Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Relationship Between Agricultural Law and Environmental Law in Italy

  • Chapter
Law and Agroecology

  • 1219 Accesses

Abstract

In Italy, the traditional view of agriculture has been that it is the most immediate, authentic and natural expression of the environment. This occurred even though the study of the emergence of environmental issues and their integration in agricultural law has only recently appeared as a problem. Furthermore, the affirmation of environmental law in Italy is a recent fact. Even today, there is debate as to whether, instead of building a “law of the environment” as an independent discipline, we should instead identify, in the various sectors of law, common principles as source of inspiration for a “law for the environment.” Many books on agrarian law, published in the 1980s, deal with environmental issues only marginally, to define the borders of agrarian law strictu sensu. An important role in defining the boundaries and interactions between environmental law and agrarian law has been played by Italian journals of agrarian law, which starting from the beginning of the twentieth century opened to new subject matters, such as food, nutrition and environmental protection. This broadening of agricultural law towards environmental law had important repercussion on didactics, as proved by the inclusion in the sector of the scientific discipline of “agricultural law” of studies pertaining to the protection of the environment and to the commercialization of agricultural products.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
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.

    Cristiani (2004), p. 11.

  2. 2.

    Grassi (2012), p. 12; Bolognini (2007), pp. 723–737, 723.

  3. 3.

    Giannini (1973), pp. 15–53, 15. There exist three distinct meanings of the term “environment”: (1) the environment as referred to by the legislation and the movement of ideas relative to landscape; (2) the environment as referred to by the legislation and the movement of ideas relative to the defence of soil, air and water; (3) the environment as referred to by the legislation and in urban studies. For years, the doctrine continued to refer to this “tripartition” in order to describe the different profiles of environmental protection: Caravita (2004), p. 13, and, in greater detail, Caravita (2005), p. 16; Nespor (1986), pp. 1–8, 2.

  4. 4.

    In this regard, it should be recalled the Proceedings of the “Giornate Camerti di Diritto agrario” (1–2 December 1989); see Pennisi and Calcinelli (1990).

  5. 5.

    See Cordini et al. (2005); Costato (1987), pp. 512 et seqq; Manservisi (2008), p. 177; Costato and Manservisi (2012), p. 1.

  6. 6.

    Costato (2003), pp. 75–85, 84.

  7. 7.

    Capizzano (1987), pp. 433–451.

  8. 8.

    All the quotations in English between “” are author’s translations from Italian, if not otherwise stated.

  9. 9.

    Carrozza (1984), pp. 177–178, 177; Carrozza (1982), pp. 77 et seqq; Carrozza (1994); Carrozza (1988), pp. 93, 320. In this perspective see also Grossi (1986), pp. 427–438. The author affirms that, in comparison with many other disciplines, agricultural law is a future-oriented discipline; nonetheless, it needs to beware of the flattery of environmental law, for instance, because if “agrarian issues” becomes an opportunity, all is lost for agricultural jurists.

  10. 10.

    Galloni (1995), pp. 17–48, 27; Galloni (2000), pp. 381–411, 402.

  11. 11.

    Francario (1993), pp. 517–519; Galloni (1993), pp. 5–10.

  12. 12.

    See Jannarelli (2002), pp. 729–753, 743.

  13. 13.

    The literature is immense. See, for example, Irti (1972), pp. 391–401; Sandulli (1972), pp. 465–490; Carrozza (1985), pp. 4 et seqq; Ferrero (1979), p. 228; Capizzano (1979), pp. 23–88; Salaris (1981); Rodotà (1982), pp. 211–233; Comporti (1983), pp. 444–465; Carrozza (1983), pp. 466–473; Busnelli (1983), pp. 474–478; Costato (1983), pp. 479–488; Graziani (1985), pp. 309–316; Costato (1988), pp. 325–338; Francario (1986).

  14. 14.

    This work is obviously organized within a typically Italian dimension in that the logic of the Convention at which it was presented was to identify the differences between the various national legal systems. It is clear that an analysis of the relations between agricultural law and environmental law within a European Union perspective would have been almost analogous among the various countries.

  15. 15.

    Costato (2001), p. 34.

  16. 16.

    Doctrine has widely analyzed the sense in the introduction of the term “ecosystem,” absolutely unprecedented and not legally defined, together with the concept of environment: Tarchi (2006), pp. 65–106, 71; Grassi (2003), pp. 39–65, 57. More generally, see Benozzo and Bruno (2003), p. 5.

