Implementation of International Treaties - Essay Example

?Analysis of implementation of international treaties (with specific reference to the United Nations Convention for Biological Diversity 1992)  International environmental treaties reflect global approaches to tackle various environmental issues. Currently there are more than 700 international environmental treaties, at regional, multilateral and bilateral levels (Rose, 2011, p. 6).With increasing number of environmental treaties, issues related to their appropriate implementation also increase. Many countries, especially the developing nations, often do not possess necessary infrastructure and capability for effective implementation of such treaties. ‘Implementation’ in legal terms refer to the different regulations, laws, policies, and various other initiatives and measures adopted for fulfilling the obligations as made mandatory under an environmental agreement (Donald, 2002). Implementation of environmental policies, at a global level, is liable to face more issues than implementing at a national level. This is owing to the fact that global implementation depends on mutual collaboration between different countries that have their own set of political, socio-economic and environmental issues, and are under voluntary obligations to follow the treaties; hence it is difficult to hold them responsible for failure in adhering to and implementing the convention guidelines. States with emerging economies may find that implementation of global environmental policies lacks feasibility. Such countries would prefer to allocate public funds for promoting socio-economic growth, instead spending money on safeguarding and regulating environmental resources. In developing nations (often, also observed in developed countries) increasing populations and demands for bettering the quality of life, a pressure develops on state governments to relax environmental protection norms. Keeping the challenges and the need for environmental protection in mind, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) was created in 1992 for promoting worldwide sustainable environmental development. CBD is an international body that evolved from the Earth Summit (June 1992), also known as the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), in Rio de Janeiro. The chief aims this Convention are: “conservation of biological diversity, the sustainable use of its components and the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the utilization of genetic resources, including by appropriate access to genetic resources and by appropriate transfer of relevant technologies, taking into account all rights over those resources and to technologies, and by appropriate funding” (Convention On Biological Diversity, 1992, p. 3). The Convention takes into account many issues that range from safeguarding natural resources, to making “use of traditional knowledge, innovations and practices relevant to the conservation of biological diversity and the sustainable use of its components”(ibid, p. 2), arranging for incentives in cases where there have been sustainable use of environmental resources, and transfer of science and modern technology. In this context, this research paper will study and analyse the 1992 Convention for Biological Diversity (CBD) in order to review the issues faced while implementing global environmental policies. In recent years, countries have become dependent on different international bodies to promote cooperation between States at a global level on various aspects (Lane, 2006). International treaties have turned into foundation stones for various multilateral regulatory efforts along with being an institutionalised kind of global collaboration, a process based on notions of shared sovereignties (Sharma, Chettri, Gurung and Shakya, 2007). Increased institutionalised collaboration in the recent years has created a complex mosaic of agreements at the global, regional and bilateral levels (Kim, 2003). Even after 2 decades since its inception, CBD continues to be one of the most important global environmental treaties with a great deal of influence on environmental policies of the member states (UNEP, 2011, p. 84). The effective designing and implementation of global environmental policies is often accounted to a current increase in institutionalised collaboration between nations at international and regional levels, through organisations as the European Union (EU), Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and the United Nations (UN). Environmental treaties that are legal binding on nations at a global level came into existence during end of 19th century, and primarily aimed at safeguarding specific animal or plant species for future exploitation by humans, and not for protecting them as part of the natural environment (Henderson 2010). It was only during the latter half of the 20th century (early 1970s) that global environmental policies began to change from being human centric in nature. For the first time it was taken into consideration that it was necessary to need to protect animals and plants, not for future human exploitation, but for the sake of maintaining a balance within environment. This change was first noticed during the 1972 UN Conference on the Human Environment (Stockholm Declaration), and thereafter, more than 1000 environmental treaties, at global, regional and bilateral levels have been formulated, signed and implemented (ibid).  Under global legal jurisdictions, signing a treaty does not translate into legal obligations for a member state where it must enforce/implement the regulatory directives. However, it is obligatory for the nations to collaborate, which leads to the establishment of global laws. Inter-State collaboration is more evident (with States ratifying international declarations) in issues that address matters related to social justice or protection of human and environmental rights, subjects that often fail to garner interest or support at national or local levels. The word Declaration “is often deliberately chosen to indicate that the parties do not intend to create binding obligations but merely want to declare certain aspirations” (United Nations, 1999, “Declarations”). Therefore, Stockholm Declaration (first of its kind) did not have the right to impose any legal obligations on its member states, yet it is important as it made way for future drafting and implementation of other legally binding treaties, agreements, conventions and charters, associated with environmental protection. The 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), based on the principles of Stockholm Declaration, moved further, in order to address growing concerns on worldwide destruction of flora and fauna, and subsequent adverse effects on human beings. In this Earth Summit, two agreements were framed that were legally obligatory on member states: the Framework Convention on Climate Change or UNFCCC, and the Convention on Biological Diversity or CBD. Convention, as a term with specific meaning was “regularly employed for bilateral agreements, is now generally used for formal multilateral treaties with a broad number of parties. Conventions are normally open for participation by the international community as a whole, or by a large number of states. Usually the instruments negotiated under the auspices of an international organization are entitled conventions (e.g. Convention on Biological Diversity of 1992, United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 1982, Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of 1969)” (United Nations, 1999, “Conventions”). Conventions are akin to contracts with a narrow scope that impose legal obligations and are generally restricted to the involved ratifying members (Thomas, 2007). Thus, when a State ratifies an agreement or a treaty and becomes a member of any international Convention, it is obliged to adopt and implement measures at national and local levels that aim at meeting all outlined objectives and achieve desired outcomes. This necessitates conversion of Convention articles into public policies at a national level; establish bilateral agreements at a regional level with neighbouring countries, start local enterprises that initiate or promote changes right from basic levels. Effective implementation of global environmental policies is especially difficult as it involves collaboration amongst different countries that have their own socio-political structures in place with varying economic limitations and restraints.  The 1992 Convention and Agenda 21, focused on the necessity to establish internal framework for establishing institutional and legal areas, essential for sustainable environmental development in member states. Observations reveal that in last two decades, nations with emerging economies have adopted various suitable measures that aim at creating sustainable legal frameworks for achieving better management of the environment. Various institutional and legislative activities led to the formation of environmental ministries, along with implementation of a new series of environmental laws. Currently, almost all nations have an environmental ministry that are authorised to implement various activities that safeguard and conserve the environment, and advocate sustainable use of environmental resources. A majority of the experts contend that there are no standard methods for framing international policies. However, most of the international treaties follow a specific route that comprise of ascertaining the exact requirements and aims; adoption of specific regulatory mechanisms that aim at achieving these goals; ratification by member states; implementation at global, national and local level; and conformity (Hunter, Salzman and Zaelke, 1998). The development of global environmental policies follows a route that is similar to a public policy cycle, operating at national and local levels. Given below is a framework for developing environmental policies at national levels. Fig 1: “Environmental policy framework” (Network for Business Sustainability, 2011, p. 8). Policy development comprises of three basic components: the policy environment, the crosscutting policy functions and issues life cycle. Here the Policy Environment creates a background, which is necessary for developing policy development in a certain area. This is an important aspect, as a failure to grasp the environment is likely to cause a policy to fail, thus making context an important part of policy development. Other factors like economic, technological and socio-political ones, that might affect a policy, must also be taken into consideration. As shown in figure 1, “the Context informs the Drivers, which identify the factors motivating policy on an issue, e.g. multilateral negotiations, domestic pressures for action, stakeholder interests and public opinion” (Network for Business Sustainability, 2011, p. 9). Cross-Cutting Policy Functions form the main structures and activities that provide support during a policy development. The Issues Life Cycle comprise of specific steps within policy development related to specific environmental issues or goals. Given below is a diagrammatic representation of policy development cycle. Fig 2: Process of effective policy development (Network for Business Sustainability, 2011, p. 11). The figure is representation of a “decision-tree [to] help policy-makers select an appropriate instrument for the issue at hand (during the policy development and selection of the Environmental Policy Framework)” (ibid, p. 11). In context of Australia, creating a policy framework follows a similar pathway, where a successful environmental policy development comprises of problem identification, analysis of a proposed policy, policy mechanisms, expert advice/consultation, work in collaboration, decision making processes, implementation and performance measurement (Bridgman and Davis, 1998). Despite being represented in a structured pattern (fig 2), it must be noted that policy development cannot be viewed strictly as a linear process, since analysing ideas may result in modifications within policy plans (Thomas, 2007). He further claimed that while policy development can be viewed as a structured process/cycle, it should not be considered as a perfect match for all issues or situations (ibid). This evident during policy implementation, when flaws and gaps in a policy are often exposed, making modifications necessary.  The initial steps within any policy cycle are chalked out during meetings at global levels that involve experts and environmental ministers from the concerned nations. After all parties concerned have ratified the treaty, process of implementation starts, which is the responsibilty of member states. Implementing state policies involves realising various governmental activities and decisions that aim at bringing into effect directives that have already been decided (Hanf and Underdal, 1998)). On the other hand, international policy implementation makes it necessary that policy-makers move back to the designing phase at national levels, so that international policies are suitably adapted or translated into legislations appropriate for the state concerned (Stewart, Hedge and Lester, 2007). This is important as local groups and other stakeholders, whose interests would be affected, turn more active during policy implementation. Thus, this step within the cycle of international policy implementation is highly speculative in nature, as there are chances of a complete failure owing to negative impact or lack of support at domestic levels that may prevent or slow down implementation (Boehmer-Christiansen and Kellow, 2002). Therefore, to comprehend the challenges that an international policy implementation may face, there must be a breakdown of the policies at regional, national and local levels (Scheberle, 2004; Hessing, Howlett and Summerville 2005). Policy implementation takes place when policy related decisions are placed into force, and this process varies from one country to another owing to socio-cultural and political differences. The three basic steps in policy implementation are, arranging for necessary resources; translating policy into workable programs; and applying these programs or initiatives through service provisions, chalking out specific targets and allocating funds or payments (Jones, 1984). Such plans which States use for policy implementation, depend to a great extent on the type of environmental policies being considered, even though they can be categorised as managerial and procedural; structural; and political and behavioural (Hogwood and Gunn, 1984). In the context of CBD, ascertaining the correct mechanisms for policy implementation is a difficult task, owing to multiple dimensions that exist within social, political and cultural aspects of the ratifying states, and the wide scope of issues that come under purview of the Convention. The CBD takes into consideration sustainable modes of conservation and takes into account all biodiversity forms that “cover all eco-systems, species and genetic resources” (Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, 2000, p. 8). This holds future consequences for various forms of bilateral agreements and international collaboration on grounds of science and technology, since exploitation of flora and fauna for commercial purposes take place primarily in developing countries by transnational corporations (TNCs) operating mainly from developed nations (Rosendal, 2000). Even though the implementation of CBD has been criticised by the scientists as hampering their scientific work, it has proven to be beneficial for the developing nations. As for example, “in 1995, the Philippines required bioprospectors to get "prior informed consent" from both the government and local people… Countries of the Andean Pact (Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia and Venezuela) have adopted laws and measures to regulate access to their genetic resources. The bio-prospector is required to meet certain conditions, such as the submission of duplicate samples of genetic resources collected to a designated institution; including a national institution in the collection of genetic resources; sharing existing information; sharing research results with the competent national authority; assisting in the strengthening of institutional capacities; and sharing specific financial or related benefits” (Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, 2000, p. 14). These moves would, in turn, help the State and local stakeholders, like local researchers and local communities. At a global level, CBD sets agendas and formulates policy cycles, while placing the “responsibility for achieving goals… with the countries themselves” (ibid, p. 9). Implementation starts with the gathering of all resources required for completing necessary activities, and CBD is a part of this process as it is arranges for collaboration of financial and technical resources at a global level. This is essential for developing nations, which require funding to provide alternative livelihood for communities affected by environmental conservation projects. For aiding member-states during policy implementation, there are many working groups under CBD. One such group that works toward providing financial assistance is the Global Environmental Facility or GEF, and reports show that by the “end of 1999, the GEF had contributed nearly $ 1 billion for biodiversity projects in more than 120 countries” (ibid, p. 15). Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice or SBSTTA, is another group functioning under CBD that consist of experts from various member states, to provide technical and scientific advice, necessary for making policy decisions (ibid, p.13). Implementing CBD is liable to face challenges, as the treaties must necessarily take into account the vast differences that exist between socio-economic, cultural and political orders in the developing and developed nations. Environmental policies that aim to safeguard natural resources often come into direct contention with powerful TNCs and similar other wealthy stakeholders, while also being in conflict with socio-economic development on a local level (Gamman, 1994). Thus, often a lack of political will and a tendency to give environmental policies a low priority is noticed, since they are viewed as being in direct opposition to economic growth and development of a country (ibid). Therefore, (as depicted in fig 1), in order to have a successful implementation of environmental policies at a local level, improving public understanding and knowledge on the matter is of supreme importance, along with judging the institutional, material and social capacity of that particular nation. TNCs are one of the biggest challenges to successful implementation of environmental policies, as they are extremely powerful and have a control over policymakers in different countries where they operate. In recent years, member states instead of using a direct legal approach, prefer using flexible management strategies that aim at bringing together various non-governmental actors and using soft law, like, framing specific ethical directives and codes of practice (Thomas 2007). Despite CBD, being a treaty based on a hard law system that makes it obligatory for member states to follow the outlined directives, there is a scope for compliance between powerful TNCs and local communities (Guruswamy 1998). CBD in this third article provides member states with a “sovereign right to exploit their own resources pursuant to their own environmental policies” (Convention on Biological Diversity, 1992, p. 4). Therefore, a successful implementation of CBD, involves strong collaboration between TNCs, local communities and governments. For successful collaboration between local communities and large businesses houses (TNCs) during implementation of environmental policies, the government must arrange for various programs. These programs must emphasise on positive aspects of conducting ethical and transparent business operations; aim at spreading public awareness and providing information on issues related to the protection of local environment; and programs promoting collaboration between NGOs and local communities (Sand, 1999). Keeping the aforementioned factors in mind The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity or TEEB, was established for a successful implementation of CBD at various national levels, which was designed for highlighting financial benefits derived from protecting global biodiversity (Brink, 2011). The study aimed at increasing general public awareness, so that instead of enforcing TNCs to take part in environmental protection, it would yield better results if consumers start “favouring ecologically-certified goods and services” (Bishop et al., 2010, 2). Under such circumstances, the TNCs would be forced to follow environmental protection directives, in order to retain their market share. Another important aspect that has raised a great deal of concern is the disparity that exists between international policy development and national level policy implementation, since an important factor in achieving the desired outcome is the capability of the member states. If the local issues and differences are not taken into consideration, even the best-planned international policy will fail, thus making it difficult for a researcher to determine from an overall viewpoint the success of an international policy implementation. Therefore, a successful policy implementation on local levels would include “a basis in law; and educative component; and an institutional or organisational component” (Thomas, 2007, p. 262). Since the establishment CBD, many countries have ratified the treaty and successfully implemented environmental programs for protecting their national flora and fauna. As for example, Uganda started a program where a part of the revenues generating from wildlife tourism were shared with local communities and this approach is now being replicated in other African countries (Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, 2000, p. 10). In Mexico, "shade coffee," is promoted where coffee trees are mixed with foliage of the tropical forests, instead of monoculture plantations that adversely affect local biodiversity (ibid, p. 11). As reports further reveal the coffee farmers “then rely entirely on natural predators common to an intact ecosystem rather than on chemical pesticides” (ibid). However, identifying such successful implementation models is not an easy task, since national strategies vary, while performance measurement is dependent on projected goals and obtained results of a legislation or program. Here it should be kept in mind that if the projected goals of any program or legislation are set too low, implementation may appear as effective, even though the positive impact on environment may be zero or minimal. From the above study, it can therefore be suggested that ascertaining the degree of successful implementation of CBD is not an easy task as the mechanisms used by various States vary, based on their national capabilities, objectives, and priorities. Implementation of environmental policies is a difficult task for emerging economies, where environmental protection is seen as a barrier to economic growth and development. These countries often lack the financial capability to implement legislations on a large-scale basis and arrange for educational programs that would increase general public awareness on environmental issues. It is also not easy to determine whether some of the environmental policies operating at national levels would have been the same if these particular nations were not member states of CBD. Despite these, CBD is important in the arena of environmental protection as it a measure and a guide for States that wish to safeguard their biodiversity, while it also provides financial assistance and other accessories to developing nations that are willing to safeguard their environment, but lack the necessary resources (CBD, 2010). This Convention highlights the importance of global biodiversity and the necessity to safeguard it at international, regional, national, and local levels; while emphasizing the fact that for an effective environmental policy implementation there must be strong overall collaboration between all involved stakeholders. References Bishop, J., et al., 2010. TEEB- The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity Report for Business- Executive Summary 2010. Retrieved from, http://data.iucn.org/dbtw-wpd/edocs/2010-031.pdf Boehmer-Christiansen, S., and Kellow, A., 2002. International environmental policy: interests and the failure of the Kyoto Process. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar publishing limited. Bridgman, P., and Davis, G., 1998. Australian Policy Handbook. Sydney: Allen and Unwin. Brink P., (ed.) 2011. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity in National and International Policy Making. London: Earthscan. CBD, 2010. Global biodiversity outlook 3. Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, retrieved from,  http://www.cbd.int/doc/publications/gbo/gbo3-final-en.pdf. [Accessed 6th September 2012] Convention on Biological Diversity, 1992. United Nations. Retrieved from http://www.cbd.int/doc/legal/cbd-en.pdf [accessed 1st September 2012] Donald, K., 2002. UNEP Governing Council adopts Guidelines on Compliance with and Enforcement of Multilateral Environment Agreements. Retrieved from, http://www.inece.org/conf/proceedings2/9-UNEP%20Gov%20Council. [Accessed 4th September 2012] Gamman, J., 1994. Overcoming obstacles in environmental policymaking: creating partnerships through mediation. NY: Suny press.  Guruswamy, L., 1998. “The Convention on Biological Diversity: a polemic.” In, J McNeely, L Guruswamy (eds.) Protection of global biodiversity: converging strategies. Durham: Duke University Press. Hanf, K., and Underdal, A., 1998. “Domesticating international commitments: linking national and international decision-making.” In, A., Underdal (ed.), The politics of international environmental management. Dordrecht: Kluwer academic publishers, Henderson, C., 2010. Understanding international law. West Sussex : John Wiley and sons. Hessing, M., Howlett, M., and Summerville, T., 2005. Canadian natural resource and environmental policy: political economy and public policy. Vancouver: UBC press. Hogwood, B., and Gunn, L., 1984. Policy Analysis for the Real World. Oxford: OUP. Hunter, D., Salzman , J, and Zaelke, D., 1998. International environmental law and policy. NY: Foundation press. Jones, C., 1984. An introduction to the study of public policy (3rd ed.). Monterey: Brooks. Kim, J., 2003. Sub-regionalism, regionalism, trans-regionalism. Implications for economic integration and international trade policies. Asia Europe Journal 1, 183-196. Lane, M., 2006. Critical issues in regional natural resource management. Paper prepared for the Australian State of the Environment Committee, Department of the Environment and Heritage, Canberra, Australia. Retrieved from, http://books.icimod.org/uploads/tmp/icimod-implementation_of_the_convention_on_biological_diversity.pdf. [Accessed 2nd September 2012] Network for Business Sustainability, 2011. Building effective environmental policy. Retrieved from,  http://nbs.net/wp-content/uploads/NBS-Executive-Report-Policy.pdf. [Accessed 4th September 2012]. Rose, G., 2011. Gaps in the Implementation of Environmental Law at the National, Regional and Global Level. Retrieved from, http://www.unep.org/delc/Portals/24151/FormatedGapsEL.pdf. [Accessed 4th September 2012] Rosendal, G., 2000. The Convention on Biological Diversity and developing countries. Dordrecht: Kluwer academic publishers. Sand, P., 1999. “To treaty or not to treaty? A survey of practical experience.” In, P.H. Sand (ed.), Transnational environmental law: Lessons in global change (pp. 55-60). Boston: Kluwer Law International. Scheberle, D., 2004. Federalism and environmental policy: trust and the politics of implementation. Washington DC: Georgetown University press. Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, 2000. Sustaining life on earth: how the Convention on Biological Diversity promotes nature and human well-being. UNEP, retrieved from, http://www.cbd.int/iyb/doc/prints/cbd-sustain-en.pdf. Sharma, E., Chettri, N., Gurung, J., and Shakya, B., 2007. The Landscape approach in biodiversity conservation: A regional cooperation framework for implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity in the Kangchenjunga Landscape. Kathmandu: ICIMOD. Retrieved from, http://apps.icimod.org/elibrary/uploads/tmp/icimod-the_landscape_approach_in_biodiversity_conservation.pdf [accessed 3rd September 2012] Stewart, J., Hedge, D., and Lester, P., 2007. Public policy: an evolutionary approach (3rd.edn). Boston: Cengage learning. Thomas, I., 2007. Environmental policy: Australian practice in the context of theory. Sydney: The Federation Press. UNEP, 2011. Annual report 2011. Retrieved from http://www.unep.org/annualreport/2011/# [accessed 3rd September 2012] United Nations, 1999. Definition of key terms used in the UN Treaty Collection, “Declarations.” Retrieved from, http://untreaty.un.org/ola-internet/Assistance/guide.txt [accessed 4th september, 2012] Read More