диссертация (1169188), страница 98
Текст из файла (страница 98)
Before that, assessment was carried out only in specific narrowareas: heavy metals,601health,602oil and gas,603marine navigation,604radioactivity,605 persistent organic pollutants,606 etc.2011 saw proposed a new 6-year Arctic Change Assessment project.The project was suggested to cover:- impact of the use of Arctic resources,- studying the Arctic Ocean,599ACIA (2004) Impacts of a warming Arctic. ACIA overview report.
Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programof the Arctic Council. Oslo. http://www.amap.no/acia/600Corell R.W. Arctic Impact Assessment: Setting the Stage. / The Arctic in World Affairs. A North PacificDialogue on the Future of the Arctic. North Pacific Arctic Conference Proceedings. 2013. Ed. by O.R. Young, J.D.Kim, Y.H. Kim. Seoul, Honolulu, 2013, P. 64–66.601AMAP (2002a) Heavy metals in the Arctic. Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program of the Arctic Council,Oslo.
http://amap.no/documents/602AMAP (2002b) Human health in the Arctic. Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program of the Arctic Council,Oslo. http://amap.no/documents/603AMAP (2008) Arctic oil and gas 2007. Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program of the Arctic Council, Oslo.http://amap.no/oga604PAME (2009) Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment (AMSA). Protecting the Arctic Marine Environment WorkingGroup of the Arctic Council.
Akureyri. http://www.pame.is/amsa/amsa-2009-report605AMAP (2010a) Radioactivity in the Arctic. Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program of the Arctic Council,Oslo. http://library.arcticportal.org/1215/606AMAP (2010) Persistent Organic Pollutant (POPs) in the Arctic. // Sci Total Environ 408 (Special Issue).
P.2851–3051.433- oxidation of the Arctic Ocean,- human adaptation to changes in the Arctic,- adaptation and prospects for indigenous peoples in the changing Arctic,- human dimension of changes,- strategies for human adaptation and social and economic impact,- Arctic and the global water cycle,- developing climate change models to project and predict scenarios for theArctic,- levels, projections and impact of methane yield in the Arctic,- studying short-term impact of climate change,- updating the Snow, Water, Ice, Permafrost in the Arctic study,607- studying food safety,- impact of climate change on means of pollution,- changes in fisheries and fisheries management strategies.The topic selected for the third study was Arctic Resilience Assessment.608 Itis intended to help prepare decision-makers to manage social and economicsystems during the period of rapid changes, in light of great uncertainty andobscurity.In terms of interim conclusions, the Anglo-American doctrine assumes thatthe US, Canada and European states have accumulated considerable experience ofapplying EIA procedures for both natural and manmade environments.
Thismechanism is actively used to seek out the balance between the interests of stateagencies, businesses and population and to model the future development of aspecific area. The practice of using this legal mechanism can be in principle usedalso to assess the social and environmental effects of economic activities in theArctic. However, Anglo-American scholars see its weaknesses for the Arctic607AMAP (2011a) Snow, Water, Ice, Permafrost in the Arctic (SWIPA).
Arctic Monitoring and AssessmentProgram of the Arctic Council, Oslo. http://www.amap.no/swipa/608SEI (2011) Stockholm Environment Institute. Stockholm. http://sei-international.org/news-and-media/1999434region. These are due to rapid natural changes in the Arctic Ocean, including itsseas, that are hard to project and that entail socio-economic changes along theentire Arctic coast; the lack of scientific data; low involvement of indigenouspeoples into the reflection and evaluation of facts and relevant decision-making.That is, EIA in the Arctic can be used, but it will require not only a transformation,but also a specification given the peculiarities of climate change in the Arcticregion.§ 5.
Anglo-American doctrinal views on the precautionary principle inthe Arctic contextThe Guide to Sustainable Development and Environmental Policy, publishedback in 2001 and widely cited in English-language legal literature, clarified thatthe “Precautionary Principle is a newly emerging principle of internationalenvironmental law that calls for nations to take preventive measures when there isreason to assume that substances or energy introduced into the ecosystem maycause damage, even when there is no conclusive evidence of a causal relationshipbetween such inputs and their alleged effects.