  17. 17.

    Emphasis added.

  18. 18.

    Tarchi (2006), p. 79.

  19. 19.

    Tarchi (2006), p. 69.

  20. 20.

    Reference is to Legislative Decree 3 April 2006, n. 152, containing “Norme in materia ambientale.”

  21. 21.

    Grassi (2003), p. 54.

  22. 22.

    See, among others, Judgements 367/2007 and 378/2007; 104/2008; 12/2009, 225/2009 and 315/2009. See the notes to some of the cited judgements Furno (2007), pp. 4119–4128; De Leonardis (2009), pp. 1455–1464.

  23. 23.

    In this sense, see Judgements 62/2008, 180/2008, 214/2008 and 437/2008 and also 61/2009 and 164/2009. The reform of Titolo V of the Italian Constitution, if correctly interpreted, in the sense of ensuring a uniformity of direction in policies regarding protection of the environment, indicates “the reference framework within which there is coordinated and coherent commitment on the part of all the subjects (Municipalities, Provinces, Metropolitan councils, Regions and State) which, in the configuration foreseen by the reformed Article 114, constitute the Republic,” in the terms efficiently expressed by Cordini (2009), pp. 611–634.

  24. 24.

    Thus, see Judgements 104/2008, 12/2009, 30/2009, 61/2009, and 225/2009.

  25. 25.

    On the one hand, Art. 37 of the Charter of Nice affirms that “a high level of environmental protection and the improvement of the quality of the environment must be integrated into the policies of the Union and ensured in accordance with the principle of sustainable development” (original text) and, on the other, that in Arts. 191–193 of the TFEU, which discipline protection of the environment, there is recognition of the right of Member States to maintain or make provisions for an even greater protection. Safeguarding the environment is, however, set out by Art. 4 of the TFEU as one among the concurrent competences of the EU. See Germanò and Rook Basile (2014), p. 81; Merusi (2007), pp. 495–501, 499.

  26. 26.

    Galloni (1986), pp. 145–190; Galloni (2000), p. 381; Sirsi (1986), pp. 415–420; Cristiani (2008), pp. 464–479.

  27. 27.

    In these terms, Francario (1993), p. 517.

  28. 28.

    The reference is to the title of the fifth section of the work by Jannarelli (2013), pp. 11–35.

  29. 29.

    See Jannarelli (2013), p. 11.

  30. 30.

    Emphasis added.

  31. 31.

    See Carrozza et al. (1989), pp. 3–34; Costato (1992), pp. 72–77; Casadei (1992), pp. 78–88.

  32. 32.

    See Germanò and Rook Basile (2014).

  33. 33.

    See the recent EU regulations of 17 December 2013 adopted within the context of cross-compliance or greening. As effectively observed, the measures that provide for reinforced eco-conditionality can be interpreted as a “consideration to be respected by farmers for the support and help granted to them by the European Union,” Germanò and Rook Basile (2014), p. 259, n. 119.

References

  • Benozzo M, Bruno F (2003) Legislazione ambientale (per uno sviluppo sostenibile del territorio). Giuffrè Editore, Milano

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolognini S (2007) La definizione giuridica di ambiente: una chimera? Diritto e Giurisprudenza Agraria Alimentare e dell’Ambiente 12:723–737

    Google Scholar 

  • Busnelli FD (1983) Dalla proprietà agraria alle proprietà agrarie, con ritorno alla proprietà. Riv Dirit Agrar 28:474–478

    Google Scholar 

  • Capizzano E (1979) La razionalità dello sfruttamento del suolo nella disciplina costituzionale dei rapporti economici e nel “nuovo” quadro pubblico di riferimento dell’attività economica in agricoltura. Diritto dell’economia 25:23–88

    Google Scholar 

  • Capizzano E (1987) Per un diritto agrario ambientale. Riv Dirit Agrar 32:433–451

    Google Scholar 

  • Caravita B (2004) Profili costituzionali e oggetto del Diritto ambientale. In: Cristiani E, Massart A (eds) Diritto agrario e ambiente. Pacini Editore, Pisa

    Google Scholar 

  • Caravita B (2005) Il diritto dell’ambiente. Il Mulino, Bologna

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrozza A (1982) Agricoltura e tutela della natura (L’impatto ecologico sul diritto agrario). Giurisprudenza agraria italiana 29:77 et seqq.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrozza A (1983) La proprietà come istituto del diritto agrario. Riv Dirit Agrar 28:466–473

