The second millennium represents the watershed between two substantially different conceptions of life.
One comes from the individual needs of men, and the other comes from a universal and global vision of humanity.
The first concept was born with man and developed with him through an ever greater awareness of his own needs, which have progressed from elementary ones (such as food) to more complex ones(such as entertainment).

This concept, though undergoing a slow and gradual evolution, has, however, remained hinged in a well-defined limit that has been, up until today, that of an egocentric relationship between individual rights and public law.
The advent of the post-industrial era, characterized by the globalization process and by environmental emergencies, has produced a series of concrete needs that are increasingly affecting the relationships between responsibility, individual rights and public law.
To give an example which can be readily understood, it is enough to remember that today every single productive activity weighs upon the world’s energy balance, with direct repercussions on the questions of the Kyoto protocol.
This protocol tends to implement a criterion of global self-management for the emission of carbon dioxide and gases responsible for the greenhouse effect in order to reach, in the long term, a balance in which the composition of the Earth’s atmosphere does not change its native composition.
This is why the egocentric vision of one’s own development (and one’s own needs) must necessarily be concentric to a vision in which every single individual (and activity) is organised within this new and great vision i.e. respect for the Kyoto protocol.
It must immediately be made clear that the Kyoto protocol will not be the last act of a sufficiently valid vision for environmental protection. It does, however, represent a first step that, from the definition found in the 1987 Brundtland Report within a UNEP conference to today, at least guarantees a well-defined horizon towards which we can move.
If the Protocol points out to the States that have signed it, and to those we hope will sign in the future, a horizon to be reached at various regular intervals, its fulfilment at a private level remains more complex. This regards its practical enactment by individuals who, through their social behaviour, contribute to the emission/absorption balance of the nation as a whole.

1. The Agro-environmental question

Leaving out everything we know about human activities, we want to analyze a little more closely the questions linked to the agricultural and forest sectors, above all, the repercussions they have on the national and international policies of reference.
We believe in an increasingly congruous vision that not only includes traditional market laws, but a set of references where energy budgets, contributions to emissions/absorption and, obviously, traditional market laws have a single function.
From this point of view the relationship between those having a part of the environment (the agricultural or Forest Company, uncultivated land, parks, gardens, etc.) and public utilities has to be based on objective responsibility.
For example, if up until today European policies (and national ones as well) have produced incentives in relation to the quality of the production, the concept of quality must also include the principle of reference to the Kyoto protocol for every single territorial unit. Whoever holds a part of the environment must receive incentives or disincentives according to whether they contribute negatively or positively to this more complex balance.
A course has been taken that cannot evidently harm private law, as such, but rather the role and relation (both fiscal and in terms of incentives) between the sovereign government and the holder of a part of the environment.
This principle, once calibrated in its concrete application, would have notable repercussions on production policy in the relationship between holder/territorial unit and their market.

Another example which can be immediately understood lies in seeing, also in our country, whole agricultural districts which have been abandoned and at the moment lie in a state of productive and property stagnation.
The norms will also have to face these situations by directing private citizens toward the application of a productive principle which conforms more to the complexity of the general thermodynamic norms to which the Kyoto protocol wants to educate us.
In a Country such as ours, which is scarce in traditional energy forms (oil, carbon fossil, etc.) it is of absolute importance to have the possibility to direct our territory from this renewed production-energy viewpoint which, in addition, conforms to the necessary application of the Kyoto protocol.

