Vertical Legal Borrowing and Environmental Governance: Bridging Institutional Gaps for Climate Intervention and Natural Resource Management in Developing Countries

Princess Nice David

doi:doi:10.11648/j.ijeee.20261102.12

Research Article |

| Peer-Reviewed

Vertical Legal Borrowing and Environmental Governance: Bridging Institutional Gaps for Climate Intervention and Natural Resource Management in Developing Countries

Princess Nice David^*

Published in International Journal of Economy, Energy and Environment (Volume 11, Issue 2)

Received: 30 October 2025 Accepted: 12 November 2025 Published: 13 April 2026

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

Climate change has compelled both developed and developing countries to seek innovative regulatory responses to environmental degradation and carbon emissions. While international environmental law provides broad normative guidance, it lacks precise instruments for the governance of emergent climate-intervention technologies such as carbon-dioxide removal (CDR) and solar-radiation management (SRM). In this context, domestic legal systems increasingly serve as experimental laboratories for designing governance approaches that may later diffuse to the international plane. This paper explores vertical legal borrowing the process by which national or sub-national legal innovations inform international environmental law and assesses its potential to bridge governance gaps in developing countries, particularly in Nigeria. Using qualitative doctrinal and comparative methods, the article examines constitutional, statutory, and judicial frameworks regulating environmental protection and natural-resource management, comparing them with examples from the Netherlands, Brazil, India, and the United States. It hypothesizes that vertical legal borrowing enhances environmental governance effectiveness in developing countries by fostering reciprocal learning between domestic and international legal systems. The study concludes that developing countries can move from norm-takers to norm-shapers by translating domestic experiences into the evolving international architecture of sustainable environmental governance.

Published in	International Journal of Economy, Energy and Environment (Volume 11, Issue 2)
DOI	10.11648/j.ijeee.20261102.12
Page(s)	26-31
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2026. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Vertical Legal Borrowing, Environmental Governance, Climate-Intervention Technology, Developing Countries, Natural-Resource Management, Sustainability, Comparative Law

1. Introduction

1.1. Climate Governance in Transition

The twenty-first-century environmental agenda has expanded beyond traditional pollution control to encompass planetary-scale technological interventions. Carbon-dioxide removal (CDR) and solar-radiation management (SRM) represent frontier technologies intended to stabilise global temperature and atmospheric composition

[1]

. Yet they raise pressing questions concerning legality, ethics, accountability, and transboundary risk. Current international regimes most notably the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the Paris Agreement (2015), and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) address mitigation and adaptation but remain silent on the governance of CDR and SRM

[2]

. This silence leaves a normative gap that domestic jurisdictions are increasingly required to fill.

Developing countries, particularly those in Africa, face this challenge amid fragile institutions and dependence on natural-resource extraction. Nigeria exemplifies the dilemma: it is both a hydrocarbon economy and a signatory to major environmental treaties. The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 imposes a duty on the State to protect and improve the environment and safeguard the water, air and land, forest and wildlife

[3]

. However, persistent enforcement deficits, weak coordination between federal and state agencies, and limited community participation undermine effective realisation of these goals.

1.2. From Domestic Laboratories to Global Frameworks

Within this context emerges the idea of vertical legal borrowing. The term describes a process through which innovative domestic legal norms migrate upward to influence international or regional regimes

[4]

. Environmental impact-assessment requirements, access-to-information laws, and judicially enforced climate-action obligations all began as national experiments before gaining transnational traction. The Urgenda Foundation v State of the Netherlands (2015) decision, which required the Dutch government to reduce emissions by 25 per cent, epitomises this dynamic

[5]

. Similarly, Nigerian courts have delivered decisions that extend corporate liability for oil-pollution damage and recognise communities’ environmental rights

[6]

. Such domestic precedents, if coherently consolidated, can shape the emerging international governance of climate intervention.

1.3. Why Developing Countries Matter

For developing countries, vertical borrowing holds both opportunity and risk. It offers an avenue to contribute local perspectives and ensure that global standards reflect socio-economic realities. Yet it also risks reproducing colonial patterns of legal dependency if borrowing remains one-directional from North to South. To avoid this, borrowing must be reciprocal: domestic innovations should inform global norms just as international principles guide national reforms. Nigeria’s mixed system of statutory, customary, and international law provides fertile ground for examining how such reciprocity might evolve.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Research Design

The study adopts a qualitative doctrinal legal methodology, supplemented by comparative and socio-legal analysis. Primary data comprise legislation, judicial decisions, and constitutional provisions from Nigeria, while secondary materials include international conventions, comparative case law, policy documents, and academic literature. The research interprets law as a dynamic social institution that both shapes and is shaped by global environmental discourse

[7]

2.2. Doctrinal Method

A doctrinal approach is suited to analysing the normative structure of law: identifying principles, interpreting statutory language, and synthesising judicial reasoning. This paper interprets Nigeria’s environmental statutes the National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency (NESREA) Act 2007, the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Act 2010, and the Harmful Waste (Special Criminal Provisions) Act 2010 to evaluate the extent to which they operationalise constitutional environmental duties

[8-10]

. The method also involves tracing how these domestic norms interact with international obligations under the Paris Agreement 2015 and Rio Declaration 1992

[11, 12]

2.3. Comparative Framework

Comparative analysis identifies cross-jurisdictional lessons relevant to developing-country contexts. Four illustrative systems are considered:

1) The Netherlands - pioneering climate litigation (Urgenda) and integrated environmental governance.

2) Brazil - federal legislation on environmental crimes (Law No 9.605/1998) and decentralised enforcement

[13]

3) India - judicial environmental constitutionalism through the Supreme Court’s public-interest jurisprudence (e.g., Vellore Citizens’ Forum v Union of India 1996 5 SCC 647)

[14]

4) United States - multi-level environmental federalism and agency-driven rule-making under the Clean Air Act.

This comparative approach allows evaluation of how institutional design, citizen participation, and judicial activism can inform Nigerian reforms and, through vertical diffusion, global climate governance.

2.4. Socio-legal and Policy Perspective

Environmental governance does not operate in a vacuum of legal texts. A socio-legal lens situates statutes and judgments within broader political economy, highlighting the interplay between resource dependency, community livelihoods, and governance deficits

[15]

. Field-based secondary studies particularly on the Niger Delta reveal how oil extraction, weak oversight, and environmental injustice drive local resistance

[16]

. Understanding these dynamics is essential to ensure that borrowing global models does not marginalise local realities.

2.5. Scope and Limitations

The paper focuses primarily on Nigeria as a case study of a developing country navigating global environmental obligations. It does not provide quantitative measurement of environmental outcomes but rather analyses normative coherence, institutional capacity, and pathways for legal diffusion. Findings may thus inform policy transfer across comparable jurisdictions in sub-Saharan Africa, Southeast Asia, and Latin America.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Domestic Legal Architecture and Institutional Capacity

Nigeria’s environmental framework is characterised by a dense web of statutes, regulations, and agencies intended to address diverse ecological challenges. The NESREA Act 2007 created the National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency as the principal enforcement body, empowered to ensure compliance with national environmental standards and treaty obligations. Complementary legislation—the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Act 2010 and the Harmful Waste (Special Criminal Provisions) Act 2010—further establishes procedures for environmental protection and criminal liability for pollution.

Yet enforcement remains inconsistent. Fragmented jurisdiction between the Federal Ministry of Environment, NESREA, and state environmental agencies produces overlaps and inefficiencies. The Land Use Act 2004, which vests all land in the state, centralises control of natural resources and diminishes community stewardship . Scholars have described this arrangement as “resource centralisation without responsibility” because it encourages rent-seeking while weakening local accountability

[17]

Institutional under-capacity manifests in inadequate funding, poor data management, and limited technical expertise. For instance, environmental impact assessments are often treated as procedural formalities rather than substantive safeguards. In oil-producing regions such as the Niger Delta, remediation programmes are routinely delayed, while communities face protracted litigation before compensation is awarded. These gaps illustrate why domestic systems must evolve through learning both from within—by strengthening internal coordination—and from above—by borrowing effective mechanisms from international experience. Comparatively, Brazil’s decentralised model and the Netherlands’ collaborative policy design illustrate the advantages of adaptive, polycentric frameworks that Nigeria could emulate.

3.2. Judicial Innovation and Environmental Rights

Courts in Nigeria have gradually expanded the frontier of environmental accountability. In Shell Petroleum Development Company v Anaro (2015) LPELR-24750 (SC), the Supreme Court upheld compensation for communities affected by oil pollution, confirming that corporate negligence attracts civil liability

[18]

. Similarly, SPDC v Tiebo (2005) 9 NWLR (Pt 931) 439 recognised both general and special damages for environmental harm

[19]

, while SPDC v Otoko (1990) 6 NWLR (Pt 159) 693 clarified evidentiary standards in pollution claims

[20]

. These decisions reinforce principles of deterrence and restorative justice.

Recent jurisprudence reflects an embryonic recognition of environmental rights as justiciable. In Ogoni Community v SPDC (2021 SC), the Supreme Court affirmed a ₦45 billion compensation award for oil-spill damage, emphasising the constitutional duty to protect citizens’ health and environment

[21]

. Although Nigeria lacks an explicit constitutional right to a clean environment, section 20 and regional instruments—particularly the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ratified 1983)—supply normative support for judicial activism

[22]

Such domestic evolution parallels global trends. The Urgenda Foundation v State of the Netherlands [2015] HAZA C/09/00456689 compelled the Dutch government to strengthen emission reductions based on the European Convention on Human Rights

[23]

, while India’s Supreme Court in Subhash Kumar v State of Bihar (1991 1 SCC 598) declared the right to a clean environment implicit in the constitutional right to life

[24]

. Together these cases demonstrate a growing transnational judicial dialogue on environmental responsibility—an example of vertical legal borrowing in practice.

3.3. Polycentric and Experimentalist Governance

The failure of top-down environmental regimes has inspired calls for polycentric governance—multiple, overlapping centres of decision-making that encourage experimentation, mutual monitoring, and learning

[25]

. Nigeria’s federal structure is theoretically conducive to this model, but in practice coordination is weak. Local governments rarely possess resources or authority to enforce environmental standards, and public participation is limited.

Borrowing successful polycentric mechanisms—like Brazil’s state-level autonomy or the Netherlands’ public consultation frameworks—can enhance Nigeria’s fragmented enforcement structure.

[26]

. Similarly, the Netherlands’ collaborative climate-policy councils institutionalise public participation and cross-sectoral consultation

[27]

. Nigeria could emulate such mechanisms by establishing regional environmental councils integrating state agencies, industry, and community representatives.

Experimentalist governance emphasises learning by monitoring—setting provisional goals, reviewing outcomes, and revising policies iteratively

[28]

. The EIA process offers a potential experimentalist platform if transformed from a mere approval requirement into an instrument for continuous assessment and transparency. Embedding iterative review clauses within environmental licences would institutionalise feedback between regulators and affected communities, enhancing legitimacy and compliance.

3.4. Community Participation and Natural-Resource Governance

Effective natural-resource governance in developing countries requires integrating local knowledge and participatory decision-making. The Rio Declaration (Principle 10) proclaims that environmental issues are best handled with the participation of all concerned citizens. Empirical research from Nigeria shows that projects incorporating local monitoring committees achieve higher compliance and reduced conflict

[29]

. Community-Based Natural-Resource Management (CBNRM) initiatives—pioneered in Southern Africa—demonstrate that devolving limited authority to communities fosters stewardship and reduces enforcement costs

[30]

Local participation remains tokenistic in Nigeria, despite evidence that inclusive mechanisms reduce conflict and increase compliance. Incorporating models like the Aarhus Convention’s access-to-information principles could significantly improve participatory governance

[31]

Beyond participation, community involvement supports climate adaptation and resilience. Indigenous ecological knowledge can inform reforestation, flood management, and biodiversity conservation. Recognising community land-tenure systems under the Land Use Act 2004 would incentivise sustainable use rather than exploitative extraction. In the Niger Delta, empowering local councils to oversee oil-spill clean-up funds could transform grievance-driven litigation into proactive governance.

3.5. Post-colonial Context and Norm Diffusion

Legal borrowing in developing countries is not value-neutral. Post-colonial scholarship warns that uncritical transplantation of Western models can entrench dependency and marginalise indigenous norms

[32]

. Vertical borrowing must be context-sensitive to avoid dependency. Developing countries, such as Nigeria, can contribute indigenous innovations (e.g., community-based litigation and environmental accountability models) to global governance, promoting reciprocal norm diffusion.

A reciprocal model of borrowing is preferable. For example, Nigeria’s experience with the National Oil Spill Detection and Response Agency (NOSDRA) could inform global best practice on corporate accountability in extractive industries. Similarly, community-based environmental litigation in the Niger Delta provides valuable lessons for countries confronting resource conflicts. When developing nations export such innovations, they participate actively in shaping global governance rather than passively receiving it.

3.6. Bridging the Governance Gap

To operationalise vertical borrowing, certain preconditions must be met. First, institutional capacity: enforcement agencies require technical expertise, financial autonomy, and judicial backing. Second, legal transparency: clear procedural rules for environmental decision-making build trust and attract international cooperation. Third, regional collaboration: African states can pool regulatory knowledge through the African Union’s environmental frameworks and the African Ministerial Conference on the Environment (AMCEN)

[33]

Finally, international support mechanisms—technology transfer, climate finance, and capacity-building—should enable rather than dictate domestic reform. Borrowing must be iterative: developing states contribute empirical lessons from implementation, while international regimes provide guiding principles. This mutual learning creates a virtuous cycle linking national experimentation with global governance evolution.

4. Conclusions

This study posits that vertical legal borrowing strengthens environmental governance in developing countries by promoting reciprocal learning and adaptive alignment between domestic and international legal systems. Judicial activism, statutory evolution, and community participation collectively generate norms capable of influencing international discourse on climate intervention and natural-resource management.

For borrowing to be transformative, it must be reciprocal, contextual, and participatory. Domestic experiences should inform international rule-making just as global principles guide national reforms. Strengthening enforcement agencies such as NESREA and NOSDRA, enhancing the judiciary’s interpretive boldness, and institutionalising community participation would consolidate Nigeria’s leadership among developing nations.

Ultimately, climate governance demands a polycentric system where states, communities, corporations, and international organisations share responsibility. By converting local practice into global learning, developing countries can reshape the narrative from vulnerability to agency—asserting themselves as co-architects of a just and sustainable environmental order.

Abbreviations

CDR	Carbon Dioxide Removal
SRM	Solar Radiation Management
NESREA	National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency
EIA	Environmental Impact Assessment
NOSDRA	National Oil Spill Detection and Response Agency
UNFCCC	United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
AMCEN	African Ministerial Conference on the Environment

Acknowledgments

The author expresses sincere appreciation to colleagues at David & David Solicitors for research assistance and constructive feedback, and to anonymous reviewers for valuable suggestions.