The potential damages includehazards to human health, harm to living resources and ecosystems, damage toamenities, or interference with other legitimate uses of the environment.”609 Andwhere Russian scholarly works view the precautionary principle (another term forthe same concept is the “principle of precautionary approach”) mainly in thecontext of law of the sea treaties, this English-language book underlines that thatprinciple is reflected, in particular, in the 1992 UN Framework Convention onClimate Change and the 1990 European Bergen Declaration,610 and in many otherinternational legal documents too.
At the same time, even this Guide does notdiscuss the precautionary principle for the Arctic specifically; unlike later foreign609Guide to Sustainable Development and Environmental Policy. Ed.by William Ascher. Duke University Press.Durham and London. 2001. P. 247.610Ibid., P. 247–250.435academic publications, which is due to warming of the average annual temperaturein the Arctic and reduction of the area of perennial ice in the Arctic Ocean.As early as in 2004, the Arctic Council was submitted the Arctic ClimateImpact Assessment Report, that was already oriented at studying the applicabilityof the precautionary principle to regulating interstate relations in view of economicactivities in the Arctic.
The Report’s conclusion was a concerned address to theinternational community on climate change in the Arctic and the colossalimportance of that region for the future evolution of climate on planet Earthgenerally. The conclusions confirmed in 2007 by the Intergovernmental Panel onClimate Change, boil down to ten key propositions.6111. Arctic climate is currently becoming warmer very rapidly and evengreater changes can be anticipated.2. Arctic warming and its effects have not only regional, but also globalpertinence.3.
Arctic vegetation zones will likely change causing great further changes.4. The biodiversity of animals, their numbers and habitats will change.5. Many coastal communities and sites will be more exposed to strongwinds, storms and other natural calamities from the sea.6.
Reduced ice sheet in the sea may result in an intensification of navigationand will expand access to Arctic natural resources, including offshore.7. Increased land temperature may cause destruction of transportationnetworks, buildings and infrastructure currently partly built into the ice.8. Indigenous peoples will face great economic and cultural changes.9. Increased UV radiation will affect people, plants and animals.10. A combination of factors will affect people and ecosystems.612Such type of study and, as a result, international scholarly opinion can becharacterized as landmarks of the late 20th century.
This phenomenon reflects, it611This has already been briefly discussed above, but I should recall this not to interrupt the logic of thought.612Corell R.W. Arctic Impact Assessment: Setting the Stage. / Environmental Security in the Arctic Ocean. Ed. byP.A. Berkman, A.N. Vylegzhanin. Dordrecht, 2013. P. 63.436seems, the changing role of science in society, the emergence of an analyticalcomponent in politics and law formation. The scientific community, Watsonremarks, is feeling an increasing need to improve humanity’s understanding of themain processes, assess the impact of global natural changes, develop technologiesand strategies to solve new issues. This is giving new opportunities for researchand elevating the responsibility of the participants of such scientific assessmentsaimed at providing timely information for decision-making.613 This combination ofscientific assessment and governmental decisions found a reflection in the law asthe precautionary principle.
In the Arctic context, it was named as one of thepriorities in the Arctic Council’s 2002 Arctic Offshore Oil & Gas Guidelines.Domestic and international legal acts use different terms: “precautionaryprinciple”, “precautionary approach”, “precautionary measures”, “principle ofprecautionary approach”, but in the legal sense all these mean one and the sameinternational legal principle found in the treaties and other sources of internationallaw noted above.The emergence of this principle is related to the realization of peril for theenvironment and ultimately humans created by the limited nature of scientific dataon the effects of anthropogenic impact on the environment. Projecting theconsequences of the impact of activities on the nature, prevention or minimizationof environmental harm from such an activity is a multi-faceted problem.
![](https://s.studizba.com/z.php?f=/templates/si/i/noavatar.png&w=100&h=100&t=1"){kind=avatar}