2. National political policy

This new vision of the relationship between private law and public need evidently cannot fail to have an effect on the political policy of individual Countries.
It becomes fundamental to have a direct, responsible relationship between the State and the Citizen who holds the territorial unit. It is a relationship that has to address the heart of the question, preferably in fiscal terms (through incentives or disincentives), according to the capacities of these new types of businessmen to contribute positively, negatively or neutrally to the Kyoto Protocol.
This can permit us to understand how in the future the role of every single citizen will increasingly be that of a responsible and direct actor within an energy- production model with efficient thermodynamic outputs.
To this end the energy efficiency of activities within the territorial units has ever greater value. This efficiency coherently follows the principles and rules of the ecosystem and not the criterions of a financial and economic system which have to be completely rewritten.
In any case, in 1997, in Kyoto, Japan, the Conference adopted a protocol that establishes:
The commitment of industrialised Countries to reduce the emission of the principal greenhouse gases by a total of 5.3% with respect to 1990 levels in the period between 2008 and 2012. These gases are: Carbonic Dioxide (CO2), Methane, Nitrous oxide (N20), the Hydrofluorocarbons (HFC), Perfluorocarbons (PFC), and Sulphur Hexafluoride (SF6).
It has identified the actions which will have to be taken by “Annex I” countries, by industrialised countries and by countries with developing economies, in order to reduce emissions, with particular reference to:
· Promotion of energy efficiency in all sectors;
· Development of renewable sources for the production of energy and innovative technologies for
the reduction of emissions;
· Protection and extension of forests for the absorption of carbon;
· Promotion of sustainable agriculture;
· Limitation and reduction of the emission of methane from garbage tips and from other energy
·Appropriate fiscal measures to discourage the emission of greenhouse gases

In reality, many of the countries that signed the Kyoto agreement still have not approved programmes in which the protocol is applied, weakening the agreement.
In short, the Kyoto protocol makes us understand, if there were still any doubts, that the concept of production, energy, efficiency and pollution, is a single equation in which human models and behaviour can be reconverted. .
In the agro-environmental sector, there are scenarios and courses for policies of support and incentives that will necessarily have to be considered by the European Union
Above all, we want to point out that single member states, on the basis of the Kyoto protocol and of other international agreements, such as the Nice Paper, can enact legislative norms of reference that head in this direction. But here, unfortunately, we enter into a principle of political awareness of the question that struggles to set in because there is scant knowledge of the matter.