Author Contributions

Princess Nice David: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project Administration, Resources, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

Data Availability Statement

No new empirical data were created or analysed. All materials cited are publicly available legal and policy documents.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	Crutzen P. J. (2006). Albedo enhancement by stratospheric sulphur injections: A contribution to resolve a policy dilemma? Climatic Change, 77(3-4), 211-220.
[2]	United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (2015). Paris Agreement. United Nations, New York.
[3]	Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended), s. 20.
[4]	Teubner G. (1998). Legal Irritants: Good Faith in British Law or How Unifying Law Ends Up in New Divergences. Modern Law Review, 61(1), 11-32.
[5]	Urgenda Foundation v. State of the Netherlands [2015] HAZA C/09/00456689.
[6]	Okonkwo T. (2021). Environmental Justice in Nigeria: The Judicial Frontier. Nigerian Law Journal, 25(2), 143-168.
[7]	Cotterrell R. (2006). Law, Culture and Society. Ashgate Press.
[8]	National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency Act 2007 (Nigeria).
[9]	Environmental Impact Assessment Act 2010 (Nigeria).
[10]	Harmful Waste (Special Criminal Provisions) Act 2010 (Nigeria).
[11]	Rio Declaration on Environment and Development (1992), Principle 10.
[12]	Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment (Stockholm, 1972), Principle 2.
[13]	Brazil Federal Law No. 9.605 of 12 February 1998 (Environmental Crimes Act).
[14]	Vellore Citizens’ Forum v. Union of India (1996) 5 SCC 647.
[15]	Etemire U. (2015). Access to Environmental Information in Nigeria. Springer.
[16]	Obi C. (2020). Oil Extraction and Conflict in the Niger Delta. African Affairs, 119(476), 1-26.
[17]	Oviasuyi P. & Uwade E. (2014). Resource Centralisation and Environmental Governance in Nigeria. African Public Policy Review, 6(2), 44-61.
[18]	Shell Petroleum Development Company v. Anaro (2015) LPELR-24750 (SC).
[19]	Shell Petroleum Development Company v. Tiebo (2005) 9 NWLR (Pt 931) 439.
[20]	Shell Petroleum Development Company v. Otoko (1990) 6 NWLR (Pt 159) 693.
[21]	Ogoni Community v. Shell Petroleum Development Company (Supreme Court of Nigeria, 2021).
[22]	African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (1981), Art. 24.
[23]	Urgenda Foundation v State of the Netherlands.
[24]	Subhash Kumar v. State of Bihar (1991) 1 SCC 598 (India).
[25]	Ostrom E. (2010). Polycentric Systems for Coping with Collective Action and Global Environmental Change. Global Environmental Change, 20(4), 550-557.
[26]	Government of Brazil (2020). National Policy on Climate Change Implementation Plan 2020-2030.
[27]	Government of the Netherlands (2020). Climate Policy Plan 2020-2030.
[28]	Sabel C. & Zeitlin J. (2012). Experimentalist Governance. Oxford University Press.
[29]	Eneji R. I. & Ering S. O. (2018). Community-Based Natural Resources Management and Rural Development in Nigeria. Int. J. Humanities & Social Science, 8(11), 113-121.
[30]	Fabricius C. & Koch E. (2004). Community Involvement in Natural Resource Management in Africa. Earthscan.
[31]	United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (1998). Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters.
[32]	Twining W. (2005). Social Science and Diffusion of Law. Journal of Law and Society, 32(2), 203-240.
[33]	African Ministerial Conference on the Environment (AMCEN) (2022). Decision on Climate Governance Mechanisms in Africa.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

David, P. N. (2026). Vertical Legal Borrowing and Environmental Governance: Bridging Institutional Gaps for Climate Intervention and Natural Resource Management in Developing Countries. International Journal of Economy, Energy and Environment, 11(2), 26-31. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijeee.20261102.12

Copy | Download

ACS Style

David, P. N. Vertical Legal Borrowing and Environmental Governance: Bridging Institutional Gaps for Climate Intervention and Natural Resource Management in Developing Countries. Int. J. Econ. Energy Environ. 2026, 11(2), 26-31. doi: 10.11648/j.ijeee.20261102.12

Copy | Download

AMA Style

David PN. Vertical Legal Borrowing and Environmental Governance: Bridging Institutional Gaps for Climate Intervention and Natural Resource Management in Developing Countries. Int J Econ Energy Environ. 2026;11(2):26-31. doi: 10.11648/j.ijeee.20261102.12

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijeee.20261102.12,
  author = {Princess Nice David},
  title = {Vertical Legal Borrowing and Environmental Governance: Bridging Institutional Gaps for Climate Intervention and Natural Resource Management in Developing Countries},
  journal = {International Journal of Economy, Energy and Environment},
  volume = {11},
  number = {2},
  pages = {26-31},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijeee.20261102.12},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijeee.20261102.12},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijeee.20261102.12},
  abstract = {Climate change has compelled both developed and developing countries to seek innovative regulatory responses to environmental degradation and carbon emissions. While international environmental law provides broad normative guidance, it lacks precise instruments for the governance of emergent climate-intervention technologies such as carbon-dioxide removal (CDR) and solar-radiation management (SRM). In this context, domestic legal systems increasingly serve as experimental laboratories for designing governance approaches that may later diffuse to the international plane. This paper explores vertical legal borrowing the process by which national or sub-national legal innovations inform international environmental law and assesses its potential to bridge governance gaps in developing countries, particularly in Nigeria. Using qualitative doctrinal and comparative methods, the article examines constitutional, statutory, and judicial frameworks regulating environmental protection and natural-resource management, comparing them with examples from the Netherlands, Brazil, India, and the United States. It hypothesizes that vertical legal borrowing enhances environmental governance effectiveness in developing countries by fostering reciprocal learning between domestic and international legal systems. The study concludes that developing countries can move from norm-takers to norm-shapers by translating domestic experiences into the evolving international architecture of sustainable environmental governance.},
 year = {2026}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Vertical Legal Borrowing and Environmental Governance: Bridging Institutional Gaps for Climate Intervention and Natural Resource Management in Developing Countries
AU  - Princess Nice David
Y1  - 2026/04/13
PY  - 2026
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijeee.20261102.12
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijeee.20261102.12
T2  - International Journal of Economy, Energy and Environment
JF  - International Journal of Economy, Energy and Environment
JO  - International Journal of Economy, Energy and Environment
SP  - 26
EP  - 31
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2575-5021
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijeee.20261102.12
AB  - Climate change has compelled both developed and developing countries to seek innovative regulatory responses to environmental degradation and carbon emissions. While international environmental law provides broad normative guidance, it lacks precise instruments for the governance of emergent climate-intervention technologies such as carbon-dioxide removal (CDR) and solar-radiation management (SRM). In this context, domestic legal systems increasingly serve as experimental laboratories for designing governance approaches that may later diffuse to the international plane. This paper explores vertical legal borrowing the process by which national or sub-national legal innovations inform international environmental law and assesses its potential to bridge governance gaps in developing countries, particularly in Nigeria. Using qualitative doctrinal and comparative methods, the article examines constitutional, statutory, and judicial frameworks regulating environmental protection and natural-resource management, comparing them with examples from the Netherlands, Brazil, India, and the United States. It hypothesizes that vertical legal borrowing enhances environmental governance effectiveness in developing countries by fostering reciprocal learning between domestic and international legal systems. The study concludes that developing countries can move from norm-takers to norm-shapers by translating domestic experiences into the evolving international architecture of sustainable environmental governance.
VL  - 11
IS  - 2
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Princess Nice David

David & David Solicitors, Port Harcourt, Nigeria

Contact Email

http://orcid.org/0009-0009-1913-4993

Download PDF

Submit an Article

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

David, P. N. (2026). Vertical Legal Borrowing and Environmental Governance: Bridging Institutional Gaps for Climate Intervention and Natural Resource Management in Developing Countries. International Journal of Economy, Energy and Environment, 11(2), 26-31. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijeee.20261102.12

Copy | Download

ACS Style

David, P. N. Vertical Legal Borrowing and Environmental Governance: Bridging Institutional Gaps for Climate Intervention and Natural Resource Management in Developing Countries. Int. J. Econ. Energy Environ. 2026, 11(2), 26-31. doi: 10.11648/j.ijeee.20261102.12

Copy | Download

AMA Style

David PN. Vertical Legal Borrowing and Environmental Governance: Bridging Institutional Gaps for Climate Intervention and Natural Resource Management in Developing Countries. Int J Econ Energy Environ. 2026;11(2):26-31. doi: 10.11648/j.ijeee.20261102.12

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijeee.20261102.12,
  author = {Princess Nice David},
  title = {Vertical Legal Borrowing and Environmental Governance: Bridging Institutional Gaps for Climate Intervention and Natural Resource Management in Developing Countries},
  journal = {International Journal of Economy, Energy and Environment},
  volume = {11},
  number = {2},
  pages = {26-31},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijeee.20261102.12},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijeee.20261102.12},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijeee.20261102.12},
  abstract = {Climate change has compelled both developed and developing countries to seek innovative regulatory responses to environmental degradation and carbon emissions. While international environmental law provides broad normative guidance, it lacks precise instruments for the governance of emergent climate-intervention technologies such as carbon-dioxide removal (CDR) and solar-radiation management (SRM). In this context, domestic legal systems increasingly serve as experimental laboratories for designing governance approaches that may later diffuse to the international plane. This paper explores vertical legal borrowing the process by which national or sub-national legal innovations inform international environmental law and assesses its potential to bridge governance gaps in developing countries, particularly in Nigeria. Using qualitative doctrinal and comparative methods, the article examines constitutional, statutory, and judicial frameworks regulating environmental protection and natural-resource management, comparing them with examples from the Netherlands, Brazil, India, and the United States. It hypothesizes that vertical legal borrowing enhances environmental governance effectiveness in developing countries by fostering reciprocal learning between domestic and international legal systems. The study concludes that developing countries can move from norm-takers to norm-shapers by translating domestic experiences into the evolving international architecture of sustainable environmental governance.},
 year = {2026}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Vertical Legal Borrowing and Environmental Governance: Bridging Institutional Gaps for Climate Intervention and Natural Resource Management in Developing Countries
AU  - Princess Nice David
Y1  - 2026/04/13
PY  - 2026
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijeee.20261102.12
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijeee.20261102.12
T2  - International Journal of Economy, Energy and Environment
JF  - International Journal of Economy, Energy and Environment
JO  - International Journal of Economy, Energy and Environment
SP  - 26
EP  - 31
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2575-5021
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijeee.20261102.12
AB  - Climate change has compelled both developed and developing countries to seek innovative regulatory responses to environmental degradation and carbon emissions. While international environmental law provides broad normative guidance, it lacks precise instruments for the governance of emergent climate-intervention technologies such as carbon-dioxide removal (CDR) and solar-radiation management (SRM). In this context, domestic legal systems increasingly serve as experimental laboratories for designing governance approaches that may later diffuse to the international plane. This paper explores vertical legal borrowing the process by which national or sub-national legal innovations inform international environmental law and assesses its potential to bridge governance gaps in developing countries, particularly in Nigeria. Using qualitative doctrinal and comparative methods, the article examines constitutional, statutory, and judicial frameworks regulating environmental protection and natural-resource management, comparing them with examples from the Netherlands, Brazil, India, and the United States. It hypothesizes that vertical legal borrowing enhances environmental governance effectiveness in developing countries by fostering reciprocal learning between domestic and international legal systems. The study concludes that developing countries can move from norm-takers to norm-shapers by translating domestic experiences into the evolving international architecture of sustainable environmental governance.
VL  - 11
IS  - 2
ER  -

Copy | Download