Trade in safe and healthy foods is essential for businesses, authorities and consumers throughout the world. When drafting food policies, states should ensure that they provide protection for people’s lives and health, as well as saving social and economic interests on a national and international level. Over the last few decades, scientific developments and technological innovations have enabled us to achieve extraordinary successes in our mastery of technology with a view to improving our quality of life. In this context, biotechnology has opened up a wealth of solutions to problems in sectors such as healthcare, industry, agriculture and the environment. Perhaps the greatest challenge facing humankind is to achieve sustained global economic growth while ensuring environmental protection and conservation and food security for future generations. Environmental policy is today one of the most important social challenges for public authorities and economic agents. It is a very sensitive issue in public opinion as it directly affects well-being and health. The precautionary principle, for its part, arises as a consequence of seeking to protect the environment and human health against certain activities characterized by scientific uncertainty about their possible consequences. The precautionary principle is conceived as the axiom on which environmental policy is based. The most characteristic feature of this principle is that it can be the basis for decisions to derogate from a legal regime that would in principle be applicable. In my research for this manuscript, I have carried out an exhaustive analysis of the precautionary principle in the area of biodiversity, with specific regard to LMOs. To do so, it was necessary to examine the legal, theoretical and jurisprudential aspects of the topic on several levels. This study is divided into three sections. The first offers a legal approach to the precautionary principle, in which the essential elements are analyzed. The second section is devoted to analyzing the precautionary principle in the area of International Agreements. This study would be complete analyzing the risk, damage and scientific uncertainty. The new challenges facing the international community in the area of encouraging fair and equitable participation in the profits obtained from the use of genetic resources are discussed, in the light of the Nagoya Protocol, and a new Protocol concerned with international liability, the Nagoya-Kuala Lumpur Protocol. These Protocols are of great interest, as they provide greater legal security and transparency in the area of LMOs.
| Published in | American Journal of Applied Scientific Research (Volume 8, Issue 1) |
| DOI | 10.11648/j.ajasr.20220801.11 |
| Page(s) | 1-10 |
| Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Environment, Precautionary Principle, Food Security, Living Modified Organisms
| [1] | Juste Ruiz, J. (1999). Derecho Internacional del Medio Ambiente. McGraw-Hill, 17. |
| [2] | Kiss, A. (2000). Droit International de l'environnement. Pedone, 30. |
| [3] | Cortina, A., (2004). Fundamentos filosóficos del principio de precaución. Available in Casabona, C. Principio de precaución, biotecnología y Derecho. Comares, 3. |
| [4] | Sands, P. (2003). Principles of International Environmental Law. Cambridge University Press, 267. |
| [5] | Von Moltke, K. (1988). The Vorsorgeprinzip in West German environmental Policy: 12th Report of the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution (United Kingdom). Available in Freestone, D. and Hey, E. (1996). The Precautionary Principle and International Law. The Challenge of Implementation, Kluwer Law International, 31. |
| [6] | Andorno, R., (2004). Validez del principio de precaución como instrumento jurídico para la prevención y la gestión de riesgos. Available in Casabona, C. Principio de precaución, biotecnología y Derecho. Comares, 20. |
| [7] | Doc. CAB/LEG/24.1. Available at: https://au.int/en/treaties/african-convention-conservation-nature-and-natural-resources. |
| [8] | UNGA Resolution 1/8429 of November, 20th, 1971. |
| [9] | Drnas de Clément. Z. (2007), Aspectos conceptuales del principio de precaución ambiental. Anuario hispano-luso americano de Derecho Internacional, 18, 570. |
| [10] | UN Declaration A/CONF 48/14, Rev 1. |
| [11] | Lozano Cutanda, B. (2010). Derecho ambiental administrativo, La Ley, 55. |
| [12] | Brundtland Report, UNGA Resolution A/42/427 of 4 August 1987. |
| [13] | Report of the UN Conference on Environment and Development, A/Conf.151/26, 12 August 1992. |
| [14] | UNGA Resolution A/45/25 (Decision SS. II/4, of the 45th session, supplement 25). |
| [15] | Para. 19 of the Ministerial Conference on Environment of the UN Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific Bangkok, 15-16 October 1990. |
| [16] | Juste Ruiz, J. (1999). Derecho Internacional del Medio Ambiente. McGraw-Hill, 22. |
| [17] | UNGA Resolution A/CONF.151/26 (vol. III) of 14 August 1992. |
| [18] | Sands, P. (2003). Principles of International Environmental Law. Cambridge University Press, 266. |
| [19] | Doc. UNEP/Bio.Div/CONF/1. |
| [20] | Pérez Salom, J. R. (2002). Recursos genéticos, biotecnología y Derecho internacional. La distribución justa y equitativa de beneficios en el Convenio sobre Biodiversidad. Aranzadi, 38. |
