Alejandro Camacho

Explores the full arc of U.S. environmental legal history across five major periods in the United States, reaching as far back as North America’s colonization and ending with the present. Through this rich history, the book considers the ways leadership, social movements, political coalitions, information, and technologies have both been catalyzed by the law and have advanced environmental change.

Argues that Caribbean coral reefs are declining so badly that traditional restoration methods may no longer work. Proposes studying whether coral species from the Indo-Pacific could be introduced to the Caribbean to rebuild reef structures and help the ecosystem recover. 

Analyzes how climate change is disrupting ecosystems upon which Native communities rely and evaluates the current capacity of tribal governance to respond—finding that existing legal frameworks often fall short in assessing climate risks, though tribal systems have distinctive strengths in flexible goals, Indigenous knowledge integration, and decentralized decision‑making that could inform broader adaptation strategies.

Provides an interdisciplinary and comprehensive overview of U.S. environmental law, blending history, theory, regulation, litigation, policy, science, economics, and ethics.

Spans both traditional concepts (“old property” such as estates and servitudes) and modern developments (“new property” like intellectual and living‐thing property), incorporating recent, socially relevant cases to spark critical debate and adapt to evolving legal landscapes.

Breaks down how U.S. laws and government systems handle biodiversity and finds that the current setup—what goals are set, how decisions are made, and who has the power to act—makes it nearly impossible to effectively address biodiversity loss. Argues that our legal system isn’t built to handle the complexity and uncertainty brought on by climate change.

Examines how U.S. metropolitan areas share interconnected problems—like housing, water pollution, and transportation—but still operate under fragmented legal authority. Finds that instead of trying costly system-wide changes, it's more practical to improve regional coordination by strategically reallocating power (e.g., giving third parties enforcement rights or tools for intergovernmental cooperation), which can better balance local flexibility and broader effectiveness.

Looks at how government agencies are organized and suggests a better way to design them so they work more effectively. By studying real-life examples like food safety and pollution control, the authors show how smarter organizations can help prevent government failures and improve public decision-making. 

Uses the idea of bringing back extinct species (de-extinction) to show how current environmental laws are outdated. Argues that these laws rely too much on rigid ideas of what’s “natural” or “native,” and instead calls for more flexible, realistic approaches that better reflect the complex relationship between people and nature.

Looks at the growing practice of “assisted migration,” where species are moved to new areas to help them survive climate change, and argues that U.S. environmental laws aren’t built to handle this kind of proactive strategy. Calls for rethinking natural resource laws to be more flexible and forward-looking, urging careful experiments and better data to guide decisions that balance protecting species with managing ecosystems in a changing world.

Argues that while efforts to slow climate change are important, we also need to adapt to its unavoidable effects—something current natural resource laws aren’t well-equipped to handle. Proposes a new approach called “adaptive governance,” where agencies regularly update their decisions based on new information, helping them better manage uncertainty and avoid costly mistakes as climate impacts unfold.

Proposes a new, more collaborative approach to local land use decisions, aiming to replace outdated, top-down methods with community-driven processes that are more open, flexible, and participatory. Argues that involving the public more meaningfully and redefining the role of planners can lead to better outcomes and stronger trust in local government, despite some challenges.