The most important document in the ongoing international action on climate change is the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Introduced in 1992, the UNFCCC serves as the basis for many subsequent environmental treaties, including the Kyoto protocol. It is an excellent example of a successful implementation of the precautionary principle.
Article 3, section 3 of the convention states:
”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, taking into account that policies and measures to deal with climate change should be cost-effective. ... ” (UNFCCC, 1992)
When the UNFCCC was introduced nearly twenty years ago, the scientific evidence supporting human-induced climate change was much weaker than it is currently. How fortunate it is that the United Nations chose not to wait for more evidence before making decisions about climate change. It is now understood that global warming is occurring, and though the current situation appears bleak, it could have been far worse had the world waited until now to begin acting on climate change.
The UNFCCC also acknowledges a common objection to fighting climate change: the economic cost. Some parties feel that the price associated with efforts to reduce the effects of climate change are not worth the perceived benefits, especially as there is still a small chance that disastrous global warming may be averted. By limiting solutions to only those considered cost-effective, the UNFCCC refutes the financial argument by ensuring that any measures taken will be done so as cheaply as possible.
Although the global political will to act on climate change is still underwhelming, notable advances continue to be made. Due to the UNFCCC and the precautionary principle, the state of the world is far more positive than it might have been.
References
United Nations. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Rio de Janeiro: 1992.
http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/convkp/conveng.pdf. Accessed 21 October 2009.
This is a prime example of the necessary use of the precautionary principle in the given situation, and using it accordingly. The UN recognized that though there was an insufficient amount of scientific evidence to wholly support the threat of global warming, the threat in itself was significant and alarming enough to take precautionary action without waiting for further scientific support. It is indeed fortunate that the UNFCCC was compiled twenty years ago. Waiting for full scientific support means that the UN would not have taken action for a possible twenty years, and quite possibly more to come, where the issue of global warming requires immediate action and cannot afford any more loss of time.
ReplyDeleteI don't know if I understand the second point about the changes made being cost effective. I'm not really sure how this reflects the precautionary principle. It seemed to me like the UNFCCC was simply trying to reassure the countries who weren't necessarily convinced there was a problem?
ReplyDeleteAlso, while not trying to be a total pessimist, I'd have to disagree that the state of the world is far more positive. While it is impossible to determine what the effects would have been had the precautionary principle not been used, it is also pretty apparent that climate change and global warming aren't really showing any signs of slowing down.
It's interesting to see that the UNFCCC implimented the precautionary principle back in 1992 and now it seems that they are simply modifying this principle to fit into today since more technology is available.
ReplyDelete