Principles

Precautionary Principle
• it is better to foresee the problems and to take ‘risk
management’ kind of approach, so that pollution
would not affect to the other areas.
• Earlier the principle of ‘assimilative capacity’ was
prevailing, this ‘assimilative capacity’ principle was
provided by the Principle 6 of Stockholm Declaration,
1972
• “science could provide policy makers with the
information and means necessary to avoid
encroaching upon the capacity of the environment to
assimilate impacts and it is presumed that relevant
technical expertise would be available when
environmental harm was predicted and there would
be sufficient time to act in order to avoid such harm.”
• The ‘precautionary principle’ was highlighted also by
11th Principle of the U.N. General Assembly
Resolution on World Charter for Nature, 1982 as a
substitute of ‘assimilative principle.’
• At the 1992 United Nations Conference on
Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de
Janeiro, this is believed to be caused by the fear of
the influence of the principle on the discussion of
measures against the greenhouse effect. According
to the USA, the fact that there was not sufficient
scientific evidence for the causal relationship
between human behaviour and the greenhouse
effect meant that taking expensive measures was not
acceptable. Other states were more willing to take a
precautionary approach as they suspected that
waiting for proof might result in irreversible harm. In
the (non-binding) Rio Declaration of 1992,
• ‘Precautionary principle’ originated in Germany as
one of the basic principle of environmental policy;
and discussed later on a number of times during
the discussion on issue of ‘protection of North
Sea’
• By 1990, at the third conference in Hague, the
parties declared that they “will continue to apply
the precautionary principle that is to take action
to avoid potentially damaging impacts of
substances that are persistent, toxic and liable to
bio-accumulate even when there is no scientific
evidence to prove that a causal link between
emissions and effects.”
• Principle 15 said: “In order to protect the
environment, the precautionary approach shall be
widely applied by States according to their
capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or
irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty
shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost
effective measures to prevent environmental
degradation.”
• As the whole idea of precaution is linked with the
notion that preventing damages is often less
expensive than cleaning up afterwards, this new
element seems to be reasonable.
• In the 1990s, more and more binding
international treaties contain references to the
precautionary principle. One important treaty
which does so is the Treaty on the European
Union, otherwise known as the Treaty of
Maastricht. In the EC Treaty, Article 2 expressly
calls for “an economic growth which is both
sustainable and respects the environment.
Strangely enough, the wording sustainable
growth is employed, instead of the more common
expression sustainable development.”
• The ECE Convention on the protection and use of
transboundary watercourses and international
lakes, Helsinki Convention 1992 (Helsinki, 1992)
underlines the importance of precaution at
several stages. First of all, the parties to it shall
take all appropriate measures to prevent, control
and reduce pollution of waters causing or likely to
cause transboundary impact
• Supreme Court has suggested the appellate
authority to appoint Technical Members, who will
be well versed in the environmental laws and will
have special knowledge in scientific and technical
fields related to environmental
science/management
 Polluter Pays Principle
• “The ‘polluter pays principle’ (PPP) states that
whoever is responsible for damage to the
environment should bear the costs associated
with it.”
• PPP had its recommendation first by OECD in
1972 and also found to be mentioned in First
Environmental Action Program of EU (1973-1976).
In 1975 EC recommended regarding cost
allocation by public authorities on environmental
matters. Article 191(2) of EC Treaty, 1987 and
Principle 16 of Rio Declaration, 1992 has this
principle mentioned.
 sustainable development
• “Development that meets the needs of the
present without compromising the ability of
future generations to meet their own needs.”-
World Commission on Environment and
Development, presented in 1987
• ‘Right to sustainable development’ includes much
wider aspect of overall economic growth and
development of a community or a country; hence
the importance has to be judged carefully while
compared with the fundamental right of any
individual.
• the balance between the environmental protection and the
economic development, says that in order to provide the
maximum benefit to the people, the States should integrate
economic development with protection of the environment.
• Bergen Declaration had drawn an interrelation between the
‘sustainable development principle’ and the ‘precautionary
principle’. In the Bergen Declaration it is said that, “In order
to achieve sustainable development, policies must be based
on the precautionary principle. Environmental measures
must anticipate, prevent and attack the causes of
environmental degradation. Where there are threats of
serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty
should not be used as a reason for postponing measures to
prevent environmental degradation. ”
• Pesticides sprayed in Chile have the potential to
harm fish stocks off the coast of Japan.  The air
pollution we emit in Los Angeles affect the quality
of air in Asia.
• Sustainable development constantly seeks to achieve
social and economic progress in ways that will not
exhaust the earth’s finite natural resources.  The needs
of the world today are real and immediate, yet it’s
necessary to develop ways to meet these needs that do
not disregard the future.  The capacity of our ecosystem
is not limitless, meaning that future generations may not
be able to meet their needs the way we are able to now
• Solar and wind energy.  Energy from these resources is
limitless, meaning we have the ability to eliminate
dependence on non-renewable power sources by
harnessing power from renewable resources.
