диссертация (Англо-американские международно-правовые доктрины о современном статусе Арктики), страница 100

According to that Principle,to “protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely applied byStates according to their capabilities Where there are threats of serious orirreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reasonfor postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.” Asimilar provision is also found in the Convention on Biological Diversity, wherethe very notion of “precautionary principle” (or the “precautionary approachprinciple”) is not used, but is, in essence, expressed: where there is a threat ofsignificant reduction or loss of biological diversity, lack of full scientific certaintyshould not be used as a reason for postponing measures to avoid or minimize sucha threat.A crucial treaty source which sets out the scope of the precautionaryprinciple or approach in detail for a particular sphere of regulation is theAgreement for the Implementation of the Provisions of the United NationsConvention on the Law of the Sea, 1982, Relating to the Conservation andManagement of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks, 1995.The 1995 Agreement contains an obligation of the contracting states to apply theprecautionary approach.

Further, the 1995 Agreement contains a special article“Application of the precautionary approach”, formulating the scope and purposesof applying the approach itself: conservation, management and exploitation ofmarine living resources to protect them and preserve the marine environment. Thepoint of the principle is that states should be more cautious when information isuncertain, unreliable or inadequate.

The absence of adequate scientific information442shall not be used as a reason for postponing or failing to take conservation andmanagement measures.Some of the Agreement’s provisions warrant a closer look, since, firstly, theAgreement belongs to the few treaties elaborating the specific obligations of statesthat constitute the content of the precautionary approach.

Secondly, the 1995Agreement is referred to in the new 2018 Agreement to Prevent Unregulated HighSeas Fisheries in the Central Arctic Ocean.Thus, pursuant to the 1995 Agreement, contracting states shall improvedecision-making for fish stocks conservation and management by obtaining andsharing the best scientific information available and implementing improvedtechniques for dealing with risk and uncertainty;- take into account, inter alia, uncertainties relating to the size andproductivity of the stocks, stock condition, as well as existing and predictedoceanic, environmental and socio-economic conditions;- develop data-collection and research programmes to assess the impact offishing on non-target and associated or dependent species and their environment,and adopt plans which are necessary to ensure the conservation of such species andto protect habitats of special concern;- where the status of target stocks or non-target or associated or dependentspecies is of concern, subject such stocks and species to enhanced monitoring inorder to review their status and the efficacy of conservation and managementmeasures.620Such measures shall be regularly revised in light of new information:- for new or exploratory fisheries, states shall adopt as soon as possiblecautious conservation and management measures, including, inter alia, catch limitsand effort limits.

Such measures shall remain in force until there is sufficient datato allow assessment of the impact of fisheries on the long-term sustainability of thestocks, whereupon conservation and management measures based on that620Interestingly enough these basic legal issues are not considered in a recent publication of “Current Developmentsin Arctic Law”, Vol. 6, 2018, University of Lapland. In the Editor’s Note it is noted that the “lack of sufficientknowledge is likely the reason why the recently signed Central Arctic Fisheries Agreement offered a moratorium onArctic Fishing for the next sixteen years” (Ibid., P.

1) This wording seems too vague and not precise.443assessment shall be implemented. The latter measures shall, if appropriate, allowfor the gradual development of fisheries;- If a natural phenomenon has a significant adverse impact on the status ofstraddling fish stocks or highly migratory fish stocks, states shall adoptconservation and management measures on an emergency basis to ensure thatfishing activity does not exacerbate such adverse impact.In the context of the scope of the precautionary principle, foreignpublications also mention the Business Charter for Sustainable Developmentadopted in November 1990 by the International Chamber of Commerce.

Accordingto Principle 10 “Precautionary approach”, the burden of proof shifts to the businessentity where there are persuasive and scientifically acceptable grounds to suspectthat that business activity is likely to cause irreparable harm.621The precautionary principle can also be found in Art. 130R(2) of theMaastricht Treaty. It is set out in detail in the European Commission’s 2 February2000 Communication on the precautionary principle.

This document supplementsthe 2000 White Paper on Food Safety. The Commission’s document lists instanceswhere the precautionary principle applies: where scientific information isincomplete or inconclusive; there are indications through preliminary objectivescientific evaluation that there are reasonable grounds for concern that thepotentially dangerous effects on the environment, human, animal or plant health.The Commission’s document also sets out the rules for applying the precautionaryprinciple: a full scientific valuation to establish the<b>Текст обрезан, так как является слишком большим</b>.