Guido Bissanti


AA. VV. (2004); Book Energia Gas 2004; Editrice Reporter.
AA. VV. (2004); Records of the “Enercon 2004” Conference ; International Institute of
AA. VV. (2004); Newsletter “The Sun in 360 Degrees”; ISES – International Solar Energy
Society Italia.
AA. VV. (2004); Records of the “Energy and Environment” Conference; Europolis Bologna.
AA. VV. (2004); Records of the “Next Energy 2004” Conference; Kyoto Club.
G. ALPA, Law subjective to a healthy environment: “new” law or technical expedient, in AA.VV. , Ambiente e diritto, 1999.
L. ORTEGA ALVAREZ – Leciones de derecho del medio ambiente, Valladolid, 1998;
C. AMIRANTE, Laws of man and the constitutional system: a future with an ancient heart?, introductory essay in E. Denninger, Diritti dell’uomo e legge fondamentale, Turin, 1997.
C. AMIRANTE, fundamental laws and social laws in constitutional jurisprudence, Naples 1995.
C. AMIRANTE, Constitutional interpretation, in C. Amirante (edited by) Unioni sopranazionali e riorganizzazione costituzionale dello Stato, Turin 2001.
C. AMIRANTE, monetary union and political union: contradictions in perspectives of the process of European integration, C. Amirante (edited by) Unioni sopranazionali e riorganizzazione costituzionale dello Stato, Turin 2001.
D. AMIRANTE, Environment and constitutional principles in comparative law, in D. Amirante (edited by) Diritto ambientale e Costituzione. Esperienze europee, Milan, 2000
A. APOSTOLI, the Charter of rights of the European Union, Promodis 2000.
A. APOSTOLI, the Charter of rights of the European Union: the convention enters into a decisive phase, Quaderni Costituzionali n. 3/2000.
N. ASSINI, The European Comunità and protection of the environment in Cordini, Postiglione (a edited by) Ambiente e Cultura ESI 1997.
L. AZZENA, Important forms of the charter of fundamental rights of the European Union
G. BAGNETTI – Origin and value of the Constitution in the European perspective, Conference Records of the Regional Council of Tuscany, 17 – 18 May 1996, Milan, 1996;
F. BENOÎT- ROHMER – Les droits de l’homme dans l’Union européenne: de Rome a Nice, in L.S. Rossi (edited by) Carta dei diritti fondamentali e Costituzione dell’Unione europea, Milan 2002.
BIFULCO-CARTABIA-CELOTTO – (edited by) L’Europa dei diritti, Il Mulino 2001.
K. BOSSELMANN, An ecological approach to human rights, in M. Greco (edited by) Diritti umani e ambiente, ECP 2000.
G. BOZZI, Environmental harm, personal harm and harm to liveability, T.A.R. n. 11, 1996.
BULTRINI, European Court of the rights of man, Dig. IV.
B.CARAVITA Of TORITTO, Constitution, constitutional principles and techniques of regulation for the protection of the environment, in AA.VV. Ambiente e diritto, Milan
B. CARAVITA Of TORITTO, The right to the environment and the right to development, in AA.VV. Scritti in onore di A. Predieri, Milan 1996.
A. BARBERA, (Comment on) Art.. 2 of the Constitution in G. Branca (edited by) Commentario alla costituzione. Principi fondamentali Bologna – Rome
A. BARBERA, Does a European Constitution Exist? Quaderni Costituzionali, n. 1/2000.
S. BARTOLE – B. CONFORTI – G. RAIMONDI., Commentary on the European convention for the protection of the rights of man and of fundamental liberties, Padua, 2001.
F. BENOÎT- ROHMER, Les droits de l’homme dans l’Union européenne: de Rome a Nice, in L.S. Rossi ( edited by ) Carta dei diritti fondamentali e Costituzione dell’Unione europea, Milan 2002.
V. BERGER – Jurisprudence de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme, Paris, 1996.
BIFULCO-CARTABIA-CELOTTO, (edited by) L’ Europa dei diritti, Il Mulino 2001.
K. BOSSELMANN, An ecological approach to human laws, in M. Greco (edited by) Diritti umani e ambiente, ECP 2000
B. CARAVITA., Environment Law, Bologna, 2001.
A.A. CATOIRA, Power and laws: a mutual limitation, Diritto pubblico comparato ed europeo, n.2/2001.
M.P. CHITI, Environment and European Constitution, in AA.VV. Ambiente e diritto 1999
M.C. CICIRIELLO – From the start of a common patrimony to the concept of sustainable development, in Dir. Giur. Agr. Amb., n. 4, Rome.
CLÒ ALBERTO (2004); Editorial: Beyond Kyoto; Rivista Energia 1/2004; RIE Bologna.
F. COCOZZA, Les droits fondamentaux en Europe entre justice constitutionnelle <<transfrontière>> de la CEDH et justice constitutionnelle nationale, Revue française de droit constitutionnel n. 28/1996.
V. COCOZZA, item Constitution II) Italian Constitution, in Enc. Giur. X,1988.
N. COLACINO, protection of the environment in the system of the European Convention on the rights of man: some elements of jurisprudence, Law and environmental management n. 2/2001.
G. CORDINI, Environment and democracy. Introductory profiles of comparative public law, Law and management of the environment, n. 2/2001.
G. CORDINI, Comparative environmental law, CEDAM 1997.
M. DE SALVIA , Protection of the environment and the European Convention on the rights of man, International journal of the rights of man, n. 1/1989.
M. DE SALVIA, Environment and the European Convention on the rights of man, International journal of the rights of man n. 2/1997.
V. FERRARA – The decisions of Kyoto, in Enea Dip. Ambiente, 1998.
J. F. FLAUSS- de SALVIA La Convention européenne des droits de l’homme: développement récente t nouveaux défis, 1997.
S. FOA’, The European base of the rights to health, in Gallo- Pezzini (edited by) Profili attuali del diritto alla salute, Milan 1998.
F. FONDERICO, Jurisprudence of the Court of Justice in environmental questions, in S. Cassese (edited by) Diritto ambientale comunitario, Milan 1995.
M.S. GIANNINI., Environment: essay on various juridical aspects, in Riv. Trim. dir. pubbl., 1973
A. KISS. – D. Shelton., Manual of European environmental law, I., Manchester – New York, 1995.
L. KRAMER – Droit international de l’environnement, Paris, 1989.
L. KRAMER – Focus on European environmental law, London, 1992
L. La Marks, The three levels of protection of the laws of man, the rights of man, 1999.
A. LINDGREN ALVES – The declaration of human rights in postmodernity, in Human rights quarterly, n. 2, 2000;
MANZELLA, After Nice: the Paper of << proclaimed >> rights, in L.S. Rossi (edited by) Carta dei diritti fondamentali e Costituzione dell’Unione europea, Milan 2002.
OBERDORSTER G., UTELL MJ. – Ultrafine particles in the urban air: to the respiratory tract and beyond? Environ Health Perspect. 2002.
F. Palermo, The Paper of the fundamental rights of the European Union between positive law and positiveness of the law, in R. Toniatti (edited by) Diritti, diritti, giurisdizione, CEDAM 2001.
A. PREDIERI., Aspects of the legislation in force in the question of management of the territory and of the resources and perspectives of reform, Report at the Conference in Florence 1974, in the Region of Tuscany, Records of the Conference “Regional policy on the environment”, Florence, 1975.
P. PUSTORINO – The interpretation of the European convention of the rights of man in the usual procedure of the commission and the Court of Strasburg, Naples, 1998.
G. RECCHIA, Protection of the environment: from widespread interest to interests which are protected constitutionally, in C. Murgia (edited by) L’ambiente e la sua protezione, Milan 1991.
G. ROEHRSSEN OF CAMMARATA. – Man’s position in the Italian constitution, in Dir. and Soc., 1987; J. Luther., Anthropocentrism and ecocentrismo in environment law in Germany and in Italy, in Pol. Dir., 1989; F.G. Scoca., Guardianship, op. cit.
R. ROMI- L’Europe et la protection juridique de l’environnement, Nantes, 1993.
L.S. Red – Charter of fundamental laws and the Constitution of the European Union (edited by L.S. Rossi), Milan, 2002;
SALVIA, Environment and sustainable development, Rivista giuridica dell’ambiente, 1998.
H.O. SANO – Development and human rights: The necessary, but partial integration of human rights and development, in Human rights quarterly, n. 3, 2000;
SCHLETTE, Les interactions entre les jurisprudences de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme et la Cour Constitutionnelle fédérale allemande. Revue française de droit constitutionnel, n. 28/1996.
J. SCHNEIDER – World public order of the environment: Towards and international ecological law and organization, London, 1979;
SCOVAZZI, Protection of the environment and laws of the man, Rivista giuridica dell’ambiente 1994.
S. SENESE – The international protection of human rights, in Questioni giustizia, n. 4, 2000;
F. SUDRE – Les grands arrêts de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme, Paris, 1997.
G. TAMBURRELLI, Observations on democratic nature and the formation of international environmental norms, Law and management of the environment, n. 3/2001.
R. TONIATTI, Toward the definition of superior values of community regulations, in R. Toniatti (edited by) Diritto, diritti, giurisdizione, CEDAM 2002
D.M. TOSI, Il Protocollo 11 alla CEDU: la tutela dei diritti fondamentali davanti alla nuova Corte europea,
Protocol 11 at CEDU: the protection of fundamental rights before the new European Court, Diritto pubblico comparato ed europeo, n. 1/2001.
A. VUOLO, La tutela dell’ambiente quale principio fondamentale comune, in M. Scudiero (edited by ).
A. VUOLO, Protection of the environment as a fundamental common principle, in M. Scudiero (edited by) Il diritto costituzionale comune europeo, Jovane 2002
L. WILDHABER, Protection of the rights of man by the European Court and national tribunals, International journal of the rights of man, n. 2/2000.
C. WILLIAMS, Free the environmental victims, in M. Greco (edited by) Diritti umani e ambiente, ECP 2000.

By Dr. For. Maria Giovanna Mangione