This dissertation addresses the problem of the scope of applicability of international human rights law in order to demonstrate the potential of human rights approaches for extraterritorial environmental protection. While the issue of extraterritoriality in the human rights field has been discussed for more than a decade now, the discussion has been restricted to specific areas of practice (state agent conduct abroad and situations of occupation), with limited consideration of the implications of human rights law for other areas of State action including, importantly, environmental protection. On the one hand, the approach has been confusing. Commentators normally explain the circumstances that extend primary responsibility in light of the elements of responsibility under secondary rules. On the other hand, there is the conviction that the extension of State’s remit operates on an exceptional basis, subject to effective power over the victim.

This dissertation reframes the question of extended remit under international human rights law and demonstrates that the extension rests on an expansive rather than restrictive logic based on the exercise of power over a source of harm rather than over the victim. In doing so, it intends to enrich this discussion through three specific contributions. First, it develops a fully-fledged theory on the extended remit that defines the conceptual and legal dimensions of the underpinning elements of the extension grounded on doctrinal authorities. Secondly, it establishes a framework that allows a structured applicability of the theory to distinct factual configurations, including, importantly, unconventional situations of transboundary environmental damage. Thirdly, it provides a new lens to observe the interaction between human rights law and environmental protection beyond the traditional synergistic approaches, thereby providing a more nuanced understanding of their potential interactions at the case level in specific areas of practice.