ABSTRACT
One of the most insightful contributions of Professor Patrick McAuslan, during his time at Warwick, was his analysis of the three ideologies that compete in the field of planning and environmental law (McAuslan 1979 and 1980). Private property, the public interest (as seen from state agencies) and public participation, are indeed the three points of view from which any decision that transforms cities and the environment can be considered. Often, when one of them prevails, it is at the expense of the other two. It would not be an exaggeration to assert that legal practices in this field are nothing less than the result of the ever changing balance between those points of view. This chapter describes a shift of balance between those three ideologies in the case of Mexico, as a result of changes in the rules that recognise standing before the courts to members of the community that oppose projects that damage the environment. In parti - cular, we will analyse how in the last three decades high courts abandoned traditional notions of legal interest, in order to give access to the courtroom to members of the community that claim their right to an adequate environment – a process that empowered citizens as much as it empowers judges themselves.
