Skip to main content

Legal Challenge of the Socio-ecological Connection: The Paradigm of Coviability Defined by the Adequacy Between Social Usefulness and the Ecological Function

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Coviability of Social and Ecological Systems: Reconnecting Mankind to the Biosphere in an Era of Global Change

Abstract

Environmental law, whose purpose is to respond to the ecological urgency, is based on technical aspects, i.e. legal; obliterating the anthropological aspects of human diversity. It is from the assumption of an interweaved society-environment viability within the biosphere, that the legal approach can be revisited and re-established based on the adequacy of (social) usefulness to an (ecological) function, based on field studies. The adoption of a paradigm based on an approach of social viability within the Earth system, i.e. coviability, has resulted in a socio-ecological link being highlight and which needs to be formalized in legal regulation by though an adequacy between human needs and the ecological function.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    “Humans are considered the only beings to be equipped with a value and all the rest of the living and non-living creatures only have an instrumental value, measured by their usefulness to humans” (Maris 2011).

  2. 2.

    System “coming from the inside” of the social group, of the society.

  3. 3.

    Barrière and Barrière 1997; Barrière 2003, 2012; Barrière and Faure 2012.

  4. 4.

    More specifically: the interior delta of the Niger River in Mali (in 1995), the gum zone of Chad (1998), the Bassari country in Eastern Senegal located at the edge of the Niokolo Koba National Park, in 1999, the territory of the Aït Zekri tribe in the Moroccan High Atlas Mountains, Morocco (2007) and the Wayana Territory in French Guiana, Maripasoula municipality (in 2009).

  5. 5.

    See the complete table published in Barrière 2017.

  6. 6.

    Here governance is understood as a “decision-making process, regulation of practices, in terms of actions and interventions in a territory and implementation of public policy” (Barrière 2005).

  7. 7.

    Based on the “land-resource” concept, developed by us on the interior delta field of the Niger River (Mali) in 1996: “Even the substance of the renewable resource is the main element, which is the reason why its qualification prevails and appears in the land-resource concept.” The universality of land-resource concept is not related to an eco-system as a whole, but to one of these elements: grass, fish, topsoil, hunted animal species (the game), trees, their fruits and products. In fact, the renewable resource itself represents only a support accessory, but it forms a whole with the latter. However, we cannot consider the resource without its land and that is why it is difficult to prefer the land over the resource. Moreover, since the land supports multiple resources, it is likely to be the subject of a plurality of “land-resource”, which reflects the multi-functionality of land. The land-resource constitutes a legal qualification of universality which cannot dissociate the land element from the resource element. Each land-resource thus constitutes a volume that is not completely independent, because the different resources occupy the physical spaces that more or less intersect and overlap. In contrast, these land-resources imply a distinction of the holders of rights to access, exploit and manage resources” (Barrière 1996, 119; Barrière and Barrière 1996, 162, 1997, 22).

  8. 8.

    Unlike Pareto’s (1896) approach who prefers the term “ophelimity” (from the Greek term “ophellimos” meaning “useful”) for the subjective satisfaction of needs which is an economic usefulness of an asset or a service experienced by a given agent in a given moment of time: a relationship of caused convenience in order for a need or desire, legitimate or not, to be satisfied. It is distinguished from social usefulness, which concerns all types of satisfaction.

  9. 9.

    “There are things that belong to no-one and whose usage is common to all”.

  10. 10.

    Unified Modeling Language.

  11. 11.

    Decree No. 2007-266 of 27 February 2007 establishing the National Park called “Parc Amazonien de Guyane”.

  12. 12.

    Survey conducted in 2009 among the 39 decision-makers distributed over the four Wayana villages, with approximately 900 residents: Antecum Pata (10), Twenke- Talwen (13), Kayode (10), Elahe (6). The Captains and the Gran man, with the support of local officers of the ‘Parc Amazonien de Guyane’ (PAG), helped us to determine the list of decision-makers per village (traditional leaders, head of the association, local reference persons). We have made the choice to add the representatives of the PAG inhabitants’ councils, well aware that it is an artificial institution provided by the park.

  13. 13.

    As opposed to the English Common Law.

  14. 14.

    “Assets are physical objects for which a demand exists, over which ownership rights can be established and whose ownership can be transferred from one institutional unit to another by other means of transactions on markets” (INSEE, online: http://www.insee.fr/fr/methodes/default.asp?page=definitions/biens.htm.)

  15. 15.

    2011, see: http://whc.unesco.org/fr/list/1153; and: http://www.causses-et-cevennes.fr.

  16. 16.

    Through the pastoral and the global pact of the UNESCO, see previous footnote.

  17. 17.

    See the text of the pastoral inter-municipal pact Causses Aigoual Cévennes, online: http://www.caussesaigoualcevennes.fr/connaitre-communes/

  18. 18.

    In the draft biodiversity law of 2006 (op.cit.) revising act. L110-1 of the French Environment code.

  19. 19.

