At each level of government these processes involve
different tensions and conflicts of interest, as the stakeholders acting on
different scales are not the same; for the same reason, different discursive
constructions of the problems prevail in each setting. Here we propose a
comparison between the processes of debate, passing and and implementation
of the Native Forests Act (Law Nr. 26.331, of 2007), the Glaciers Act (Law Nr.
26.639, of 2010), and the bills currently under discussion for an act on
wetlands. Our analysis is based on the analysis of primary and secondary
sources of information. We concentrate on the national level and on certain
provinces taken as examples, and we focus on two aspects. First, the normativeinstitutional dimension; we explain how each norm has distributed functions
and powers between the national and provincial levels through the provisions
of the normative texts and the structure of enforcement authorities. Second,
we compare the conflict scenarios that emerge around the enacting and
implementation of the different laws: the actors involved, the interests affected
and the discourses mobilized in each case.