• Sustainable construction.  Homes, offices and other
structures that incorporate recycled and renewable
resources will be more energy efficient and stand the test
of time.
• Crop rotation. Many farmers and gardeners are using this
method as a chemical free way to reduce diseases in the
soil and increase growth potential of their crops.
• Water fixtures.  Water conservation is critical to
sustainable development, and more and more products
are available that use less water in the home, such as
showers, toilets, dishwashers and laundry systems.
• In Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of
India, the PPP was explained as following:
• “Once the activity carried on is hazardous or
inherently dangerous, the person carrying on such
activity is liable to make the loss caused to any other
person by his activity irrespective of the fact whether
he took reasonable care while carrying on his activity.
• The polluting industry is absolutely liable to
compensate for harm caused to environment,
• He is also liable to pay the cost of restoring the
environmental degradation – reversing the damaged
ecology.” (1996) 3 SCC 212.
 Public Trust Doctrine
• Public Trust Doctrine is the principle that says, the
resources like air, water etc. are preserved for public use
and that the government is required to maintain them for
the public’s reasonable use.
• Origin of PTD is found in the Justinian Code of sixth
century Rome – as the ‘doctrine of res communes’ –
which said that some things are “common to mankind -
the air, running water, the sea, and consequently the
shores of the sea and the right of fishing in a port, or in
rivers, is common to all men.”
• Res communes were excluded from private control and
the trustee was charged with the duty of preserving the
resources in a manner that made them available for
certain public purposes.
• Paragraph 5 of the Magna Carta (For so long as a
guardian has guardianship of such land, he shall
maintain the houses, parks, fish preserves, ponds,
mills, and everything else pertaining to it, from
the revenues of the land itself. When the heir
comes of age, he shall restore the whole land to
him, stocked with plough teams and such
implements of husbandry as the season demands
and the revenues from the land can reasonably
bear.)
• The court observed that: Our Indian legal system,
which is based on English common law, includes the
public trust doctrine as part of its jurisprudence. The
State is the trustee of all natural resources, which are
by nature meant for public use and enjoyment. Public
at large is the beneficiary of the seashore, running
waters, airs, forests and ecologically fragile lands. The
State as a trustee is under a legal duty to protect the
natural resources. These resources meant for public
use cannot be converted into private ownership. As
rivers, forests, minerals and such other resources
constitute a nation's natural wealth.
• the Public Trust doctrine is a part of the law of the
land. The court also ruled that there is no any
justifiable reason to rule out the application of the
public trust doctrine in all ecosystems in India.
 Intergenerational and intra-
generational equity
• Intergenerational and intra-generational
equity are two hands of the doctrine of
sustainable equity. Sustainable equity aims to
find a proper balance between
intergenerational equity (between the present
and future people) and intragenerational
equity (between the rich and the poor of the
present generation.
• Intergenerational Equity & Issues
• One of the primary objectives of intergenerational equity is the
development of resources by one generation to enhance economic
sustainability for the future generation.
• Intergenerational equity has become crucial in the present times, due to
the growing imbalance in the distribution of resources, ongoing
degradation of environment and depletion of resources.
• This imbalance is more profound between the developed & developing
nations or between the Global North and the Global South.
• Moreover, the developed countries are today unwilling to help
developing countries adapt and mitigate climate change, which is a result
of their ruthless pursuit to economic growth at the cost of the
environment.
• In this context, the concept of sustainable development has been
introduced, which refers to the use of resources should be done in such a
manner that those resources shall also be available to meet the future
needs.
• Intra-generational Equity & Issues
• The concept of intra-generational equity provides rights and duties to
every person of a single generation to use and take care of the resources
moderately among the members of the generation.
• In order to promote the intra-generational equity, the concept of social
justice is propagated. Welfare schemes like subsidies, reservations, etc.,
are provided by the governments to help the vulnerable section of
society.
• However, sometimes measures taken under the narrative of social
justice interfere with the free market principle.
• The free market demands rollback of state and propagates market as the
solution of every problem.
• Following this, India conducted LPG reforms in 1991. However, the pro-
market reforms have failed to trickle-down effect and resulted in the
jobless growth & increasing inequalities (Oxfam Report).
• In this context, the concept of Inclusive Growth has been introduced,
which advances equitable opportunities for economic participants during
economic growth with benefits incurred by every section of society.
• The concept of inclusive growth and
sustainable development are the key pillars of
the global welfare narrative, which can be
prompted by ensuring intra-generational and
inter-generational equity.
• Moreover, in a developing country like India,
intra-generational & inter-generational equity
is more important as more resources are
required for ensuring the development of all,
including the future generation.
