Sustainable Development, Ocean Governance and Marine Protected Areas

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 127-141
Author(s):  
David Freestone
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Sustainable Use ◽  
Convention On Biological Diversity ◽  
The Sustainable Development ◽  
Ocean Governance ◽  
National Jurisdiction ◽  
Development Goals ◽  
Aichi Biodiversity Targets

By 2020, at least ten percent of the global oceans should be subject to area-based protection according to the target agreed by the parties to the 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity in 2010 (Aichi Biodiversity Targets) and reiterated in 2015 Sustainable Development Goal 14.5. This paper looks at the Sustainable Development Goals and the evolution of the concept of Sustainable Development, distinguishing it from international environmental law. Then it looks at the way in which the goals relate to ocean governance and the current lacunae in the system established by the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention and the negotiations within the UN to address the issue of the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity in area beyond national jurisdiction. In particular, it looks at the sectoral approaches to area-based protection in areas beyond national jurisdiction, where currently iucn reports that only 1.18% is protected.

Learning to Innovate

2020 ◽  
pp. 23-35
Author(s):  
Casey Stevens
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Sustainable Development Goals ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Convention On Biological Diversity ◽  
Governance System ◽  
The Sustainable Development ◽  
Development Goals ◽  
Aichi Biodiversity Targets ◽  
Taking Action ◽  
Biodiversity Governance

What is the likelihood of science and technology progress for biodiversity from the sustainable development goals? This chapter argues that it is higher than it may seem as a result of scientific developments ready for wide application and a structure of biodiversity governance able to spread innovation. The chapter initially argues that there are three potential fields for innovation under the specific targets of the sustainable development goals: integration of biodiversity with other spheres, ecosystem-based management, and remote sensing. Next, it argues that innovation is likely because the biodiversity governance system has developed localized centers for developing innovation with a system for transferring those findings across scales. It focuses specifically on the importance of the National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans developed under the Convention on Biological Diversity, the expert systems developed at the international level, and the ability of international organizations to implement innovative approaches to biodiversity governance. The conclusion is that there is a high potential for innovation, but that taking action after the Aichi biodiversity targets end in 2020 will be key.

scholarly journals Apples for Oranges: Disparities in Offset Legislation and Policy among Jurisdictions and its Implications for Environmental Protection and Sustainable Development in Australia

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 172
Author(s):  
Linda Abdo ◽  
Sandy Griffin ◽  
Annabeth Kemp
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Environmental Protection ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Convention On Biological Diversity ◽  
Agenda 21 ◽  
The Sustainable Development ◽  
International Obligation ◽  
Biodiversity Offsets ◽  
International Obligations ◽  
Development Goals

As a signatory to Agenda 21, the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (including the Sustainable Development Goals) and the Convention on Biological Diversity, Australia has an international obligation to ensure sustainable development. Biodiversity offsets are one tool used by Australian regulators to allow development to continue, whilst ensuring international obligations for sustainable development are met. In this study, legislation, policy and published guidelines for the Australian Commonwealth, states and territories were analysed to determine if the application of biodiversity offsets was consistent with the principles of sustainable development (environmentally, socially, economically) and if the allowance of biodiversity offsets in different jurisdictions created gaps in biodiversity and environmental protection across Australia. Regulation of biodiversity offsets was found to be inconsistent between the Commonwealth and the states and territories, with most jurisdictions having less than 50% similarity. This inconsistency in offset policy and legislation between jurisdictions could lead to loss of biodiversity. Additionally, jurisdictions did not adequately consider the social and economic aspects of sustainability in relation to biodiversity offsets, meaning that, through the allowance of biodiversity offsets, Australia may not be meeting their international obligations related to sustainable development. Further legislative development for biodiversity offsets is required in Australia to improve environmental protection and to adequately consider all aspects of sustainability. The Council of Australian Governments is a mechanism that could be used to ensure all jurisdictions consider the aspects of sustainability consistently in relation to biodiversity offsets.

scholarly journals ACCESS AND BENEFIT SHARING UNDER NAGOYA PROTOCOL AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS

2015 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 38-45
Author(s):  
STELLINA JOLLY
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Genetic Resources ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Developing Nations ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Convention On Biological Diversity ◽  
Access And Benefit Sharing ◽  
Nagoya Protocol ◽  
Equitable Sharing

The debate over control and ownership of natural and bio genetic resources has a chequered history in International environmental law. Historically genetic resources were considered and acknowledged as part of common heritage of mankind. But with the development of technologies and the heightened north south divide over the issue of sovereign right over natural resources the developing nations became extremely concerned with the exploitation of biological and Genetic resources. Access to benefit sharing (ABS) was considered as an answer to balance the interests of developed and developing nations and to conserve and protect bio diversity. Adopted on October 2010 in Nagoya, Japan by the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) of 1992, the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization (NP) has come into force after its 50th ratification on 2013. Nagoya protocol details on procedure for access and benefit sharing, disclosure mechanism, principles of transparency and democracy. The paper analyses the protection of access and benefit sharing envisaged under Nagoya protocol and its possible role in promoting sustainable development in the develoing nations. 

Part III Marine Biodiversity Conservation and Global Ocean Governance, 8 Marine Biodiversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction: Securing a Sound Law of the Sea Instrument

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Millicay Fernanda
Keyword(s):  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Sustainable Use ◽  
Global Ocean ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Marine Biodiversity ◽  
Ocean Governance ◽  
Preparatory Committee ◽  
National Jurisdiction ◽  
Un General Assembly ◽  
United Nations Convention

This chapter examines the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ). It first provides an overview of the Preparatory Committee (PrepCom), convened by the UN General Assembly to make recommendations on the elements for a possible future multilateral agreement under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). The material scope of the PrepCom is constituted by ‘the package’ agreed upon in 2011 and includes the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction. The chapter discusses the challenges of the package, focusing on two interlinked dimensions of the package plus the big issue that underlies it. It also considers two main tasks facing PrepCom: the first is to clearly identify all elements of each substantive set of issues composing the package, and the second task is to understand the implications of each element of these three substantive sets of issues and the inter-linkages between them.

Is existing scientific knowledge sufficient to provide the basis for reliable monitoring of achieving land degradation neutrality?

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan Grainger
Keyword(s):  
Land Degradation ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Forest Degradation ◽  
Convention On Biological Diversity ◽  
Land Restoration ◽  
Degraded Land ◽  
The Sustainable Development ◽  
Dry Areas ◽  
Development Goals ◽  
Environmental Concepts

<p>A goal of Land Degradation Neutrality by the year 2030 was agreed by the Rio+20 conference in 2012, and subsequently included in the Sustainable Development Goals. It dilutes earlier goals of unrestricted control of desertification, for example, by proposing that the rate of land degradation should be reduced and the rate of restoration of degraded land increased so they offset each other by 2030. As with many environmental concepts that have emerged in recent decades, Land Degradation Neutrality was proposed in the political arena, and scientific study is only now starting to evolve. Yet distinct positions are already forming within the scientific community, for example, on the feasibility of monitoring land degradation neutrality in dry areas when there are no reliable estimates for the rate of desertification, and on what constitutes land restoration in dry areas. Land degradation neutrality is also yet to be put in the wider context of environmental degradation as a whole, e.g. how does it relate to the forest degradation component of the Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD+) mechanism of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, and to degradation of biodiversity which the Convention on Biological Diversity is seeking to reduce. This session will allow scientists working in the field of land degradation neutrality to share their perspectives in this emerging field.</p>

scholarly journals Sustainable Consumption: Scope and Applicability of Principles of International Law

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-27
Author(s):  
Ipshita CHATURVEDI
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
International Law ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Sustainable Consumption ◽  
Resource Exploitation ◽  
International Environmental Law ◽  
The Sustainable Development ◽  
Responsible Consumption ◽  
Sustainable Consumption And Production ◽  
Development Goals

Abstract The role of sustainable development has been increasingly recognized in international environmental law as a way to reconcile poverty eradication and resource exploitation with environmental protection. By contrast, little attention has been given to the concept of sustainable consumption. When international law mentions sustainable consumption, consumption and production are generally considered together, for instance in Goal 12 of the Sustainable Development Goals, addressing responsible consumption and production, and in UNEP’s 10-year sustainable ‘consumption and production programme.’ While some research on sustainable consumption has been conducted in sociology and anthropology, the focus in international environmental law has remained on production rather than consumption. This article seeks to open up a discussion on how consumption should be viewed and defined legally, and the role that law could play in promoting sustainable consumption.

INTERNATIONAL LEGAL ISSUES OF THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOALS ON THE CONSERVATION OF MARINE ECOSYSTEMS IN THE CONTEXT OF FISHERIES

Fisheries ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (5) ◽  
pp. 51-57
Author(s):  
Kamil Bekyashev ◽  
Damir Bekyashev
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Sustainable Development Goals ◽  
Sustainable Use ◽  
Legal Issues ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
The Sustainable Development ◽  
Development Goals ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Law Making

The article deals with the concept, content and legal consolidation of the term “sustainable use of marine living resources”. The article analyzes the norms of universal, regional and bilateral international treaties that consolidate and disclose this term. The norms of the national legislation of states are considered. Special attention is paid to the main provisions of Goal 14 of the Sustainable Development Goals, with an emphasis on those related to the conservation of marine living resources. The law-making activity of the Russian Federation on the implementation of Goal 14 is considered. Recommendations for improving the legislation of the Russian Federation, aimed at achieving the Goal are developed.

scholarly journals Tools for Embedding and Assessing Sustainable Development Goals in Engineering Education

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (21) ◽  
pp. 12154
Author(s):  
Fermín Sánchez-Carracedo ◽  
Jordi Segalas ◽  
Gorka Bueno ◽  
Pere Busquets ◽  
Joan Climent ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Learning Outcomes ◽  
Sustainable Development Goals ◽  
Research Work ◽  
Sustainable Use ◽  
Learning Assessment ◽  
Future Research ◽  
The Sustainable Development ◽  
Use Of Resources ◽  
Development Goals

This paper presents three tools developed within the framework of the project EDINSOST2-SDG, aimed at embedding and assessing the Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) in Engineering curricula. ESD is promoted through the introduction into engineering curricula of learning outcomes related to sustainability and, specifically, to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). The first tool, the “Engineering Sustainability Map”, contains ESD-related learning outcomes that any engineering student should have acquired upon completion of their studies. These learning outcomes are described according to four sustainability competencies: (1) Critical contextualization of knowledge, (2) Sustainable use of resources, (3) Participation in community processes, and (4) Application of ethical principles. The second tool, the “Sustainability Presence Map” of a degree, shows the percentage of the presence in the curriculum of each sustainability competency. The calculation of the presence of each competency is based on the effective integration of the related learning outcomes into a specific curriculum. Respective data are provided by teachers responsible for the coordination of the different subjects of the degree, collected by means of a questionnaire. The third tool presented is a questionnaire aimed at measuring the level of ESD that students perceive they have acquired through each competency. The comparison of data resulting from the Sustainability Presence Map with the data from the student questionnaire is the first step that allows the effectiveness of embedding ESD in a degree to be determined, a proper learning assessment will confirm such effectiveness. The three tools presented in this work have undergone a validation process and are currently being used in a set of engineering degrees related to the EDINSOST2-SDG project. The results of the application of these tools are part of the future research work of the authors.

scholarly journals Reflecting on the Role of the Arctic Council vis-à-vis a Future International Legally Binding Instrument on Biodiversity in Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (0) ◽  
pp. 189
Author(s):  
Vito De Lucia ◽  
Philip Peter Nickels
Keyword(s):  
Arctic Ocean ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Sustainable Use ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Arctic Council ◽  
Ocean Governance ◽  
The Future ◽  
National Jurisdiction ◽  
General Assembly Resolution

Negotiations are ongoing to develop an international legally binding instrument (ILBI) under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ). If adopted, the ILBI will likely apply to parts of the Arctic Ocean where the Arctic Council has played an important role for ocean governance. This begs the question of what role the Arctic Council will play vis-à-vis a future ILBI, which is envisioned to “not undermine existing relevant legal instruments and frameworks and relevant global, regional and sectoral bodies” (UN General Assembly Resolution 72/249). Against this backdrop, this article reflects on the future relationship between the Arctic Council and the ILBI. In so doing, the article initially discusses possible meanings of the notion of not undermining and, more broadly, how the ILBI will likely determine its institutional relationship with relevant bodies for BBNJ. Based on that, the article provides a short overview of the role of the Arctic Council in Arctic Ocean governance and explores whether the Arctic Council would qualify as a relevant regional body that shall not be undermined by the future ILBI.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document