At times legal systems feel like going round in circles. Legal procedures move from one stage to the next and they may get referred back to the previous instance to resolve a particular issue or restart the procedure. This has good reasons with the aim of “doing justice”. Sociolegal circularity, however, begins before the, right at the beginning and negotiation of legislation on which all legal systems are based in democracies, that is. Hence, the legal definition of waste, recycling as part of the circular economy and society is rather crucial.
Circularity is a complex sociolegal issue as the example of PFAS in plastics demonstrate. In economic theory the existence of externalities invites profit seeking of the kind like: “the sea in large part is owned by us all and there is no price attached to the (ab)use of it. Dumb PFAS into the sea, because the costs of cleaning up will be shared by all of us”. In order to limit the extent of this economic logic, we have to rely on sociolegal processes. The precise definition of property rights and liabilities beyond the PFAS issue have to be well-defined. It is an intergenerational topic as well, not only in view of deferred payments.
Parliaments have to be rather competent to look through all the complex issues of producing and recycling of materials to make sound provisions in law including future generations. Going round in circles in parliament is yet another element of necessary condition of circularity in a rather broad sense.
The air we breathe and the water we drink have become part of this “economic externality”, which is a very internal, inside of our body kind of sociolegal affair. Who is responsible for the bad air we breathe and the contaminated water we drink? Air and water have for a long time become marketable products. The more your local water is polluted, the more we are forced to buy water. The more the air in inner cities is filled with fine dust particles, the more medical doctors, hospitals and rehabilitation facilities we need to construct.
For GDP calculations these are win-win-win situations, although they make us all worse off. Society and politics are in charge to define and redefine (yes, circles again) the legal basis with a lot of precision and scientific detail. Sociolegal circularity is key. You just have to turn it in the right direction.
(Image, Palais de Justice, Brussels view from Forest district).
Research Teaching Consulting