International Efforts to Combat Climate Change
By Peter Roderick, Climate Justice Programme. Email: peterroderick@cjp.demon.co.uk.

As initiatives continue in the US to enforce the law to combat climate change, there have been several recent developments further afield – in Nigeria , Australia , and at the international level.

In June 2005, eight communities from across the Niger Delta brought a case in the Federal High Court of Nigeria asking for an injunction to stop gas flaring by Shell, Exxon, Chevron, Total, and Agip in joint ventures with the Nigerian government. More gas is wasted in this way every day in Nigeria than in any other country, amounting to about 40% of all Africa ’s natural gas consumption in 2001. According to the World Bank the flares have contributed more greenhouse gases than all other sub-Saharan sources combined, and it is estimated that they cost Nigeria about US $2.5 billion annually. The communities, which live close to the flares, are arguing that their human rights to life, dignity, health, and a clean environment are being violated. On 21 July 2005 , the court sitting at Benin City granted the communities leave to enforce their fundamental human rights and thereby to proceed with their case. For more information, see http://www.climatelaw.org/media/gas.flaring.suit.

In July 2005, the first legal action against the Australian government for failing to consider the effects of global warming on the environment was filed. A local non-governmental organisation has launched the legal challenge in the Federal Court of Australia, arguing that the failure of the government under federal environmental impact laws to consider the emission of greenhouse gases that will result from the burning of coal from two large coal mines in Queensland was unlawful. The Isaac Plains Coal Project and the Sonoma Coal Project are expected to produce 18 million tonnes and 30 million tonnes of coal, respectively, for domestic and overseas markets, including China .

This case comes on the heels of a finding in October 2004 of t he Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal, which held that a planning scheme amendment to allow an expansion of a coal mine was required to consider the indirect impacts of greenhouse gas emissions resulting from the burning of the coal at a power station (Australian Conservation Foundation v Minister for Planning [2004] VCAT 2029). For more information, contact Kirsty Ruddock, Environmental Defender's Office North Queensland, kruddock@edo.org.au.

The UNESCO World Heritage Committee held an unprecedented discussion on the impact of climate change on World Heritage Sites, during its 29 th session held in South Africa in July 2005. Parties to the 1972 World Heritage Convention have a legal obligation to protect World Heritage Sites and transmit them to future generations, and the matter came before the Committee after a series of legal initiatives in the preceding months. A report in September 2004 from the Sydney Centre for International and Global Law on Australia ’s obligations in respect of the Great Barrier Reef had concluded that without significant cuts in greenhouse gas emissions those obligations would not be complied with. In November 2004, several organisations and individuals submitted petitions to the Committee requesting the Belize Barrier Reef, Huascaran National Park (Peru), and Sagarmatha (Everest) National Park (Nepal) to be placed on the List of World Heritage in Danger as a result of climate change. The melting and retreat of glaciers and the bleaching of coral reefs are amongst the first thermal impacts from global temperature increases. The Committee noted that climate change was already impacting World Heritage Sites, and decided to establish an expert group to investigate the matter and report back to next year’s meeting. For more information, see http://www.climatelaw.org/media/UNESCO.petitions.release, http://www.law.usyd.edu.au/scigl/SCIGL_MediaSummary_FINAL.pdf and http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4682437.stm.

An international wildlife crime mystery may soon be solved due to the efforts of an unlikely teaming of a university research scientist and an international police investigation team. Thanks to a grant from the International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW), Dr. Sam Wasser, a conservation biologist with the Center for Conservation Biology at the University of Washington in Seattle has been studying DNA samples taken from the 2002 Singapore seizure of 6.5 tons of illegal elephant ivory, the largest interdicted shipment since the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) banned the international trade of elephant ivory in 1989. When his analysis is completed, international law enforcement officers hope to identify the origination point of confiscated elephant ivory. Using that as a starting point, enforcement officers may be able to track the path each confiscated consignment of ivory takes on its way to commercial markets. Stopping the illegal trade in elephant ivory is critical to the long-term survival of elephants in both Africa and Asia , which are under tremendous pressure from poaching.

The culmination of this research may result in the ability to match the Singapore ivory DNA with the DNA in the fecal and tissues samples from known geographic locations, enabling law enforcement personnel to zero in on where that poached ivory originated. “Although it is too late to save the lives of the thousands of elephants whose ivory made up the 6.5 tons confiscated in Singapore, it is hoped that in the future Dr. Wasser’s DNA map will be able to help law enforcement officers on the ground to identify elephant poaching hotspots early and stop the slaughters before they happen,” says Grace Ge Gabriel, IFAW Deputy Director of Wildlife Habitat Protection.

Despite the ongoing scientific research and criminal investigation, poaching continues in disregard of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) 1989 ban on ivory trade. “During the period from 1979 to 1989, elephant populations plunged from 1.3 million to 609,000, says Gabriel. “Elephants are particularly gravely endangered in central and western Africa where forest elephant population numbers are hard to obtain. In certain areas like Garamba National Park in the DRC, elephant numbers have been repeatedly halved in the past five years due to poaching for ivory. This research will enhance the effective protection of wildlife habitats in Africa . ”

According to Peter Pueschel, IFAW Program Manager for Protection Against Commercial Trade, an additional key to protecting elephants in the wild is helping international law enforcement officers better understand how criminals provide illegal elephant ivory to markets around the world. “Dr. Wassser’s completed work will help law enforcement officers to identify the origins of illegal ivory and track such shipments and the criminals behind them, with the goal of more effectively stopping elephant ivory distribution.”

New pressure to lift the CITES ban is coming from southern African states, where populations of elephants have increased in certain protected areas. "Supporting the ban on ivory trade is the only way to enable law enforcement agencies continent wide to keep elephant poaching under control,” said Pueschel. “If the trade ban is lifted, market demand will swamp enforcement capacity and more elephants will die needlessly.”

Governance of Protected Areas Discussed at CBD Side-Event

Capturing the essence of protected areas governance was the focus of discussions at the side event at the Ad Hoc Open Ended Working Group on Protected Areas of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in Montecatini , Italy , in June. Delegates participating in the side event entitled “Governance, Participation, Equity & Benefit Sharing,” heard how governance is one of the pillars of the Programme of Work (PoW) on Protected Areas that the current meeting is addressing. The event was sponsored by IUCN, the World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA), and the Commission on Environmental, Economic and Social Policy (CEESP).

In its broadest sense, governance refers to how any organization or structure, including a Protected Area, is run. It includes all the processes, traditions, and rules that concur in establishing decisions, and should be based on principles like accountability, transparency, effectiveness, and participation. In the context of Protected Areas, governance systems are moving away from being strictly in the hands of governments. Nowadays, many natural areas are managed in a wider range of methods, all the way from government-ruled parks to community-managed landscapes.

Case studies presented at the meeting illustrated an array of governance types, including co-managed protected areas and community-conserved areas. In Hawaii , for example, several marine areas have been managed by local populations for centuries, without formal government recognition or support. Today, these communities are asking for a large marine reserve to be set up officially, with a plan involving all stakeholders, such as the commercial sector and fisheries. Landscapes conserved by a mobile community named Gabbra, in Kenya, and Ethiopia, have still to be recognized officially as effectively conserved areas, although the Gabbra have traditionally used the resources wisely for years, posed restrictions on their own resource uses and establised sacred sites, while at the same time sustaining themselves.

The event also highlighted several tools for raising awareness on the governance. One such tool is “Sharing Power – Learning by doing in Co-Management of Natural Resources throughout the World,” an IUCN publication designed to support professionals and those who wish both to better understand collaborative management processes and to develop and enhance them in practice. Another such tool for practitioners is the most recent issue of the IUCN Protected Areas Best Practice Guidelines on “Indigenous and Local Communities and Protected Areas,” which offers concrete advice on co-management and community conserved areas, and provides options for supporting policies.

Most governments struggle with politically difficult situations and issues like livelihoods and poverty and development when setting up new parks or expanding their current Protected Areas network. “Protected areas are difficult to sell politically unless they are linked to meeting the needs of populations. The Programme of Work we are working on here is a way to expand support for Protected Areas, whilst helping attain all Millennium Development Goals which are underpinned by a healthy environment. Good governance is also a way of simultaneously expanding the conservation effectiveness of Protected Areas and their global coverage,“ said Ashish Kothari.

For more information, please contact Grazia Borrini-Feyerabend at gbf@cenesta.org or Ashish Kothari at ashish@nda.vsnl.net.in.