Eian Katz


Transboundary resource disputes are often analyzed by reference to two nebulous and conflicting principles that have emerged in international environmental law: “equitable and reasonable utilization” and “no significant harm.” Frequently overlooked in this context is the potential value of other canons of international law—especially human rights law, criminal law, and the rules governing the use of force—in adding definition to the muddled contours of these foundational precepts. This Article therefore undertakes an assessment of sovereign rights and obligations regarding shared natural resources which arise from these other bodies of law. In doing so, it offers new lenses through which to evaluate competing state resource claims. It also provides fresh perspective on longstanding controversies in international law relating to extraterritorial jurisdiction, conflict of rights, and non-military attacks or uses of force.