Chapter 3- LESSON 1 NREM 2024-2025 PDF

CHAPTER 3 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT ISSUES LESSON 1 **The Precautionary Principle and Approaches of Natural Resource Management** I. **Introduction** II. **Expected Learning Outcomes** 1. Defined and explained the precautionary principle 2. Traced back the historical development of the prec...

CHAPTER 3 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT ISSUES LESSON 1 **The Precautionary Principle and Approaches of Natural Resource Management** I. **Introduction** II. **Expected Learning Outcomes** 1. Defined and explained the precautionary principle 2. Traced back the historical development of the precautionary principle 3. Enumerated the notable examples of agreements that contain the precautionary principle 4. Defined and explained the approaches of natural resource management III. **Learning Contents/Discussion** **UNDERSTANDING THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE** Lawyers can disagree over the definition and application of a principle in law, but it\'s safe to say that a principle isn\'t a hard and fast rule. It is merely a guide. A principle has the advantage of including theoretical explanations and legal fundamentals, which aid legislators in their decision-making. This means that a principle can govern how regulations in a piece of legislation or a treaty should be applied if it is contained in the legislation or treaty. If you decided to leave your home or office, you would be taking precautionary action, which is one of the expressions of the precautionary principle? To make this example less theoretical, this precautionary action was also applied in early 2020 to decision-makers who were considering the likely impacts of COVID-19. There was insufficient information on the impact of this new coronavirus strain when news of its development reached authorities. It\'s fair to say that imagining the virus\'s worldwide consequences in January 2020 was challenging. However, there was enough information about similar viruses to allow governments to make informed decisions. Early preventative measures, such as travel restrictions, forced lockdowns, and quarantines, were implemented in certain circumstances, resulting in fewer major cases and deaths. Other governments did not take the same precautions, and their citizens have suffered as a result of their inactions, with illnesses, economic troubles, and even death. Those countries that did take effective early action did so despite a lack of scientific confidence, opting for strict and costly measures---in many cases limiting citizens\' fundamental freedoms and rights---in order to avoid potentially catastrophic effects. The precautionary principle was applied. **WHAT IS THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE?** **The precautionary principle**, according to Wiener (2007), is one of the most significant and possibly controversial developments in modern international environmental law. The principle is contained in a number of international treaties. The concept provided in **Principle 15 of the 1992 Rio Declaration** is widely acknowledged by nations and provides practical guidance in the development and application of international law, despite the fact that no universal understanding of its meaning exists: The precautionary principle\'s components are continually changing. Because the phrase \"principle\" carries less legal weight, some countries choose to label it a \"precautionary approach.\" The precautionary principle, in simple terms, is an attempt to give the concept of precaution---understood as a means of addressing risk---legal status. ***"**In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely applied by States according to their capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.**"*** The need for environmental protection, the presence of a threat or risk of substantial damage, and the reality that a lack of scientific certainty should not be used as an excuse to delay or avoid taking action to prevent such damage (Sands and Peel, 2012) are the fundamental factors. Prior to the 1990s, the traditional approach to preventing environmental damage usually required taking into account the available scientific knowledge asserting the risk, thus applying the preventive principle, in which activities that may cause environmental harm are identified but it is not certain that they will occur. This method is used to set regulations for reducing the known effects of motor vehicle emissions on air quality, for example.  Nonetheless, the precautionary principle, as stated by Sands and Peel (2012), continues to elicit debate over its meaning and application. On the one hand, others argue that it lays the groundwork for early international legal action to address serious environmental issues like ozone depletion and climate change. Opponents, on the other side, have criticized the principle for having the potential to overregulate or limit human activity, as evidenced by criticism of moratoriums on genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in various nations. The point of disagreement is whether the principle dictates that uncertainty necessitates action or whether uncertainty justifies inaction. The shifting of the burden of proof is one of the most controversial aspects of the principle. Traditionally, anyone asserting that an action may cause harm must provide proof to support their assertion. The burden of proof is reversed under the precautionary principle, with the individual or entity proposing the action having to establish that it is not dangerous. **HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE** The precautionary concept is included in several pieces of law and treaties. The majority of them arise after the **Stockholm Conference of 1972**, which marked the beginning of the entrance of concepts into international law that had previously only been utilized in state law. According to Beyerlin and Marauhn (2011), the precautionary principle was born in **Sweden**, where a domestic statute (the Environmental Protection Act of 1969) established the idea of environmentally hazardous activities for which the burden of proof was reversed. As a result, the mere threat of an environmental hazard was enough for Swedish authorities to take preventative steps or even outright prohibit the activity in question. Other countries followed Sweden\'s lead, and \"precautionary action\"---a term Beyerlin and Marauhn prefer because they believe it is more appropriate and action-oriented---became a core principle in Europe, and it is now part of European Union law, as stipulated in the Maastricht Treaty, which states that community environmental policy must be based, among other things, on the precautionary principle. ***"***"The Community policy on the environment shall be based on the precautionary principle and on the principles that preventative action should be taken, that environmental damage should as a priority be rectified at source and that the polluter should pay. Environmental protection requirements must be integrated into the definition and implementation of other Community policies" **MAASTRICHT TREATY, 1992, ARTICLE 130R** The 1982 World Charter for Nature (UN General Assembly resolution 37/7), a declaration with no legal authority, was the first international treaty to incorporate a semblance of the precautionary principle. "Discharge of pollutants into natural systems will be avoided," the Charter stated, "and exceptional precautions shall be taken to prevent the discharge of radioactive or poisonous wastes." The Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer included acknowledgment of preventive measures adopted by parties in 1985. Parties to the Montreal Protocol on Chemicals that Deplete the Ozone Layer stated their commitment to protecting the ozone layer by "taking precautionary measures to control equitably total global emissions of substances that deplete it" in 1987. The Montreal Protocol is now widely regarded as one of the most effective global environmental agreements ever negotiated. Many global and regional agreements, as well as national laws, have included precautionary action in some form since the 1992 Rio Declaration, which was also the first international instrument to include a formulation of the precautionary principle. **NOTABLE EXAMPLES** The basic duty to prevent environmental harm reaches into the future through the precautionary principle (Bodansky, 2017). Not only can it prompt inaction---such as choosing not to build a hydroelectric dam---but it can operate as a license to prevent actions that could lead to irreversible environmental damage for future generations. **Selected environmental multilateral and regional agreements that contain the concept of precautionary action** **1992** *Convention on Biological Diversity* **1992** *United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change* **1992** *United Nations Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes* **1994** *Protocol to the 1979 Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution on Further Reduction of Sulphur Emissions* **1995** *Agreement for the Implementation of the Provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 relating to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks* **1996** *London Protocol to the 1972 Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matters* **2000** *Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological* Diversity **2001** *Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants* **2018** *Regional Agreement on Access to Information, Public Participation and Justice in Environmental Matters in Latin America and the Caribbean* The contents of the precautionary principle are still evolving and, for this reason, even though many international and national courts have mentioned the precautionary principle, they have been careful not to base any decisions on it, leaving its exact legal meaning unresolved. "The Parties should take precautionary measures to anticipate, prevent, or minimize the causes of climate change and mitigate its adverse effects. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing such measures..." **UNFCCC ARTICLE 3** **APPROACHES OF NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT** **Natural Resource Management -**refers to the management of natural resource such as land, water, soil, plants and animals with a particular focus on how management affects the quality of life for both present and future generations. It also deals with bringing together land use planning, water management, biodiversity conservation and the future sustainability of industries like agriculture, mining, fishing, etc. There are four (4) approaches to Natural Resources Management: **(1). Maximum Sustainable Yield Approach:** \- Explains the relationship between the rate of growth and level of population of a renewable resource, for example, Fish. In the first quadrant, sustainable yield curve is shown as OS and the curve OP as population growth rate of fish. The third quadrant indicates the inverse relationship between effort (or cost of hunting) and the level of population. The fourth quadrant contains a 45° line so that the effort can be on both axis. When resources devoted to harvesting are low and hunting to catch fish is the level E~1~, population will be virtually unexploited and will be relatively high at level P~1~. The equivalent sustainable yield is low at level Y~1~, on sustainable yield curve OS. A large effort devoted to harvesting the resources decreases the size of population and thus sustainable yield is raised. This is explained at effort level OE~2~. The yield level increases to OY~2~ and the reduction in population level to OP~2~. **(2). Natural Resource Scarcity Approach:** \- defined as a reduction in economic well-being due to a decline in the quality, availability, or productivity of natural resources. Simple in concept but many classical economists have expressed their arguments natural resource scarcity. According to Malthus, *"Population has this constant tendency to increase beyond the means of subsistence, and that it is kept to its necessary level by these causes and thus, humankind, is necessarily confined in room by nature."* He analysed the problem in relation to the growth of population. It indicates that if the burden of an ever-increasing population on food supplies persists, human life will be miserable. As a result, due to population expansion and limited natural resources, the rate of economic development will be slowed. However, J.S. Mill has applied the scarcity of natural resources to nonrenewable mineral resources. According to J.S. Mill, *"The only products of industry, which, if population did not increase, would be liable to a real increase of cost of production, are those which depending on a mineral which is not renewed, is either wholly or partially exhaustible such as coal, and most if not all metals, for even iron, the most abundant as well as most useful of metallic products, which forms an ingredient of most minerals and of almost all rocks, is susceptible of exhaustion so far as regards its riches and most tractable ores."* In the words of Dr. Herbert Ginits, *"Balancing the goal of improving the natural environment against other desirata such as increased consumption and leisure is a problem of Marshallian scarce resources towards competing ends to use the well-known phrase of Lionel Robbins. However, these views do not concern about environmental problems."* Moreover, the classical school considers environment as a free good. Therefore, society has overused the natural resources, leading to environment degradation. Marshall does not assume absolute resource constraints, but rather acknowledges that resources fall when natural productive powers become limited. According to Ricardo, the problem of relative scarcity is a difficulty of a rising economy. The highest grade resources are extracted and substituted for all low grade resources, resulting in relative scarcity. **(3). Ecological Approach:** \- allows a simple scientific basis for environmental actions to be presented to the community and allow it to be involved in deciding how to balance community and natural resource ecosystem needs. \- the development of an objective understanding of an ecosystem which is achieved by taking a perspective of an ecosystem rather than relying on human perception. \- maximizes the use of natural resources without causing damage to an ecosystem. Many natural resources, such as air, water, fertile soil, and biodiversity, are considered non-replaceable by ecological economists. Pearce and Turner both believe that economic growth can only be sustained if it is accompanied by the improvement and expansion of natural capital. As a result, maintaining economic success in the face of population increase necessitates investments in non-depreciable natural resources and the environment, such as planting more trees, improving soil quality, and safeguarding water supplies, among other things. Another viewpoint is that depleting natural and environmental resources allows for the buildup of reproducible (human-made) wealth. As a result of the changing capital stock mix, the economy will become less reliant on natural resources. A corollary is that conserving natural resources slows the accumulation of reproducible stocks, preventing economic growth that would be feasible if natural resources were used more efficiently. **Four Common Principles of Ecological Approach:** a. The linkages between the components of the ecosystem and resource uses and users b. Actions and interventions should lead to sustainable outcomes c. Stakeholders take precautions to avoid deleterious actions and, d. Be adaptive in seeking more effective approaches based on experience. The idea behind the ecological approach involves understanding ecological processes, including the trends in degradation and regeneration. The understanding is developed in a 3-step process: **(4). Resource Scarcity Hypothesis:** \- **Resource scarcity** is the lack of availability of supplies required to maintain life, or a certain quality of life. It is one of the fundamental ideas in the study of economics. \- **Resource scarcity** is essentially about current demand for a resource exceeding available supply. But what matters is that this scarcity has potentially huge implications for how we lead our lives and the economic prosperity of communities, countries and regions. \- **Resource scarcity** occurs when demand for a natural resource is greater than the available supply -- leading to a decline in the stock of available resources. This can lead to unsustainable growth and a rise in inequality as prices rise making the resource less affordable for those who are least well-off. (i). Field survey to capture the ecological diversity of a given area (ii). Computer analysis to classify vegetation types (iii). Preparation of an ecological model to show structure and dynamics of an ecosystem. (Structure of an ecosystem is represented by vegetation types and the dynamics is shown by changes of these types from one to another). Barnett and Morse looked at current ecological and economic perspectives on natural resource availability. The following are the findings of their research: **First,** as certain resources become scarce, their prices rise, while other resources become more cost-effective substitutes. **Second,** the price hike encourages people to look for fresh reserves of the original resources, as well as recycle and reuse. **Third,** if lower-grade sources are still plentiful, technical advancements may reduce extraction and processing costs for both currently used and lower-grade deposits. Finally, technological advancements allow for changes in the manufacturing and composition of items. V. **References** 1. CLEVELAND C.J and STERN D.I. 1997. Indicators of Natural Resource Scarcity: Review, Synthesis, and Application to U.S. Agriculture. 2. MILNER, H. n.d. Range and Animal Sciences and Resources Management-Volu.II- Science and the Community: Role of the Ecological Approach in Sustainable Rangeland Management. 3. Sands, P. & Peel, J. (Eds). (2012). Principles of international environmental law, third edition. Cambridge University Press. 4. Wiener, J. B. (2007). Precaution, in Bodansky, D., Brunnée, J., & Hey, E. (Eds.). The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law. Oxford University Press. ***Internet Sources:*** 1. 2.