The Use and Limits of Science in International Decision Making - Essay Example

The BP Oil Spill The recent BP oil spill is one of the most critical environmental disasters that has occurred in the recent past, in terms of the colossal levels of damage that are being caused. Since the 20th of April, 2010 when the deepwater horizon rig exploded and sank off the coast of Louisiana, as much as 40,000 barrels or 1.7 million gallons of oil has been gushing out from a Gulf of Mexico well.1 The massive scale of the oil spill has caused deaths and damage that are far beyond the 11 workers who were killed when the rig exploded; the clogging of the water by the oil is damaging marine life and rendering the ocean waters toxic so that coastal life support systems are under severe threat. This is quite apart from the enormous waste of a valuable resource such as oil, which the world can ill afford during a time of fuel scarcity. The incident invokes environmental law, because BP is a British organization whilst the major part of the environmental damage has been caused to the United States. With increasing globalization, international trade levels have also increased and the broad objectives of the GATT – General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade- have been to foster trade among countries and to reduce the restrictions that are imposed by individual nations in order to protect their own, narrow, regional interests. Multilateral agreements on the environment are those agreements made between various countries with the objective of preserving and protecting the environment. They may comprise two kinds of agreements: (a) agreements on the preservation of the environment through measures like preventing global warming, ozone depletion, rise in sea levels or other measures related to the environment and (b) agreements that link trade and the environment, wherein certain measures are included to discourage trading in those commodities that may be linked to unsound environmental practices or where the materials produced may be hazardous.2 Recent trends for the formulation of multi-lateral agreements to restrict trade in the interest of protection of the environment3 have received a mixed reaction from developing countries. While on the one hand, these agreements are welcomed because they help to protect the fragile environment, some developing countries also perceive these agreements as barriers to trade, which will hinder their competitiveness because they are already handicapped in their access to finance, technology and information.4 In the case of oil exploitation in particular, the potential threat to the environment has been a significant aspect of the fierce debate raging about environmental costs and responsibilities. As Eweje(2006) states, the concept of environmental compliance has expanded in recent years to a position far more than mere recycling and maintaining energy efficiency; rather it has come to encompass a much wider scope, such as the assessment of business products, the elimination of waste and emissions, maximising of efficiency and avoiding any practices that could damage the environment5. The recent BP incident only demonstrates how dismally this environmental disaster conforms to the requirements of responsibility and protection of the environment. In recent years, corporate social responsibility has increasingly become relevant for consideration as an integral part of international human rights law.(McCorquodale, 2009).6 John Ruggie, the United Nations Special representative on Transnational Corporations and Human Rights, has adopted a new framework in considering the scope of corporate social responsibility within the framework of international law and he concludes that individual States’ obligations to protect human rights could be much broader and deeper than has been envisaged under the existing provisions of environmental protection provided under international trade laws such as the GATT. Moreover, he also questions whether there will even be sufficient legal remedies available to the victims of environmental disasters , when corporate social responsibility is assessed under the framework of international law. The basic premise underlying corporate social responsibility, which is especially relevant in the context of oil exploration, is that businesses have a responsibility not to cause harm to others, either intentionally or through their negligence. Environmental degradation is one of the fastest growing problems in the international arena7, especially with the increase in free trade and the predominance of multi-national corporations, who are driven purely by the drive to make profits. In essence, corporations “argue that it is the job of governments to correct for market failure and then they use their influence and money to defeat or water down regulations designed to conserve and protect the environment.”8 In the context of the incident with the BP oil spill, all of these issues will be relevant. The freedom and flexibility afforded through international trade has contributed to BP’s activities in the region of the Gulf of Mexico, but the damages to the environment may preclude the freedoms allowed under the provisions of GATT. Undoubtedly, BP’s corporate social responsibility is at stake here, the media pressure and the actions of the United States President Barack Obama, have placed BP in a position where it is obligated to make good some of the damages sustained in this environmental disaster which is still continuing. But as the literature review above has stated, the major question which arises is whether there will be adequate compensation for the victims at all. The scale of the disaster is so vast that it is not merely human life in the coastal areas which is at stake, but the future of the delicate marine ecosystem, which could be irretrievable damaged to the extent that no single corporation, however large it is, may be able to single-handedly provide compensation to the levels that would even partially compensate for the damages. References: Eweje, Gabriel, 2006. “Environmental costs and responsibilities resulting from oil exploitation in developing countries: the case of the Niger delta of Nigeria”, Journal of Business Ethics, 69: 27-56 “Experts double estimate of BP oil spill size”, BBC News, June 11, 2010, retrieved July 5, 2010 from: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/us_and_canada/10290238.stm McCorquodale, Robert, 2009. “Corporate social responsibility and international human rights law”, Journal of Business Ethics, 87(2):385-400 “The CITES Fort Lauderdale criteria: The use and limits of science in International decision making”, 114 Harvard Law Review, 1769 (2001) “The implementation of multi-lateral environment agreements”, http://www.unescap.org/drpad/publication/dp21_1990/dp21_vii.PDF; Read More