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrozza A (1984) Due alternative alla concezione “pura” del diritto agrario: diritto ambientale e diritto agro-alimentare. Riv Dirit Agrar 29:177–178

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrozza A (1985) Diritto agrario e Costituzione. Riv Dirit Agrar 30:4–31

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrozza A (1988) Lezioni di diritto agrario. Giuffrè Editore, Milano

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrozza A (1994) Lineamenti di un diritto agrario ambientale. I materiali possibili. I leganti disponibili. Riv Dirit Agrar 39:151–172

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrozza A, Comporti M, Panuccio V (1989) La didattica del diritto agrario: i testi dell’ultima generazione, vol XXXV. Accademia Economico Agraria dei Georgofili, Stamperia Editoriale Parenti, Firenze

    Google Scholar 

  • Casadei E (1992) L’insegnamento del diritto agrario nelle Facoltà di Agraria. Riv Dirit Agrar 37:78–88

    Google Scholar 

  • Comporti M (1983) La proprietà agraria. Riv Dirit Agrar 28:444–465

    Google Scholar 

  • Cordini G (2009) Principi costituzionali in tema di ambiente e giurisprudenza della Corte Costituzionale italiana. Rivista giuridica dell’ambiente 24:611–634

    Google Scholar 

  • Cordini G, Fois P, Marchisio S (2005) Diritto ambientale, profili internazionali, europei e comparati. Giappichelli Editore, Torino

    Google Scholar 

  • Costato L (1983) Proprietà terriera e potere politico. Riv Dirit Agrar 28:479–488

    Google Scholar 

  • Costato L (1987) Alcune considerazioni sul diritto comunitario fra agricoltura e ambiente (anche a proposito dell’Atto unico europeo e dei regolamenti 1760 e 2242/87). Rivista di diritto agrario 32:512 et seqq.

    Google Scholar 

  • Costato L (1988) Proprietà agraria. Enciclopedia del diritto XXXVII:325–338

    Google Scholar 

  • Costato L (1992) L’insegnamento del diritto agrario nelle Facoltà giuridiche. Riv Dirit Agrar 37:72–77

    Google Scholar 

  • Costato L (2001) Corso di Diritto agrario. Giuffrè Editore, Milano

    Google Scholar 

  • Costato L (2003) Per una storia del diritto agrario. Riv Dirit Agrar 48:75–85

    Google Scholar 

  • Costato L, Manservisi S (2012) Profili di diritto ambientale nell’Unione Europea. CEDAM, Padova

    Google Scholar 

  • Cristiani E (2004) La disciplina dell’agricoltura biologica fra tutela dell’ambiente e sicurezza alimentare. Giappichelli Editore, Torino

    Google Scholar 

  • Cristiani E (2008) Le riviste agraristiche italiane e i nuovi contenuti del diritto agrario. Riv Dirit Agrar 53:464–479

    Google Scholar 

  • De Leonardis F (2009) La Corte Costituzionale sul Codice dell’ambiente tra moderazione e disinvoltura. Rivista giuridica dell’edilizia 4:1455–1464

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrero E (1979) La proprietà terriera. Giappichelli, Torino

    Google Scholar 

  • Francario L (1986) Le destinazioni della proprietà a tutela del paesaggio. Jovene, Napoli

    Google Scholar 

  • Francario L (1993) Agricoltura e ambiente: nuovi stimoli per l’approccio giuridico. Diritto e giurisprudenza agraria e dell’ambiente 10:517–519

    Google Scholar 

  • Furno E (2007) La Corte Costituzionale “salva” la cogestione in materia paesaggistica ma non scioglie il nodo dei rapporti Stato-Regioni. Giurisprudenza costituzionale 6:4119–4128

    Google Scholar 

  • Galloni G (1986) Il contributo culturale delle riviste agraristiche. In: Massart A (ed) Metodi e contenuti del Diritto agrario moderno. Giuffré Editore, Milano, pp 145–190

    Google Scholar 

  • Galloni G (1993) Profili giuridici di un nuovo rapporto tra agricoltura ed ambiente. Diritto e Giurisprudenza Agraria e dell’Ambiente 1:5–10

    Google Scholar 

  • Galloni G (1995) L’incontro tra agricoltura e ambiente: fondamenti costituzionali. In: Galloni G, Tarolo C, Donnhauser C (eds) Agricoltura e ambiente (Il cambiamento di rotta della nuova PAC e la sua attuazione in Italia). Pirola, Milano, pp 17–48

