İyi Çevresel Yönetişim Bağlamında Aarhus Sözleşmesi’nin Analizi

Öz

Aarhus Sözleşmesi, çevresel yönetişim ve katılımcı demokrasi arasındaki ilişkiyi güçlendirmeye hizmet eden uluslararası bir anlaşmayı temsil etmektedir. Çevresel haklar konusunda önemli bir belgedir. Sözleşme’nin belirtilen amaçları üç yönlüdür: ilk olarak, çevresel karar alma süreçlerine katılımı artırmayı amaçlar; ikinci olarak, çevre bilincini artırmayı amaçlar; ve üçüncü olarak, çevresel adaleti sağlamayı amaçlar. Bu nedenle Sözleşme, çevresel yönetişimin temel ilkelerinin güçlendirilmesi açısından büyük önem taşımaktadır. Ayrıca çevre sorunlarının çözümüne yönelik sürdürülebilir bir yaklaşımı da teşvik etmektedir. Bu makalenin amacı, Aarhus Sözleşmesi’nin ilkeleri doğrultusunda çevresel yönetişim mekanizmalarını analiz etmek ve Sözleşme’nin temel ilkeleri ile etkili çevresel yönetişimin temel ilkeleri arasındaki bağlantıyı açıklamaktır. Araştırma konusunu objektif ve kapsamlı bir şekilde sunabilmek için nitel bir yaklaşım kullanılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Çevresel Yönetişim
• Çevresel Bilgiye erişim
• Halkın Katılımı
• Adalete Erişim
• Çevre Hakkı

Analysis of the Aarhus Convention in the Context of Good Environmental Governance

Öz

The Aarhus Convention represents an international agreement that serves to strengthen the relationship between environmental governance and participatory democracy. It is an important document on environmental rights. The Convention's stated aims are threefold: firstly, it seeks to increase participation in environmental decision-making processes; secondly, it aims to raise environmental awareness; and thirdly, it seeks to ensure environmental justice. The Convention is therefore of great significance in reinforcing the basic principles of environmental governance. It also promotes a sustainable approach to solving environmental problems. The objective of this article is to analyse the mechanisms of environmental governance in accordance with the principles of the Aarhus Convention, and to elucidate the interconnection between fundamental tenets of the Convention and the foundational principles of effective environmental governance. In order to present the research topic in an objective and comprehensive manner, a qualitative approach was employed.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Environmental Governance
• Accesss to Informatıon
• Publıc Participation
• Access to Justice
• Environmental Right

Kaynakça

1. Aslan Acar, Ş. (2020). The Reflectıons of Arne Naess’ Deep Ecology Prıncıples ın Rac.hel Carson and Yaşar Kemal’s Works. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Van Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Van.
2. Aydın, Y. (2019). Nesiller Arası Adalet: Rawls’cu Bir Savunma. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Bartın Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Bartın.
3. Baker, S. (2006). Sustaınable Development. London and New York: Routledge Taylor&Francis Group Bar, Magdalena. (2023). ‘’Access to justice regarding plans and programmes related to the environment – Polish law in the light of Article 9.3 of the Aarhus Convention’’. Opolskie Studia Administracyjno-Prawne, 21(1), 33–50. https://doi.org/10.25167/osap.5005
4. Bal, H., Algan, N. & Özdemir, P. (2015). Yeni Kurumsalcı Perspektifte Çevresel Yönetişim ve Kurumsal Çerçevenin Önemi. Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi, 16(2), 179-191.
5. Bennett, J. N. & Satterfield, T. (2018). Environmental Governance: A Practıcal Framework to Guıde Desing, Evaluation and Analysis, Conservation Letters, 11 (6), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12600
6. Benson, D. & Jordan, A. (2017). Environmental Governance, The International Encyclopedia of Geography.https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9781118786352.wbieg0631 adresinden erişildi.
7. Bierman, F., Stevens, C., Bernstein, S., Gupta, A., Kabiri, N., Kanie, N., Levy, M., Nilsson, M., Pinter, L., Scobie, M., & Young, R. O. (2014). İntegrating Governance into the Sustainable Development Goals, Policy Brief, Post2015/UNU-IAS, Tokyo:United Nations University Institue fort he Advanced Study of Sustainability.
8. Bozlağan, R. (2005). Sürdürülebilir Gelişme Düşüncesinin Tarihsel Arka Planı, Sosyal Siyaset Konferansları Dergisi, 50, 1012-1028.