 What is anthropocentrism?
• Anthropocentrism is the view or belief that humans are superior to
all other organisms. The focus in this view is mainly on humans, and
animals and nature are only a background. In anthropocentrism,
the human perspective is most important and other issues come
second. We can call most fields of study such as philosophy and
psychology anthropocentric.
• There are different types and degrees of anthropocentrism.
Sometimes anthropocentrism is viewed as contributing to
environmental damage. This concept often appears in the field of
environmental ethics, but most experts argue that it is myopia that
promotes environmental damage, not anthropocentrism, since the
environment is necessary for human existence. Some also argue
that anthropocentrism is a fundamental element of human nature,
as humans have always used natural resources, including plants
and animals, for their own benefit.
 What is biocentrism
• In contrast to anthropocentrism, biocentrism attaches greater
importance to living components of the environment, including
living individuals. It focuses on nature. From this perspective, all
living things in the world are equally important. From this
perspective, the life of an animal is just as important as that of a
human. In addition, when considering a topic like climate change ,
biocentric individuals would focus on how climate change affects
living things by analyzing species migration or changes in wildlife
habits.
• In addition, biocentrism does not consider chemical or geological
elements of the environment as living beings to be important. In
addition, biocentric experts often tend to emphasize the
importance of individual organisms.
 What is ecocentrism
• Ecocentrism is a perspective that attaches importance to the
ecosystem as a whole. It considers both living and non-living
components to be equally important, especially when making
decisions about the environment. In contrast to anthropocentrism,
he attaches little importance to humans. Ecocentrism only deals
with humans when one considers how humans affect the
ecosystem as a whole. If we revisit the example of climate change
above, ecocentrics could also consider changes in abiotic factors
such as changing sea levels, ocean acidity, and weather patterns.
• Ecocentrism takes a more holistic approach than biocentrism in
that it gives value to species, ecosystems or the environment as a
whole. In contrast to biocentrism, ecocentrism also uses abiotic
factors or ecological components in nature to show the
importance of non-living elements of the environment. It
therefore also includes the chemical and geological components of
nature.
• Difference between anthropocentrism, biocentrism and ecocentrism
• Anthropocentrism is the view or belief that humans are superior to all
other organisms, and biocentrism attaches greater importance to the
living components of the environment, while ecocentrism is a
perspective that attaches importance to the ecosystem as a whole.
• perspective
• Anthropocentrism focuses on humans while biocentrism focuses on all
living things while ecocentrism focuses on ecosystems as a whole.
• Biotic vs. abiotic factors
• While anthropocentrism considers humans most important, biocentrism
considers biotic factors important, and ecocentrism considers both biotic
and abiotic factors important.
• The main difference between anthropocentrism, biocentrism, and
ecocentrism is their focus; Anthropocentrism regards humans as the
central element of existence, while biocentrism regards all living
components of the environment as central and ecocentrism focuses on
the ecosystem as a whole.
 Common But Differentiated Responsibility (CBDR)
• The principle of “common but differentiated responsibility” (CBDR),
formalised at the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and
Development in Rio de Janeiro, is ultimately pertaining to the matter of
climate justice.
• Its basic meaning is first and foremost a “shared” moral responsibility
between different groups of countries to address global climate change,
nevertheless the proportions of such responsibility are differentiated.
CBDR’s underlying concepts of fairness and equity has also been
manifested in other global governance architectures than just the
climate.
• the CBDR is still relevant in global climate governance today for several
reasons. First, the combination of CBDR and National Determined
Contributions creates a period of adaptation and inclusive participation
for emerging economies and developing countries to gradually assume
greater responsibility.
• Economic: CBDR facilitates the need for developed states to
provide technological and financial assistance to the developing
states for combating climate and at the same time also saves
developing states the cost of engaging in stringent carbon cut
regulations, thereby indirectly helping to build their economies in
order to close the gap with the developed states.
• Equity: It focuses on equity rather than equals, and does not
undermine the interest of any country or group of countries, rather
focuses on a middle path beneficial to all.
• Democratic: Based on CBDR, countries need to develop their own
Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) which is
framed at Central, State, and grassroots levels. This is a multi-
stakeholder exercise which is essentially democratic for its bottom-
up approach.
• Ethical: CBDR is an expression of general principles of equity in
international law. It recognizes the historical correlation between
higher levels of development and a greater contribution to the
degradation of global environmental resources and enables the
sharing of responsibility accordingly.
• Justice: CBDR not only focuses on climate change mitigation but
also understands the developmental needs of most vulnerable.
The greatest impacts of climate change are felt by developing
countries, whilst the greatest per capita GHG emissions are
concentrated in developed countries. In this context, it is
important that the developed nations should also take on the
greatest brunt of the performance of climate change mitigation.