    Google Scholar 

  • Galloni G (2000) Nuovi confini del Diritto agrario fra il diritto comunitario e il diritto ambientale. Riv Dirit Agrar 45:381–411

    Google Scholar 

  • Germanò A, Rook Basile E (2014) Manuale di diritto agrario comunitario. Giappichelli Editore, Torino

    Google Scholar 

  • Giannini MS (1973) Ambiente: saggio sui diversi suoi aspetti giuridici. Rivista trimestrale di diritto pubblico 23:15–53

    Google Scholar 

  • Grassi S (2003) Agricoltura, ambiente ed ecosistema. In: Germanò A (ed) Il governo dell’agricoltura nel nuovo Titolo V della Costituzione. Giuffrè Editore, Milano, pp 39–65

    Google Scholar 

  • Grassi S (2012) Problemi di diritto costituzionale dell’ambiente. Giuffrè Editore, Milano

    Google Scholar 

  • Graziani CA (1985) Sull’attualità dell’art. 44 della Costituzione. Nuovo diritto agrario 12:309–316

    Google Scholar 

  • Grossi P (1986) Relazione di sintesi. In: Massart A (ed) Metodi e contenuti del diritto agrario moderno. Giuffrè Editore, Milano, pp 427–438

    Google Scholar 

  • Irti N (1972) Profili della programmazione agricola (o per una rilettura dell’art.44, I°comma Cost.). Riv Dirit Agrar 18:391–401

    Google Scholar 

  • Jannarelli A (2002) Il diritto agrario tra profilo globale e profilo locale: spunti sul metodo e l’oggetto della ricerca. Rivista di diritto agrario 47:729–753

    Google Scholar 

  • Jannarelli A (2013) Il divenire del diritto agrario italiano ed europeo tra sviluppi tecnologici e sostenibilità. Riv Dirit Agrar 58:11–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Manservisi S (2008) L’interattività delle norme ambientali e di quelle agrarie internazionali nel contesto comunitario e nazionale. Aracne, Roma

    Google Scholar 

  • Merusi F (2007) Il diritto ambientale. Riv Dirit Agrar 52:495–501

    Google Scholar 

  • Nespor S (1986) Ambiente 1973–1986. Rivista giuridica dell’ambiente 1:1–8

    Google Scholar 

  • Pennisi R, Calcinelli C (eds) (1990) Tutela ambientale e centralità dell’agricoltura. Centro interdipartimentale audiovisivi e stampa dell’Università, Camerino

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodotà S (1982) Sub art. 44. In: Branca G (ed) Commentario della Costituzione. Zanichelli, Bologna, pp 211–233

    Google Scholar 

  • Salaris F (1981) Considerazioni sulla proprietà agricola. Giuffrè Editore, Milano

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandulli AM (1972) Profili costituzionali della proprietà privata. Riv Trimest Dirit Proced Civ 26:465–490

    Google Scholar 

  • Sirsi E (1986) La “cultura” delle Riviste e la Rivista di Diritto agrario. In: Massart A (ed) Metodi e contenuti del diritto agrario moderno. Giuffrè Editore, Milano, pp 415–420

    Google Scholar 

  • Tarchi R (2006) Agricoltura e ambiente. In: Rook Basile E (ed) Dopo la modifica dell’art. 117 Cost.: problemi ed esperienze sulla competenza della materia agricoltura. Giuffrè Editore, Milano, pp 65–106

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Law, Politics and Development (Dirpolis), Sant’Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy

    E. Cristiani

Authors
  1. E. Cristiani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to E. Cristiani .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dipartimento di Scienze Giuridiche, Università del Salento, Lecce, Italy

    Massimo Monteduro

  2. Dipartimento di Scienze Giuridiche; Institute for the History of Law, Università del Salento; University of Münster, Münster, Germany, Lecce, Italy

    Pierangelo Buongiorno

  3. Dipartimento di Scienze Giuridiche, Università del Salento, Lecce, Italy

    Saverio Di Benedetto

  4. Dipartimento di Storia, Societ a e Studi sull’Uomo, Università del Salento, Lecce, Italy

    Alessandro Isoni

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Cristiani, E. (2015). The Relationship Between Agricultural Law and Environmental Law in Italy. In: Monteduro, M., Buongiorno, P., Di Benedetto, S., Isoni, A. (eds) Law and Agroecology. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-46617-9_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation