The environmental justice movement, which turns our attention to fairness in the distribution of environmental benefits and burdens and in the processes, biases and structures that determine those distributions, is challenging the foundations of environmental law. • ‘Extractivism’ – a mode of accumulation that necessitates both a high pace and a large scale of taking of natural resources such as fossil fuels – is deeply embedded in environmental law, producing uneven costs/benefits and intense, concentrated impacts on people and ecosystems. Even as we move towards a greener economy, environmental laws and regulations governing such areas as facility siting, pollution permitting, and environmental/impact assessment continue to apply extractivist logics. • As Indigenous peoples assert inherent jurisdiction over lands and waters, debates continue over the legal and practical standards of ‘consent’ required in relation to projects on or crossing Indigenous lands and waters. Moreover, regimes for achieving Indigenous ‘prosperity’ through natural resource development are moving from impact-benefit agreements, to equity stakes deals and joint ventures, and towards inherent jurisdiction. • Environmental law for a just transition must prioritize equity and Indigenous jurisdiction, and work to re-make the underlying legal and structural relations of production and consumption by moving away from ‘extractivism.
