In Chapter 1 of this study, there is a fairly extensive discussion of “soft law,” a concept that, for reasons I discuss there, arguably creates considerable confusion and may, in some circumstances, be dysfunctional. Be that as it may, various forms of certain manifestations of soft law appear regularly in the international environmental arena. For example, it is “generally understood that ‘soft’ law creates and delineates goals to be achieved in the future rather than actual duties, programs rather than prescriptions, guidelines rather than strict obligations.” In this form, soft law is articulated in nonbinding instruments such as declarations of principles, codes of practice, guidelines, standards, nonbinding resolutions by international organizations, and international plans of action or codes of conduct. Perhaps the best known form of this kind of soft law in the international environmental law field is the Declaration on the Human Environment issued by the 1972 United Nations Conference on the Human Environment held in Stockholm, Sweden. This declaration, although clearly nonbinding, contained twenty-six principles that led to the later adoption of specific binding rules.

Another example of soft law in the international environmental context is the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (Framework Convention). This convention, although technically a binding treaty, contains many provisions that set forth goals to be reached rather than rules to be followed.