Just published: updating environmental decision making to take human rights into account
Any decisions that may negatively impact on marine biodiversity should observe precaution and fully assess and prevent foreseeable harm to biodiversity and dependent dimensions of human wellbeing that are protected as human rights. In a new commentary published in npj Ocean Sustainability, an interdisciplinary group of Hub researchers in ecosystem services, environmental governance, and deep-sea ecology at the University of Plymouth (Holly J. Niner, Kerry L. Howell and Siân E. Rees) and in law at Strathclyde University (Elisa Morgera and Andrea Longo), underscore that international developments on the human right to a healthy environment should prompt a rethink of how any environmental decisions that hold the potential to impact biodiversity are made.
Doing this would mark a significant evolution of current environmental decision-making which, they say, is presently “constrained by a perceived need for quantified certainty in impact assessment”. Instead, the article calls for full consideration of research on marine ecosystem services, including deep-sea ecosystem services and the ocean knowledge and cultures held by Indigenous peoples and local communities, to ensure that authorities fulfil their obligations to protect ecosystems that are vital for human wellbeing.
Holly Niner, Global Challenge Research Fellow at the University of Plymouth and lead author, said: “There are significant parts of our planet – for example, the deep ocean – that we currently know very little about. However, we know that these regions are critical for human wellbeing for global society. Uncertainty in understanding and lack of formalised, statistically certain evidence of the dependency of people to these regions should not be reason to exclude these connections in decision-making that pose a potential risk of harm. If we are to protect the planet and human wellbeing, we need to consider the full picture and accept that biodiversity cannot and does not exist in a silo. This article makes the argument for addressing this and setting the critical connections between people and nature at the centre of decision-making.”
One Ocean Hub Director, Elisa Morgera (University of Strathclyde) underscored: “Overall the article demonstrates the legal value of integrating ecosystem services research and ocean cultural heritage as an essential evidence base in any decisions that may negatively impact on biodiversity.” She added, “It is great to see another article led by an early-career researcher of the Hub, who has already contributed also to international debates on human rights and deep-sea research, such as on deep-seabed mining.”
Sian Rees, Associate Professor of Social-Ecological Systems (Research) at the University of Plymouth, added: “Biodiversity loss is not just about a quantified decline in habitats and species, or a tradeable good in cost-benefit analysis. If we are to truly change our approach to protecting it now and for future generations, we need to challenge the current context for all environmental decision-making. We can start to do that by ensuring biodiversity loss is considered a human rights issue, and that environmental decision-making needs to align with advances in international human rights law.”
Illustration by Margherita Brunori