| [21] | Martos Calbrús, M. A. (2009). La problemática de la seguridad en los movimientos transfronterizos de OVM: Protocolo de Bioseguridad. Available in Herrera Campos. R. and Cazorla. M. Agricultura transgénica y medio ambiente. Perspectiva legal, 31. |
| [22] | Doc. UNEP/CBD/BS/COP-MOP/1/15. |
| [23] | Freestone, D. and Hey, E. (1996). Origins and Development of the Precautionary Principle. The Precautionary Principle and International Law. The Challenge of Implementation. Kluwer Law International, 12. |
| [24] | The Precautionary Concept in Environmental Policy and Law: Institutionalizing Caution, Georgetown International Environmental Law Review, 4, 305. |
| [25] | Freestone, D. and Hey, E. (1996). Origins and Development of the Precautionary Principle. The Precautionary Principle and International Law. The Challenge of Implementation. Kluwer Law International, 13. |
| [26] | Boisson de Chazournes, L. (2002). The Precautionary Principle. Precaution from Rio to Johannesburg. International Environment House, 13. |
| [27] | De Sadeleer, N. (1999). Les principes du pollueur-payeur, de prévention et de précaution: essai sur la genèse et la portée juridique de quelques principes du droit de l'environnement. Bruylant, 174. |
| [28] | Judgment of the CFI (Third Chamber), Pfizer Animal Health v. Council, Case T-13/99, September 11, 2002, para. 142. |
| [29] | Judgment of the CFI (Third Chamber), Pfizer Animal Health v. Council, Case T-13/99, September 11, 2002, para. 144. |
| [30] | Judgment of the CFI (Third Chamber), Pfizer Animal Health v. Council, Case T-13/99, September 11, 2002, para. 145. |
| [31] | Judgment of the ECJ (Sixth Chamber), Mondiet, Case C-405/92, of 24 November 1993, paragraphs 29 to 31. Judgment of the ECJ (Sixth Chamber), Spain v. Council, October 5, 1999, paragraph 31. |
| [32] | Jiménez de Parga y Maseda, P. (2003). Análisis del principio de precaución en Derecho Internacional Público: perspectiva universal y perspectiva regional europea. Política y Sociedad, 40, 15. |
| [33] | Gomis Catalá, L. (1998). Responsabilidad por daños al medio ambiente. Aranzadi, 64. |
| [34] | Caddy, J. F. and Mahon, R. (1996). Technical Consultation on the Precautionary Approach to Fisheries. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Available at: http://www.fao.org/docrep/V8400S/v8400s05.htm. |
| [35] | Scovazzi, T. (1992). Sul principio precauzionale nel diritto internazionale dell'ambiente. Rivista di Dirrito Internazionale, 262, 701. |
| [36] | Judgment of the CFI (Second Chamber), Artegodan GmbH and others v. Commission. Joined cases T-74/00, T-76/00, T-83/00 to T-85/00, T-132/00, T-137/00 and T-141/00 of 26 November 2002. |
| [37] | Corti Varela, J. (2010). Organismos genéticamente modificados y riesgos sanitarios y medioambientales. Derecho de la Unión Europea y de la Organización Mundial del Comercio. Reus, 54. |
| [38] | Judgment of the CFI (Second Chamber), Artegodan GmbH and others v. Commission. Joined cases T-74/00, T-76/00, T-83/00 to T-85/00, T-132/00, T-137/00 and T-141/00, of 26 November 2002, paragraph 181. |
| [39] | Scovazzi, T. (1992). Sul principio precauzionale nel diritto internazionale dell'ambiente. Rivista di Dirrito Internazionale, 262, 699. |
| [40] | Boisson de Chazournes, L. (2002). The Precautionary Principle. Precaution from Rio to Johannesburg. International Environment House, 14. |
APA Style
Carlos Ignacio González Arruti. (2022). The Precautionary Principle and the Protection of Biological Diversity. American Journal of Applied Scientific Research, 8(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajasr.20220801.11
ACS Style
Carlos Ignacio González Arruti. The Precautionary Principle and the Protection of Biological Diversity. Am. J. Appl. Sci. Res. 2022, 8(1), 1-10. doi: 10.11648/j.ajasr.20220801.11
AMA Style
Carlos Ignacio González Arruti. The Precautionary Principle and the Protection of Biological Diversity. Am J Appl Sci Res. 2022;8(1):1-10. doi: 10.11648/j.ajasr.20220801.11
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
Copy
Download@article{10.11648/j.ajasr.20220801.11,
author = {Carlos Ignacio González Arruti},
title = {The Precautionary Principle and the Protection of Biological Diversity},
journal = {American Journal of Applied Scientific Research},
volume = {8},
number = {1},
pages = {1-10},
doi = {10.11648/j.ajasr.20220801.11},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajasr.20220801.11},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ajasr.20220801.11},
abstract = {Trade in safe and healthy foods is essential for businesses, authorities and consumers throughout the world. When drafting food policies, states should ensure that they provide protection for people’s lives and health, as well as saving social and economic interests on a national and international level. Over the last few decades, scientific developments and technological innovations have enabled us to achieve extraordinary successes in our mastery of technology with a view to improving our quality of life. In this context, biotechnology has opened up a wealth of solutions to problems in sectors such as healthcare, industry, agriculture and the environment. Perhaps the greatest challenge facing humankind is to achieve sustained global economic growth while ensuring environmental protection and conservation and food security for future generations. Environmental policy is today one of the most important social challenges for public authorities and economic agents. It is a very sensitive issue in public opinion as it directly affects well-being and health. The precautionary principle, for its part, arises as a consequence of seeking to protect the environment and human health against certain activities characterized by scientific uncertainty about their possible consequences. The precautionary principle is conceived as the axiom on which environmental policy is based. The most characteristic feature of this principle is that it can be the basis for decisions to derogate from a legal regime that would in principle be applicable. In my research for this manuscript, I have carried out an exhaustive analysis of the precautionary principle in the area of biodiversity, with specific regard to LMOs. To do so, it was necessary to examine the legal, theoretical and jurisprudential aspects of the topic on several levels. This study is divided into three sections. The first offers a legal approach to the precautionary principle, in which the essential elements are analyzed. The second section is devoted to analyzing the precautionary principle in the area of International Agreements. This study would be complete analyzing the risk, damage and scientific uncertainty. The new challenges facing the international community in the area of encouraging fair and equitable participation in the profits obtained from the use of genetic resources are discussed, in the light of the Nagoya Protocol, and a new Protocol concerned with international liability, the Nagoya-Kuala Lumpur Protocol. These Protocols are of great interest, as they provide greater legal security and transparency in the area of LMOs.},
year = {2022}
}
TY - JOUR T1 - The Precautionary Principle and the Protection of Biological Diversity AU - Carlos Ignacio González Arruti Y1 - 2022/01/08 PY - 2022 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajasr.20220801.11 DO - 10.11648/j.ajasr.20220801.11 T2 - American Journal of Applied Scientific Research JF - American Journal of Applied Scientific Research JO - American Journal of Applied Scientific Research SP - 1 EP - 10 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2471-9730 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajasr.20220801.11 AB - Trade in safe and healthy foods is essential for businesses, authorities and consumers throughout the world. When drafting food policies, states should ensure that they provide protection for people’s lives and health, as well as saving social and economic interests on a national and international level. Over the last few decades, scientific developments and technological innovations have enabled us to achieve extraordinary successes in our mastery of technology with a view to improving our quality of life. In this context, biotechnology has opened up a wealth of solutions to problems in sectors such as healthcare, industry, agriculture and the environment. Perhaps the greatest challenge facing humankind is to achieve sustained global economic growth while ensuring environmental protection and conservation and food security for future generations. Environmental policy is today one of the most important social challenges for public authorities and economic agents. It is a very sensitive issue in public opinion as it directly affects well-being and health. The precautionary principle, for its part, arises as a consequence of seeking to protect the environment and human health against certain activities characterized by scientific uncertainty about their possible consequences. The precautionary principle is conceived as the axiom on which environmental policy is based. The most characteristic feature of this principle is that it can be the basis for decisions to derogate from a legal regime that would in principle be applicable. In my research for this manuscript, I have carried out an exhaustive analysis of the precautionary principle in the area of biodiversity, with specific regard to LMOs. To do so, it was necessary to examine the legal, theoretical and jurisprudential aspects of the topic on several levels. This study is divided into three sections. The first offers a legal approach to the precautionary principle, in which the essential elements are analyzed. The second section is devoted to analyzing the precautionary principle in the area of International Agreements. This study would be complete analyzing the risk, damage and scientific uncertainty. The new challenges facing the international community in the area of encouraging fair and equitable participation in the profits obtained from the use of genetic resources are discussed, in the light of the Nagoya Protocol, and a new Protocol concerned with international liability, the Nagoya-Kuala Lumpur Protocol. These Protocols are of great interest, as they provide greater legal security and transparency in the area of LMOs. VL - 8 IS - 1 ER -
Information
Email: