THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE PROJECT
ONLINE CONSULTATION
| E-Conference Homepage | Contents |
| Next comment | Previous comment | Previous comment in thread | Next comment in thread |
From: Bertrand des Clers
Affiliation: Member Emeritus IUCN/SSC
Remote Name: atuileries-110-1-4-58.w80-13.abo.wanadoo.fr
Time: 19:21:31 +0100
De: Bertrand des Clers [bdclers@atexa.net]
RE: Resolution on the Precautionary Principle
I would first like to comment on your “Explanatory Memorandum”, and afterwards on what I would propose as an amended draft “Resolution/Motion” which I believe might be closer to a version on which IUCN members might find a consensus. Could you arrange to have the revised “Explanatory Memorandum (Rev.1)” and draft “Motion/Resolution (Rev.1)” below copied to the members of the drafting Committee. Thank you in advance for your help in this matter.
As you will note, the main clarification I am introducing consists in preventing the interchangeability between “precautionary principle” and “precautionary approach”.: a principle and an approach are not synonymous. The first, “Precautionary Principle” , which has unfortunately been introduced in several legislative texts, is a misnomer, since it is not a “principle”, which would imply that it is an a priori guide for future actions. What makes this term “unclear, with no shared understanding of its meaning, or of how it should be applied in biodiversity conservation and natural resource management” as you state in your memorandum, and “renders it highly contentious” is due to this semantic flaw . This term has originally bee meant to apply to the public health domain : i.e. ensure that appropriate precaution would be taken before administering new drugs/molecules to human patients, mandatory tests are carried out on mice, then eventually on monkeys, then on a chosen small number of people, accepting of their own volition. It cannot be used in the domains of biodiversity conservation or natural resource management without inevitable subjective interpretations leading to conflict, between complete protection and sustainable use partisans, within WTO or in the interpretation and implementation of the multilateral environmental agreements which had the misguided misfortune of using that misnomer in the Whereases or in the Preamble or articles of the treaty. The second, “Precautionary Approach” is the only appropriate term to use when addressing the issues of conservation of biological diversity and management of natural resources. Such a term implies feedback from experience and therefore the possibility of adaptive policies. It describes appropriately the way by which species, including human societies and indeed civilizations have managed to survive when faced with limited resources, to which they adapted, failing which they disappeared. It is the term which describes today the proper way to face that same crisis which comes from increasing human population numbers and their understandable desire to alleviate poverty (development?) and prevent mass starvation while conserving humanity’s natural heritage which we have hardly begun to inventory, evaluate or indeed understand. It is with this clear message that I have revised the draft Explanatory Memorandum and the draft Resolution/Motion, in order to avoid calling upon IUCN members and institutions to spend time on an insoluble problem, and instead urge them to address the real issues of biodiversity conservation and “development” with a coherent precautionary “Approach”. ………………………………………………………………………………………
Explanatory Memorandum (Rev.1) Motion on “The Precautionary Approach in Environmental Governance”
While precaution, or precautionary approach, is clearly a very important concern of environmental law and policy, great confusion and controversy currently hinder the implementation of the so-called “precautionary principle”; some interpretations of the “principle” can have negative impacts for both conservation and for livelihoods and development.
The draft Resolution/Motion represents an initial step toward developing shared understanding of important considerations in addressing the concern, and a call for IUCN engagement in further work toward developing guidance and tools for implementation of appropriate policies. Management of risk and uncertainty poses major challenges to environmental governance and management, faced with the realities of increasing human populations, desire to alleviate poverty and achieve development goals while conserving the global diversity of species and of their multiple roles in our planet’s ecosystems. Adaptive precautionary approaches have, throughout the ages, always been chosen by wild species and by human societies as the only key to survival and evolution. The problem is that, nowadays, the need for resources have been increasing exponentially fast, leading to both total control and therefore total responsibility lying squarely on the human species’ shoulders. Precautionary approaches are needed in order to provide guidance for action in the face of uncertainty about environmental harm.
Precautions must of course be taken regarding actions or inaction, without having or requiring scientific certainty the acquiring of which may take too long. Good old common sense and adaptive management must instead be the rule, since we tread unknown ground. However, a number of problems are becoming increasingly clear : the ever-increasing scale of environmental threats, and the great scientific uncertainty related to many, require anticipatory and preventive action. While the precautionary approach is widely invoked, there is little evidence of its widespread application in practice, particularly where its application conflicts with powerful economic interests.
The so-called “precautionary principle” is highly contentious. Concerns have been expressed that the principle can be abused for purposes such as trade-protectionism. Such controversies have led to damaging disputes, and have hampered progress in policy development in important decision-making arenas including the Convention on Biological Diversity and at the World Summit on Sustainable Development. Precaution is also a highly contentious issue within the World Trade Organisation and with respect to the relationship between the WTO and multilateral environmental agreements. Concerns have been expressed by some developing countries in particular that if inappropriately understood and applied, the “precautionary principle” could be inconsistent with urgent priorities of poverty alleviation and sustainable development, may be inappropriate where scientific and technical resources are limited, and could be used to oppose all sustainable utilisation of biological resources. There is a clear and urgent need to develop clarification and shared understanding of the meaning and implementation of what a precautionary approach can and should be. ………………………………………………………………………………………………..
DRAFT MOTION/RESOLUTION (Rev.1) x.x The Precautionary Approach in Environmental Governance
NOTING that the Precautionary Approach has been widely endorsed in international environmental agreements and declarations, and provides guidance for responding to uncertain environmental harm;
RECOGNISING the relevance of a precautionary approach to efforts to conserve and sustainably use biodiversity, and in particular to reduce habitat loss, control alien invasive species, prevent over-exploitation of wild species and biological resources, and avert and mitigate the impacts of climate change;
RECALLING Resolution 1.45 of the IUCN World Conservation Congress on the “Precautionary Principle”, and,
NOTING efforts made by IUCN and its members toward fulfilling Resolution 1.45,
CONCERNED that increasing controversy over the Precautionary Principle is impeding effective precautionary approaches and hampering progress within major policy-making arenas, including the Convention on Biological Diversity,
AWARE that in the field of biodiversity conservation and natural resource management, little guidance and no shared understanding of the meaning or definition of the “Principle” exists to justify it being retained as a concept,
NOTING in particular the engagement of many IUCN members and others in a collaborative process of research, consultation and regional dialogue to develop guidance on the implementation of such a so-called “Principle” in biodiversity conservation and natural resource management,
CALLS ON IUCN Members, Associates, Programmes and Commissions to consider the following guidance when applying precautionary approaches in biodiversity conservation and sustainable use of biological resources: -Precaution should be applied as part of a proactive, solutions-oriented, adaptive management framework; -Application of a precautionary approach should emphasise transparency and the involvement of all relevant stakeholders in decision-making; -Application should be based on careful assessment, subject to available resources and capacity, of likely benefits and risks of alternative courses of action and inaction; -Such assessment should include conservation, livelihoods, food security and economic considerations, and should incorporate socio-economic understanding, indigenous knowledge and traditions, as well as formal environmental science;
CALLS ON IUCN Members, Associates, Programmes and Commissions to support and actively engage in efforts to further clarify IUCN’s goals and objectives of biodiversity conservation and identify those areas where conflicts with goals and objectives of food security, poverty alleviation and public health are apparent.
FURTHER CALLS ON IUCN to encourage research and development in all fields of endeavour, from biological to social sciences, which can conciliate these goals and objectives, thus ensuring the long-term conservation of humanity’s natural biological heritage in harmony with humanity’s aspirations for better living conditions.
[_borders/disc6_aftr.htm]