9. Dellinger, M. (2012). Ten Years of the Aarhus Convention: How Procedural Democracy is Paving the Way for Substantive Change in National and International Environmental Law. Colorada Journal of International Environmental Law and Policy, Cilt:23, Sayı:2, s.309-336.
10. Dudykina, I. P. (2018). The Aarhus Convention in Russian and Foreign International Legal Doctrines. Moscow Journal of International Law, 4, 96-109. DOİ:10.24833/0869-0049-2018-4-96-109
11. Ebbesson, J., Gaugitsch, H., Jendroska, J., Marshall, F. & Stec, Stephen. (2014). The Aarhus Convention: An Implementation Guide. New York: UNITED NATIONS. https://unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/pp/Publications/Aarhus_Implementation_Guide_interactive_eng.pdf adresinden erişildi.
12. Edgar, L., Marshall, C. & Bassett, M. (08.08.2006). Partnerships: Putting Good Governance Principles in Practice. 11.09.2020 tarihinde Institute On Governance: https://www.iog.ca/docs/2006_August_partnerships.pdf adresinden alındı.
13. Ertürk, C. (2018). Uluslararası Çevre Hukukunda Halkın Katılımı İlkesi ve İlkenin Ulusal Hukuka Yansıması. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, İstanbul Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul.
14. Fitzpatrick, J.J. (2020). Target Ecological Limits and Not Economics Growth, World, 1, 135-148. https://doi.org/10.3390/world1020011
15. Fitzpatrick, J. J. & Mullally, B. (2019). Assessing Environmental Sustainability Using Ecological Limits Expressed as Mass Flowrates with the Inclusion of a Sustainable Time Perspective. 03.11.2020 tarihinde www.mdpi.com/journal/chemengineering adresinden alındı.
16. Förschner, M. (2006). Successful Partnerships a Guide. 11.03.2020 tarihinde OECD LEED Forum on Partnerships and Local Governance: https://www.oecd.org/cfe/leed/45204556.pdf adresinden alındı.
17. Giviashvili, I. (2011). The Implementatıon of Procedural Envıronmental Rıghts: The BTC Case Study on The Implementatıon of Procedural Environmental Rıghts. Nottingham Trent Universty, PhD Thesis, England.
18. Gokhelashvili, N. (2015). The Role of the Publıc ın Environmental Decision-Making. American Journal of Environmental Protection, 3(1), 1-7.
19. Goldeman, G. & Zaharchenko, R. T. (2004). Accountability in Governance: The Challenge of Implementing the Aarhus Convention in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. Internatıonal Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 4, 229-251.
20. Güneş, M. A. (2010). Aarhus Sözleşmesi Üzerine Bir İnceleme. Gazi Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, 14(1), 299-333.
21. Gür, N. (2008). The Effects of Envıronmental Polıcıes on Economıc Development. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Marmara Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul.
22. Hamunakwadi, L. D. (2019). Polıtıcs Global Environmental Governance and Polıcy: Understandıng the Global Marketızatıon of Envıronmental Governance and Polıcy Usıng The Karıba Redd+Project ın Zımbabwe. Master Thesis, Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli Üniversitesi, Lisansüstü Eğitim Enstitüsü, Ankara.
23. Haque, M. (2017). Environmental Governance. Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public, Policy and Governance. 1-9. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/318166768_Environmental_Governance
24. Huijistoe, M. M., Francken, M. & Leroy, P. (2007). Partnerships for Sustainable Development: A Review of Current Literature. Environmental Sciences, 4(2), 75-89.
25. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/46686504_Partnerships_for_sustainable_development_A_review_of_current_literature
26. Jeffery, I. M. (2005). Environmental Governance: A Comparative Analysis of Public Participation and Access to Justice. Journal of South Pacific Law, 9(2), 1-31. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228149393_Environmental_Governance_A_Comparative_Analysis_of_Public_Participation_and_Access_to_Justice
27. Jindal, N. (2014). Good Governance: Needs and Challenges’’, Internatıonal Journal of Scientific& Engineering Research, 5(5),113-116. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/304023759_GOOD_GOVERNANCE_NEEDS_AND_CHALLENGES
28. Kalisz, A. (2021). Right to Court in Climate Matters in the Light of the Aarhus Convention and the Case Law of Polish Administrative Courts. Studia Iuridica Lublinensia, 30(5), 275-293. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/357232562_Right_to_Court_in_Climate_Matters_in_the_Light_of_the_Aarhus_Convention_and_the_Case_Law_of_Polish_Administrative_Courts
29. Kahar, R. & Nath P. (2018). Good Governance: Ethos and Ethics, Journal of Political Sciences&Public Affairs, 6(4), https://www.longdom.org/open-access/good-governance-ethos-and-ethics-2332-0761-1000342.pdf
30. Kırışık, F. (2013). Ekolojik Sorunların Çözümünde Derin Ekoloji Yaklaşımı. Ekonomi ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 9(9), .279-301. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/esad/issue/6062/81553
31. Klarin, T. (2018). The Concept of Sustainable Development: From its Beginning to the Contemporary Issues, Zagreb International Review Of Economics&Business, 21(1), 67-94. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326164068_The_Concept_of_Sustainable_Development_From_its_Beginning_to_the_Contemporary_Issues
32. Kramer, L. (2018). Cıtızens Rıgts and Admınıstratıon Dutıes ın Envıronmental Matters: 20 Years of the Aarhus Conventıon’’, Revısta Catalana De Dret Ambıental, 9(1), 1-26. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330443452_Citizens_rights_and_administrations'_duties_in_environmental_matters_20_years_of_the_Aarhus_Convention
33. Kubıak, M. M. (2018). The Legal Force and Effectıveness of the Aarhus Conventıon ın the Polısh Legal System, Wroclaw Review of Law, Administratıon & Economics, 8(2), 360-371. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330475946_The_Legal_Force_and_Effectiveness_of_the_Aarhus_Convention_in_the_Polish_Legal_System
34. Laernoes, P. E. (2011). The Aarhus Convention: A Partial Solution for the Environmental&Democratic Crises?. Faculty of Geosciences Theses, Master Thesis.
35. Lee, M. (2023). The Aarhus Convention 1998 and the Environment Act 2021: Eroding Public Participation. Modern Law Review, 86(3), 756-784. https://typeset.io/papers/the-aarhus-convention-1998-and-the-environment-act-2021-2ief50lr
36. Lavrysen, L. (2010). The Aarhus Conventıon: Between Envıronmental Protectıon and Human Rıghts,https://www.researchgate.net/publication/293819193_The_Aarhus_Convention_Between_Environmental_Protection_and_Human_Rights adresinden erişildi.
37. Lemos, C.M. & Agrawal, A. (2006). Environmental Governance, Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour, 31, 297-325. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228122528_Environmental_Governance
38. Mustaghfiroh, U., Nimah, K. L., Sundusiyah, A., Addahlawi, A. H. & Hidayatullah, F. A. (2020). ‘’ Implementasi prinsip good environmental governance dalam pengelolaan sampah di indonesia’’. Bina Hukum Lingkungan , 4(2), 279-291.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343377056_IMPLEMENTASI_PRINSIP_GOOD_ENVIRONMENTAL_GOVERNANCE_DALAM_PENGELOLAAN_SAMPAH_DI_INDONESIA
39. Nicollettia, M., Maschiettoa, F. & Morenob T. (2020). Integrating social learning into climate change adaptation public policy cycle: Building upon from experiences in Brazil and the United Kingdom, Environmental Development, 33, 1-15. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/337674989_Integrating_social_learning_into_climate_change_adaptation_public_policy_cycle_Building_upon_from_experiences_in_Brazil_and_the_United_Kingdom
40. Oliver, P. (2013). Access to Informatıon and to Justice in EU Environmental Law: The Aarhus Convention. Fordham International Law Journal, 5(36), 1423-1470.
41. https://www.academia.edu/87606950/Access_to_Information_and_to_Justice_in_EU_Environmental_Law_The_Aarhus_Convention
42. Orhan, Ö. (2009). Environmental Justice in World Politics, Alternatives: Turkish Journal of International Relations, 8(1), 59-84. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/alternatives/issue/1698/21088#article_cite
43. Pal, P. R. (2017). Challenges and Prospects of Good Governance ın Reductıon of Poverty: A Case Study of Buee Town 01 Kebele, Ethıopıa, Global Journal of Political Science and Administration, 5(3), 13-27.
44. Panovics, A. (2023). Requests for internal review and the revised Aarhus Regulation. Essays of Faculty of Law University of Pécs, Yearbook of, 1, 143-157.
45. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/371677283_Requests_for_internal_review_and_the_revised_Aarhus_Regulation
46. Plessis, A. (2008). Public Particiption, Good Environmental Governance and Fulfilment of Environmental Rigts. Potchefstroom Electronic Law Jornual/Potchefsroomse Electroniese Regsblad, 11(8), 1-34.
47. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317904090_Public_participation_Good_Environmental_Governance_and_fulfilment_of_Environmental_rights
48. Pocuca, M., Mladenov, M. & Mirković, P. (2018). The analysis of the Aarhus convention in the context of good environmental governance. Ekonomika poljoprivrede, 65(4), 1615-1625. https://doi:10.5937/ekoPolj1804615P
49. Ramkumar, V. & Petkova, E., (2007). Transparency in Environmental Governance. The Rıght to Know: Transparency for an Open World. içinde (279-308). New York: Columbia
50. UniversityPress.http://policydialogue.org/files/publications/Transparency_in_Env_Governance_Ramkumar_Petkova.pdf adresinden 13/01/2021 tarihinde erişildi.
51. Sancak, E. (2021). Yerel Yönetimlerin Yönetimden Yönetişime Geçiş Sürecinde Çevresel Yönetişim Algısı: Çanakkale Belediyesi Örneği. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Çanakkale On sekiz Mart Üniversitesi, Lisansüstü Eğitim Enstitüsü, Çanakkale. Sancak, E. ve Bilgili, A. (2021). Belediyelerin Çevresel Yönetişim Algısı: Çanakkale Örneği, Türk İdare Dergisi, 493, 241-274. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/358309526_Belediyelerin_Cevresel_Yonetisim_Algisi_Canakkale_Belediyesi_Ornegi
52. Silina, M. (2011). Aarhus Sözleşmesi: Çevresel Demokrasi İçin Rehberiniz. E. Başak (Çev.), Avrupa ECO Formu.
53. Sharif N. S. M., (2016). Publıc Access to Environmental Informatıon and Partıcıpatıon ın Envıronmental Decısıon-Makıng: A Malaysıan Case Study. PhD Thesis, Imperial College London, Centre for Environmental Policy, London.
54. Sommermann, K. P. (2017). Transformative Effects of the Aarhus Convention in Europe. 321-337.
55. Sophia, A. ve Devi, M. S. (2020). Environmental Problems of Manıpur. Holistic Approach Environ, 10(4), 124-140.
56. Temizel, Ö. (2023). Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma Bağlamında Küresel Çevresel Yönetişim. Fiscaoeconomia, 7(1), 232-250. https://doi.org/10.25295/fsecon.1141427
57. Yalçın, A. (2010). İyi Yönetişim İlkeleri ve Türk Kamu Yönetimine Yansımaları. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Sakarya Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Sakarya.
58. Yalçın, O. (2010). Çevre Koruma Fikrine Radikal Yaklaşımlar; Derin Ekoloji, Sosyal Ekoloji ve Ekofeminizm. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
59. Yardımcı, S. (2006). İnsan-Doğa İlişkisi Ekseninde Derin Ekoloji ve Toplumsal Ekoloji, Yüksek Lisans Tezi Ankara Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
60. Whittakerv, S., Mendel, J. & Reid, T, C. (2019). ‘’Back to Square One: Revisiting How We Analyse the Right of Access to Environmental Information’’. Journal of Environmental Law, 31(3), 465–485. https://doi.org/10.1093/jel/eqz013