Ecocide: Making Environmental Destruction A Crime
We now live in a world where the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere has reached 415 parts per million – something that has not been seen in over 23 million years, and a situation which will ensure we see an average global temperature rise of 1.5°C by 2025.
As a result, we will see the deaths of millions of people, the displacement of billions more, mass species extinction, more widespread disease, unliveable heat, ecosystem collapse and rising sea levels within the next 30 years.
The cause of this is unequivocal: human activity.
More specifically, the activity of capitalist corporations. In fact, a Carbon Majors Report from 2017 found that just 100 companies are responsible for 71% of global emissions.
This is why a systems change is as essential as climate action by individuals. Corporations have long caused the largest amount of damage but not been held accountable for their actions. However that might change in the near future.
Today we look at ecocide, and how new legal definitions could have major implications for holding corporations criminally accountable for offences against the environment.
Defining Ecocide
“Unlawful or wanton acts committed with the knowledge that there is substantial likelihood of severe and widespread or long-term damage to the environment being caused by those acts.”
This is the definition of ecocide that has been put forward by the Stop Ecocide Foundation, who are pushing for the International Criminal Court (ICC) to create a global legal precedent against which relevant cases of ecological destruction can be judged.
They hope that this will push corporations and national governments to step up their climate action in the face of the Climate Crisis, with so many still lacking the intent needed to avert the very worst outcomes.
Graph showing the long-term increase of average temperatures in Ireland between 1901-2019. Credit: Prof Ed Hawkins
And the significance of an international legal ecocide definition is profound.
If adopted by the ICC’s members, it would become just the fifth offence that the court prosecutes – alongside crimes against humanity, war crimes, genocide and the crime of aggression. In fact, it would be the first new international crime since the 1940s, when Nazi leaders were prosecuted for war crimes.
The international nature of such legislation is essential, as it closes loopholes for corporations to ‘move’ emissions from one country to another, or blur their responsibilities across national borders – in much the same way that we so often see corporations shirking their tax obligations internationally.
Acting On Ecocide
The proposal has been widely supported by small island nations in the Pacific and Indian Oceans given their extreme vulnerability to the consequences of the Climate Crisis, and has also received backing from French President, Emmanuel Macron, along with a number of other European nations.
Having an international definition ecocide will support prosecution against a wide range of forms of ecological destruction – from nuclear incidents and oil spills, to deforestation and hunting of protected species.
Graph showing usage of “Climate Change” and “Climate Crisis” over time - with the former becoming more common in the mid-1970s, but only reaching mainstream use in the early 2000s. The term “Climate Crisis”, which drives home the severity of the situation has yet to reach such mainstream use. Credit: Google Ngram
Jojo Meta, Executive Director of Stop Ecocide International, stated: “The world is waking up to the danger we are facing if we continue along our current trajectory. The definition is well-pitched between what needs to be done correctly to protect ecosystems and what will be acceptable to states.”
“It’s concise, it’s based on strong legal precedents and it will mesh well with existing laws. Governments will take it seriously, and it offers a workable legal tool corresponding to a real and pressing need in the world.”
Ireland is a great example of national governments needing to respect ecocide laws. In 2020, the Supreme Court ruled in favour of a group of citizens who took the Irish government to court for failing to take adequate action to address the Climate Crisis.
Why It Matters
In 1957, scientists working for Humble Oil (now ExxonMobil) published a paper making a clear link between fossil fuel use and rising CO2 emissions. This was compounded in 1968, when a report produced for the American Petroleum Institute warned that among the possible sources of rising CO2 in the atmosphere “none seems to fit the presently observed situation as well as the fossil fuel emanation theory.”
The paper went on to warn that significant rises in CO2 emissions could melt ice caps, increase sea levels, change fish distributions and affect plant photosynthesis, according to the Center for International Environmental Law.
Since 1965, ExxonMobil has contributed 41.90 billion tonnes of CO2 equivalent alone – the fourth largest emitter worldwide.
As such, we know that Big Oil producers – the most polluting industry in human history – have been aware of their role in the Climate Crisis, and the consequences of inaction of emissions, for at least 50 years.
Yet they have chosen – and continue to choose – not to act. Instead relying on greenwashing to delay climate action while increasing their profits, despite having made hundreds of billions of dollars since the 1960s.
And it isn’t just inaction on the Climate Crisis that Big Oil is responsible for. The landmark 2011 case brought against Chevron by Stephen Dozinger on behalf of 30,000 Ecuadorian farmers found that the corporation was guilty of consistently destroying the environment and endangering the health of local people by repeatedly dumping chemical-laden waste water into land and water systems.
Despite the Ecuadorian courts awarding the plaintiffs $9.5 billion in damages, Chevron have never paid, and have since had Dozinger placed under house arrest as they pursue legal action against the American lawyer.
International ecocide laws will set new precedents for action on these injustices, and hold accountable whose who secure vast profits at the cost of humans and nature suffering.
Furthermore, the implementation of such laws is crucial for ensuring a just climate transition – where the wealthiest nations and those with the highest emissions are held accountable for making the greatest cuts, while also giving a greater say to nations in the Global South, who have historically had the lowest carbon footprints, and which are most vulnerable in the face of the Climate Crisis.
The definition and application of ecocide has been submitted to the ICC, although it has yet to be approved at the time of writing (29 June 2021).
What To Read Next
The People vs Shell: People & Planet Win
Landmark ruling puts major polluters on notice as Dutch court forces Shell to reduce CO2 emissions by 45% by the end of 2030 in the face of the Climate Crisis
How To Calculate Your Carbon Footprint
Find out how to measure your carbon footprint so that you can better understand your impact on the climate crisis, and take steps to reduce emissions
The Problem With PR
We look at the ethics of naming and shaming PR agencies who reinforce greenwashing in Ireland and abroad, and what this means for the climate crisis