Biodiversity and the Precautionary Principle

Risk, Uncertainty and Practice in Conservation and Sustainable Use

Rosie Cooney, Barney Dickson, Fauna Flora International

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2012
• Print ISBN: 9781844072774
• eBook ISBN: 9781136570995
• Topic: Biological Sciences
• Subtopic: Environmental Conservation & Protection
• Index: Biological Sciences

Great uncertainty typically surrounds decisions and management actions in the conservation of biodiversity and natural resource management, and yet there are risks of serious and irreversible harm for both biodiversity and the humans that rely on it. The precautionary principle arguably underlies all international conservation efforts and promotes acting to avoid serious or irreversible environmental harm, despite lack of scientific certainty as to the likelihood, magnitude or cause of harm.

This book is the first to examine the application of the precautionary principle to biodiversity conservation and natural resource management, incorporating perspectives from scientists, economists, lawyers and practitioners from both developing and developed countries. It analyses the application and impacts of the principle in many areas including forestry, invasive alien species, wildlife trade, protected areas and fisheries, in a range of national and international contexts. Particular attention is drawn to issues of equity, livelihoods, science and politics, and the book provides guidelines for applying the precautionary principle to biodiversity conservation and natural resource management.

Section One

The Precautionary Principle in
International Regimes and
Policy Processes

2

Forest Policy, the Precautionary
Principle and Sustainable Forest
Management

Adrian Newton and Sara Oldfield

INTRODUCTION

In recent decades, the precautionary principle has become increasingly accepted as a component of environmental management and associated policy, aiming to avoid environmental harm in the absence of scientific certainty about the potential impacts of human activities. Although the principle superficially appears sensible and rational, its application has proved to be highly controversial, leading to an active and ongoing debate (Sunstein, 2003).

This case study reviews the application of the precautionary principle in relation to the forest sector. We first examine the degree to which reference to the precautionary principle is made in existing international law or policy instruments relating to forests. We then describe recent developments in policy and practice relating to sustainable forest management, examine to what extent such developments are consistent with the precautionary principle, and explore whether the precautionary approach should be adopted as a tenet in forest management. Finally, we consider the application of the precautionary principle to tree species, with particular reference to the sustainable management of the commercially valuable and ecologically vulnerable species, mahogany (Swietenia macrophylla).

TO WHAT EXTENT HAS THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE BEEN APPLIED TO THE FOREST SECTOR?

Although the precautionary approach is explicitly referred to under Principle 15 of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development proclaimed at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in 1992, as noted by Brunnée and Nollkaemper (1996) the Statement of Forest Principles¹ made at the event makes no reference to precaution. Neither is it featured in the International Tropical Timber Agreement, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) Programme of Work on Forests (see Decisions IV/7, V/4, VI/9, VI/22), the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation (Decision VI/9), or the deliberations of the United Nations Forum on Forests (UNFF), the International Forum on Forests (IFF) or the International Panel on Forests (IPF) (see Cooney, 2004). We examined a wide range of documents and text on forests from the Global Environment Facility, the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, the Montreal Process, the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) Committee on Forestry, the International Tropical Timber Organisation, the International Conference on the Contribution of Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Forest Management: The Way Forward (CICI 2003), and the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation (para 45). None contained explicit reference to precaution, with the exception of a single reference made within an information note to the CBD on the status and trends of, and major threats to, forest biological diversity (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/7/INF/3), which highlights the ‘value of following the precautionary principle when there is a reasonable doubt about the impacts of human activities on a forest ecosystem’. The World Bank's Revised Strategy and Operational Policy on Forests (World Bank, 2004) states that the ‘fundamental guidance given to Bank staff and clients is that in assessing the significance of change they must take a precautionary approach’.

It is perhaps surprising that so few of these policy statements make any reference to the precautionary principle or approach. This can be attributed, at least in part, to the prevailing paradigm of state sovereignty over forest resources (Brunnée and Nollkaemper, 1996), illustrated by Principle 2 of the Rio Declaration, which notes that ‘States have … the sovereign right to exploit their own resources pursuant to their own environmental and development policies’. This paradigm has certainly dominated development of international forest policy over the past decade, and may account for the slow progress in the development of an international forest law as advocated by Brunnée and Nollkaemper (1996). However, discussions relating to international forest law are ongoing within UNFF; an Ad Hoc Expert Group met in September 2004 to discuss a legal framework on all types of forests for consideration at UNFF5. Interestingly, the report of this meeting (UNFF, 2005) made no reference to the precautionary principle, despite the fact that Brunnée and Nollkaemper (1996) considered that it should become part of any emerging international forest law.

At the national level, a number of countries have incorporated the precautionary principle within policies relating to forests, including Peru, Cameroon and Mozambique (Cooney, 2004). As noted by Cooney (2004), Australia has been pre-eminent in referring to precaution within environmental policies, and this includes those relating explicitly to forests. The 1995 National Forest Policy Statement states that, ‘in keeping with the “precautionary principle” the State Governments will undertake continuing research and long term monitoring so that adverse impacts that may arise can be detected and redressed through revised codes of practice and management plans’ (Commonwealth of Australia, 1995). In addition, the most comprehensive study of the Australian forest sector undertaken to date (Resource Assessment Commission, 1992) also indicated that it is ‘important that the “precautionary principle” be followed when managing timber harvesting in multiple use native forests’. The Commonwealth government and some state governments have entered into a number of Regional Forest Agreements (RFAs) that provide a framework for forest management and the implementation of the National Forest Policy Statement. Some of these RFAs also make explicit reference to the precautionary principle; for example the RFA for the South West Forest Region of Western Australia states that ‘planning and management of forests should be guided by the precautionary principle’.

We believe that the recent focus on sustainable forest management in international forums may be a key factor responsible for the lack of reference to the precautionary principle in international forest policy. It is significant that in the Australian policy statements cited above, the precautionary principle is referred to in the context of ecologically sustainable forest management. This implies an interpretation of the principle that potentially permits a degree of forest use. The definition and assessment of sustainable forest management (SFM) has dominated forest policy discussions at the international level since UNCED in 1992, and therefore any consideration of the relevance of the precautionary principle to forests should be placed in this context. Below, we provide a summary of these policy developments, and then explore the potential links between SFM and the precautionary principle.

DEVELOPING CRITERIA, INDICATORS AND STANDARDS FOR SFM

The definition and assessment of SFM has been the focus of intense international discussion since the development of the Forest Principles and chapter 11 of Agenda 21, which called for the identification of criteria and indicators (C&I) for evaluating progress in national efforts towards the management, conservation and sustainable development of all types of forests. Criteria may be defined as the essential elements or major components that define SFM, whereas indicators are qualitative or quantitative parameters of a criterion that provide a basis for assessing the status of, and trends in, forests and forest management (UNFF, 2004). Nine regional or international criteria and indicator processes have been developed, involving the participation of 149 countries (UNFF, 2004). Countries are increasingly using C&I as a framework for formulating national forest policy and strategic planning, monitoring of SFM, and supporting stakeholder participation in forest planning and decision-making (UNFF, 2004).

Most processes have focused on developing C&I for application at the regional or national level. However, increasing attention is being paid to development of C&I at the level of the forest management unit (FMU), driven by the growth of interest in forest certification.

Forest certification is essentially a tool for promoting responsible forestry practices. It involves certification of forest management operations by an independent third party against a set of standards. Typically, forest products (generally timber but also non-timber forest products) from certified forests are labelled so that consumers can identify them as having been derived from well-managed sources. At least at a general level, the standards developed by certification bodies can be viewed as supporting SFM, although not all certifying organizations use this precise terminology.

SFM AND THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE

We will now consider the links between the precautionary principle and SFM. First, we examine whether precaution is explicitly mentioned by any of the C&I processes or by certification standards. With respect to the nine C&I processes mentioned above, we were unable to find any reference to the precautionary principle, with the exception of the African Timber Organization process, which states under sub-indicator 1.1.12.3: ‘at the national level, decisions relating to forests of high conservation value are taken within the context of the precautionary principle’ (ATO/ITTO, 2003). With respect to the four North American forest certification organizations (the Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI) Programme, American Tree Farm System (ATFS), Canadian Standards Association (CSA) Sustainable Forest Management Programme, and the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC)), only the FSC explicitly refers to the precautionary principle. Principle 9 of the FSC Principles and Criteria, which relates to the maintenance of ‘high conservation value forests’, states that ‘decisions regarding high conservation value forests shall always be considered in the context of a precautionary approach’, and that ‘the management plan shall include and implement specific measures that ensure the maintenance and/or enhancement of the applicable conservation attributes consistent with the precautionary approach’ (FSC, 2004, subparagraph 9.3).

The concept of ‘high conservation value forest’ as first defined by FSC is increasingly being used in conservation and natural resource planning and advocacy, and considered in government policies (Jennings et al, 2003). Identification of high conservation value forest, or HCVF, is seen as important in ensuring that rational management decisions are consistent with protection of a forest area's important environmental and social values. There is a growing realization that the management of HCVF for timber production may be very difficult to achieve in practice without a significant shift in how the forest is managed and in the actions of forest operators.

Our brief overview suggests that the precautionary principle is not explicitly considered either by most SFM C&I processes or by many forest certification bodies. However, could precaution be considered as an implicit part of SFM? In fact, the links between SFM and the precautionary principle have received very little attention either from policy-makers or researchers. The World Conservation Union (IUCN), the Program on Forests (PROFOR) and the World Bank (IUCN et al, 2004) provide a discussion paper on the relationship between ecosystem approaches and SFM, arising out of the fact that the CBD has emphasized the importance of the former as a ‘strategy for the integrated management of land, water and living resources that promotes conservation and sustainable use in an equitable way’. According to the definition adopted by the CBD (Decision V/6), ‘the ecosystem approach requires adaptive management to deal with the complex and dynamic nature of ecosystems and the absence of complete knowledge or understanding of their functioning… Management must be adapti...

Table of contents

• Front Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright
• Contents
• Foreword
• List of Figures, Tables and Boxes
• List of Acronyms and Abbreviations
• List of Inter-Governmental Agreements and Declarations
• List of Contributors
• Preface
• Introduction
• Section One: The Precautionary Principle in International Regimes and Policy Processes
• Section Two: National Experience in Applying the Precautionary Principle
• Section Three: Making Decisions about Uncertain Threats: Precaution, Prohibitions and Adaptive Management
• Section Four: The Precautionary Principle and Local Livelihoods
• Section Five: Analytical Perspectives on Precaution
• Conclusion
• Appendix: Guidelines for Applying the Precautionary Principle to Biodiversity Conservation and Natural Resource Management
• Index