    Act No. 2006-436 of 14 April 2006 related to national parks, marine natural parks and the regional natural parks.

References

  • Aubin J-P (2010) La mort du devin, l’émergence du démiurge. Essai sur la contingence, la viabilité et l’inertie des systèmes, éd. Beauchesne/le miroir des savant

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrière O (1996) Gestion des ressources naturelles renouvelables et conservation des écosystèmes au Sahel: le foncier-environnement, Thèse Droit Université Paris1

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrière O (2003) Droit et gestion de l’environnement en pays Bassari (Sénégal oriental); réflexions sur un droit de l’environnement au Sénégal. Revue canadienne Droit et Société/Can J Law Soc 18(1):73–101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrière O (2005) Une gouvernance environnementale dans une perspective patrimoniale: approche d’une écologie foncière. In: Eberhard C (dir) Droit, gouvernance et développement durable, Cahiers d’Anthropologie du Droit. LAJP- Karthala, Paris, pp 73–98

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrière O (2011) Pluralisme juridique et patrimonialisation: entre paradigmes de l’“appropriation” et du “patrimoine commun. In: Serge Mam Lam Fouck et Isabelle Hidair (dir) La question du patrimoine en Guyane française. Diversité culturelle et patrimonialisation. Processus et dynamiques des constructions identitaires. Ibis Rouge Editions, Matoury, Guyane, pp 43–75

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrière O (2012) Nature juridique de l’agdal, de la propriété collective au patrimoine commun. In: Auclair L, Alifriqui M (dir) Agdal Patrimoine socio-écologique de l’Atlas marocain. éd. Institut Royal de la culture Amazighe (IRCAM) et IRD, pp 207–242

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrière O (2017) Chapter 14: Human relationship to the land from a legal perspective as a human and environmental security challenge. In: Behnassi M, McGlade K (eds) Environmental change and human security in Africa and the Middle East. Springer, Cham, pp 259–304. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45648-5_14

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Barrière O, Barrière C (1996) Approches environnementales: systèmes fonciers dans le delta intérieur du Niger: de l’implosion du droit traditionnel à la recherche d’un droit propice à la sécurisation foncière. In: Le Roy E, Karsenty A, Bertrand A (eds) La sécurisation foncière en Afrique: pour une gestion viable des ressources renouvelables. Karthala, Paris, pp 127–175. http://www.documentation.ird.fr/hor/fdi:010065117

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrière O et Barrière C (1997) Le foncier-environnement, fondements juridico-institutionnels pour une gestion viable des ressources naturelles renouvelables au Sahel, Études Législatives n 60. éd. FAO, col., Rome

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrière O, Faure JF (2012) L’enjeu d’un droit négocié pour le Parc Amazonien de Guyane. Natures Sciences Sociétés 20:167–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourgine P (1996) Modèles d’agents autonomes et leurs interactions co-évolutionnistes, Penser l’esprit: des Sciences de la Cognition à une Philosophie Cognitive. Rialle V, Fisette D (dir), Presses universitaires de Grenoble

    Google Scholar 

  • Carbonnier J (1995) Droit civil, Les biens (monnaie, immeubles, meubles), T3, PUF

    Google Scholar 

  • Colleyn J-P (2005) Fiction et fictions en anthropologie, L’Homme, Vérités de la fiction, 3, 175/176, pp 147–163, Online: https://www.cairn.info/revue-l-homme-2005-3-page-147.htm

  • Leopold A (1948/2000) Almanach d’un comté des sables. Flammarion, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Maris V (2011) De la nature aux services écosystémiques. Une comodification de la biodiversité, Ecorev n 38, Quelle(s) valeur(s) pour la biodiversité? Revue critique d’écologie politique, Online: ecorev.org

  • Næss A (1973) The shallow and the deep, long-range ecology movement. Inquiry 16:95–100. Online: http://www.alamut.com/subj/ideologies/pessimism/Naess_deepEcology.html

  • Pareto V (1896) Cours d’économie politique, F. Rouge Editeur, Lausanne, 2 tomes; Online: http://www.institutcoppet.org/2012/05/08/cours-deconomie-politique-1896-de-vilfredo-pareto

  • Romeuf J (1958) Dictionnaire des sciences économiques, Puf

    Google Scholar 

  • Shlager E, Ostrom E (1992) Property-rights regimes and natural resources: a conceptual analysis. Land Econ 68(3):249–262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Terré F et Simler P (2014) Droit civil, Les biens. Dalloz

    Google Scholar 

  • Zenati-Castain F et Revet T (2008) Les biens. PUF, Paris

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Olivier Barrière .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Barrière, O., Libourel, T. (2019). Legal Challenge of the Socio-ecological Connection: The Paradigm of Coviability Defined by the Adequacy Between Social Usefulness and the Ecological Function. In: Barrière, O., et al. Coviability of Social and Ecological Systems: Reconnecting Mankind to the Biosphere in an Era of Global Change. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78497-7_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics