Implementing Policies and Environmental Degradation - Research Paper Example

Introduction The principle means that an individual, groups of people or an organization bears the responsibility to intervene a certain process to protect the public from possible harm, where reasonable risk has been ascertained by scientific research having tested all the possible causes. Precautionary principle can be described as the ethical and political theory which declares that if certain course of action or a public policy might result in irreparable damage to the general public or the environmental surroundings without ant scientific consent that the damage would not progress, the burden of proof comes to the people who would support the execution of the activity implied. The protections that alleviate the supposed dangers can be loosened only if the further scientific evidence comes up strongly to support an unconventional explanation. In some legal systems like the legislations used by the European Union nations, the precautionary principle is considered as a general and an enforceable law principle. The Precautionary Principle Approach Basically the precautionary principle is a declaration that does not allow the progress of new technologic trials or persistence with the old one unless the safety of the public is convincingly assured (Hanley et al 2001). This declaration appears to be a sensible statement that should be accepted by every individual without any coercion or resistance; however this is not the case in reality as many people have come up in objection to the principle. Many environmentalists have used the principle to intervene some scientific projects like nuclear power generations and other projects that elevate global warming. The climate changes have become of serious concern as there are considerable variations and the climatic co0nditions can no longer be accurately predicted, Edward (2006). The principle should not be treated just like a mere statement, handling the principle with precaution is very critical as the statement does not put forward anything that has not been previously accepted, David (2001). Nonetheless, some people argue that this declaration is unjustifiable as in its so powerful that adhering to it would be a set back to many technological projects and inventions. The principle is also accused of approves unscientific discrimination while at the same time relies on the scientific backing before it is used and requires that proper scientific findings be used to eliminate safety assurances that are unfounded. Some issues are left to the courts which do not even know how to treat the cases because of conflict of interest (Hanley et al 2001). Despite these disputes, the precautionary principle has remained an important feature in the policy decision making processes that concern climatic changes, environmental conservation and management. The principle usually applies to cases where there are sensible evidences for concern that an action is or may result in damages to the environment as in unpredictable climatic conditions but still there is uncertainty about the likelihood of the risk and the extend of damage (Rogers et al 2008). The use of precautionary principle has been approved worldwide and at several occasions for instance during the meeting by world leaders in Rio in 1992. This meeting was convened as the Earth Summit to discuss climatic and environmental changes. In the meeting, the agenda 21 supported the extensive use of precautionary principle addressing the following terms, Edward (2006); For the protection of the environment to be effective, the precautionary system would be used comprehensively by countries depending on their capabilities. Whenever there are threats of severe or irremediable harm, deficient scientific evidence shall not be used as the basis to defer cost – effective measures to put a stop to environmental degradation and climate alteration (Wesseler et al 2002). Why Use Precautionary Principle Now Many of the climatic changes that occur as a result of the technological tests and other scientific experiments are trans-boundary in nature implying that the mistakes of one nation could affect the entire region and event the world at large for instance global warming effects (Rogers et al 2008). For this reason, the prevention of such occurrences has to be addressed effectively and this can only take place by international cooperation. Precautionary principle comes to mind very fast as its one of the internationally approved strategies to curb such undertakings that causes great risk to the public (Hanley et al 2001). It’s for the same reasons that the principle has been endorsed by the European Community nations having been incorporated in their environmental policies to encourage regional solutions to the climate problems at international level. The world leaders who issued the wingspread statement and their supporters did this on the grounds that the effects of risky and detrimental activities had accumulate over time and carrying on with the same momentum would be like ‘sitting on a time bomb waiting to explode’. They believed that it was the right time for the whole world to take charge as the capacity to absorb and conquer the negative climatic effects was very low implying that human beings have to be more cautious than they have previously been Metz et al 2007). The world scholars including lawyers, scientists, environmentalists, and policy makers came up with the wingspread declaration at the headquarters of the Johnson Foundation. The statement included the verity that an activity should be stopped or intervened upon as precautionary strategy if its suspected to be a threat to the public especially health wise even when the cause and effect connection is not clearly proven by scientific research or test, David (2001). Currently, there are a lot of forewarning symptoms that hint at an approaching disaster calling for intervention or use of the precautionary method. Some of the presenting signs are the people themselves as in the state of health problems is increasing with many individuals suffering mental or learning disability, a lot of asthmatic and respiratory problems, and several cancerous conditions among others(Hanley et al 2001). Other dangerous signs to watch include poor plant growth and development of animal species, the consistent depletion of the stratospheric ozone layer and the increased signs that global warming is taking place. It has been very difficult to coin these effects to comprehensible or simple cause evident the same way it has been difficult to forecast precisely what many consequences would be like. However there are plenty of sensible indication and plenty of scientific evidence that require human beings to be careful and bear in mind that all the actions that are undertaken have consequences (Freestone & Hey 1995). In some cases, waiting for scientific evidence could be dangerous as people might end up regretting it. The costs of carrying out scientific research or trials are very high hence cause and effect trails may not be done in time. For instance, the possibility cigarette smoking to cause cancer was suspected long before the connection was established and related conclusively that is the approval of scientific standards of cause and effect association. Considering the time lapse that was taken, many smokers had died and even more hand risked contracting cancer. Very few had quit smoking because of the fact that no evidence was there linking smoking to cancer and people relied on their suspicion (Hanley et al 2001). Climatic changes could be devastating like the occurrence of the El Niño rains if people would sit back and wait for scientific proof rather than exercising preventative measure in spite of the scientific uncertainty. The problems that could result from climatic changes like the cases of cancer ailments or the consequences of global warming could be too large, the causes very varied and the outcomes could be too long term to be evaluated out with irrefutable or evidence scientific research that would link the cause to the effects (Spray & McGlothlin 2002). For faster conclusions, people have to rely on the general observations, intuitive common sense reasoning, case studies and postulations that are founded on the general knowledge. As the climatic changes have been unpredictable over the past few years causing a lot of problems like poor agricultural yields, Katrina, El Nino rains, melting of ice at the temperate regions and general increase in world temperatures as a result of global warming. Precautionary principle would require that when logical scientific confirmation of any sort should be used as the rationale to deem that an activity, an item, technology or a material is dangerous and measures should be taken to stop and prevent further harm. Waiting for proof would lead to greater loss as many people would continue to suffer and the effects on the environment could be irreversible (Timothy et al 1995). The use of government finances on major projects like construction of roads on forest land or developing waste management programs, the planners should be asked to produce an environmental impact statement that explains the effects of the activities on the environment as this would be of greater consequence to the climatic conditions. Forests are associated with climatic conditions in a certain region as they are aspects that are micro climate regulators (Stewart 2002 & David 2001)). They are believed to attract rain. The general public can also play part in the assessment whether the study was done thoroughly and consider all possible alternatives because they have a responsibility to do so as a precautionary action. Most of the environmental regulations that have been put in place are aimed at controlling the pollution and clearing it altogether. The other major objective is to reduce the greenhouse emission to the environment. These emissions have been the major cause of the climatic changes that are witnessed today like the hurricane Katrina. Some regulations like clean air act, the Kyoto protocol, the superfund law and water act among others (Gollier et al 2000). Some of these laws have been very important in protecting the surroundings and slowing degradation of the environment like providing clean air, clean water and productive land. Though these regulations have been very beneficial, they relied on some harmful ideologies that the human bodies could withstand some amount of harm without succumbing to them. Basically it’s had to establish to what extend the humans and the ecosystems can take in the contamination before getting harmed and whether these levels are safe, European Environment Agency (2001). The precautionary methods have major loopholes as there are many ongoing projects that should have been started in the first place. This is a very big disadvantage as the principles is intended for prevention measures and not cure of the problems. The Global Climate Control Many international treaties have adopted the precautionary principle especially when addressing the global climatic changes that have been experienced over the past years. Some of these include the Ozone Layer Protocol of 1985, the Framework Convention on Climate Change in 1992 and in 1997, the Rio Declaration on Environment in 1992, and biodiversity treaty among others (Stewart 2002). This means that the precautionary principle is a widely accepted fact that can be useful in making guidelines that will be very useful in managing environmental degradation and the resulting environmental changes. Most of these international treaties have been supported by influential nations like United States of America and China. The US however does not acknowledge the fact that the substantive responsibilities come from the principle and it has even wanted the UN to qualify the declaration of the principle especially as implied in the UN frame work Convention on Climatic Changes (Gollier et al 2000). In 1993, the then president, Bill Clinton put a signature on the Biodiversity treaty but the congress declined to approve it (Spray & McGlothlin 2002). The climate and global warming climate has been on the centre stage with some of the developing nations declining to comply with the regulation of environmental conservation. The consequences are trans-national like acidic precipitation and this requires that all the nations be involved in bringing about the change or put a stop to the problem. The agenda 21 of the Rio declaration and from the information addressed in the agenda, economic, scientific ethical methods to solving the problems are the major features. The scientific evidence of the climatic changes is dependent on the simple relationships like temperature and pressure (Raffensperger & Tickner 1999). The temperature of the earth is determined by evaluating the amount of incoming solar energy and the radiation that comes from the earth surface. Some energy is lost to the atmosphere, land water absorbs some fraction while the radiations helps top cool down the earth. The human activities bring about some alterations. The emission of carbon dioxide is very notable in these changes. The use of carbon energy (fossil energy) sources emits carbon dioxide to the environment; emission of methane, deforestation, emission of heat and other agricultural activities reduces the cooling rates (Field 1994). The level of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere increased at a very fast rate during the industrialization era and the time these gases stay in the atmosphere is not certain but estimated at 50 to 200 years. Considering the rate at which the gases get to the environment and the time it takes to be removed it’s clear that the gases will keep on accumulating and the effects could worsen with time, European Environment Agency (2001). Common Liability, But Different Weight The presenting climatic changes are issues that fulfil the requirements of using the precautionary principle. This is because there is a threat of disastrous and sensible irreparable environmental degradation. The climatic changes that come as a consequences are a human concern because it affects everybody on the planet. Considering the generations to come is a responsibility of the current generation. The problem is very extensive and very complicated. Based on the global warming potential, the greenhouse emission of each nation has been calculated and the results indicate that China and U.S. are the leading emitters of the carbon gases, Recuerda (2006). Most of the emissions were recorded from the other developed nations like Japan, France, Canada, Italy, South Korea, and Britain. From the changes in the environmental gas emission, it’s very obvious that the temperature will increase considerably to cause serious impact on the ecosystem especially regional ecosystem. There is no specific scientific evidence that can be used to predict the regional estimates while at the same time the effects of human activities have other direct consequences on the ecosystems which could be more damaging than the climate changes (Raffensperger & Tickner 1999). The effects include melting of the Antarctic ice, the increase in ocean levels, and the ocean currents. The nations like Bangladesh, Egypt and Netherlands could suffer more from the effects of increase in levels of the ocean water. The growth in population has contributed about one third of the total emission of carbon gases from 1950 to 1985. The annual population rate during that period was a bout 1.9% and the predictions show that the world population would be about b.5 billion by the year 2025 if the same rate persists, Recuerda (2006). Most of the increase will be observed in the developing nations like China, India, and Bangladesh. The problem that faces climatic regulation is that the rich contributes more to the problem while the solution requires equal contributions by both rich and poor. Such issues bring about the problem of determining the fair distribution of the benefits and the burden of the problem (Raffensperger & Tickner 1999). For example the people in the Sweden could be emitting about 40% of what the United States is emitting per capita and if one would aim to live like the Americans the rate of greenhouse emissions would triple. Response to Climate Change The first step to consider before making any suggestions to solve the climate problem is to find out what the measures that needs to be evaluated in order to effectively work out the worry. There is still the problem of scientific uncertainty and this makes it difficult to ascertain what the precautionary principle would be made of. The policies to be implemented will rely on the opinions, values, attitudes that affect the social life and nature as well (Field 1994). Assuming that the strategy would be costly, one should determine where the cost would be obtained from in order to make proper measurements for the principle. It’s also very imperative to consider the risk that would be involved bearing in mind that the outcome is uncertain. Conclusion Implementing policies to stop environmental degradation that would cause climatic changes is very essential for the survival of future generations. It’s therefore a collective responsibility as the consequences affect everyone as well. References David K (2001). The precautionary principle in environmental science. European Center for Environmental and Health WHO Precautionary Policies and Health Protection-Principle and Applications. Rome Edward E (2006) Implementing the Precautionary Principle. Perspectives and Prospects, Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, US European Environment Agency (2001). Late lessons from early warnings the precautionary principle 1896-2000. Environmental Issue Report. 2001, No.22: 13-14. Field C. B (1994). Environmental Economics An Introduction. McGraw-Hill Freestone D & Hey E. (1995).The Precautionary Principle and International Law The Challenge of Implementation. Kluwer Law International Gollier C et al (2000). Scientific Progress and Irreversibility. An Economic Interpretation of the ‘Precautionary Principle. Journal of Public Economics Hanley N. Shogren J.F & White Ben (2001). Introduction to Environmental Economics. Oxford University Press Metz B, Davidson O & Bosch P (2007). Climate Change 2007. Working Group III Contribution to the Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC. Cambridge University Press Raffensperger C. & Tickner J (eds.) (1999) Protecting Public Health and the Environment: Implementing the Precautionary Principle.Island Press Washington, DC Recuerda, M A. (2006) Risk and Reason in the European Union Law, 5 European Food and Feed Law Review Stewart, R.B. (2002). Environmental Regulatory Decision Making Under Uncertainty. Research in Law and Economics Vol. 20, pp.76 Rogers R.P Jalal K.F & Boyd (2008) In Introduction to Sustainable Development. Earthscan Spray S.l & McGlothlin (2002). Global climate change. Rowman & Littlefield Timothy O’Riordan & Jordan. A (1995) The precautionary principle in contemporary environmental polities. Environmental Values. 4 191-212. Wesseler J. Weikard H. & Weaver D (2002) Risk and Uncertainty in Environmental and Natural Resource Economics Edward Elgar Publishing Read More