Legally binding and ambitious biodiversity protection under the CBD, the global biodiversity framework, and human rights law

Environmental Sciences Europe

Research

Raphael Weyland¹  Katharina Hagemann²  Katharine Heyl³  Beatrice Garske³  Felix Ekardt⁴  Philipp Günther⁵ 

[1] NABU (Nature and Biodiversity Conservation Union), Berlin, Germany;Research Unit Sustainability and Climate Policy, Leipzig, Germany;Research Unit Sustainability and Climate Policy, Leipzig, Germany;Faculty of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, University of Rostock, Rostock, Germany;Research Unit Sustainability and Climate Policy, Leipzig, Germany;Faculty of Law and Interdisciplinary Faculty, University of Rostock, Rostock, Germany;Research Unit Sustainability and Climate Policy, Leipzig, Germany;WZB Berlin Social Science Center, Berlin, Germany;

关键词: Biodiversity loss;    Convention on biological diversity;    Human rights;    IPBES;    Climate change;    International law;    Kunming–Montreal global biodiversity framework;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s12302-023-00786-5

 received in 2023-06-27, accepted in 2023-09-02,  发布年份 2023

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

Beyond climate change, the planet faces several other environmental challenges that are at least as threatening, such as the loss of biodiversity. In each case, the problems are driven by similar factors, such as fossil fuels and intensive livestock farming. This paper presents a legal analysis concerning the binding nature of the Convention on Biological Diversity’s (CBD) overarching objective to halt biodiversity loss, within the framework of international environmental and human rights law. Using the established legal techniques encompassing grammatical, systematic, teleological, and historical interpretations, the article demonstrates that the CBD’s objective to halt biodiversity loss is indeed legally binding and justiciable. This conclusion is directly drawn from interpreting Article 1 CBD. Furthermore, a comparable obligation emerges indirectly from international climate law. The imperative to curtail biodiversity loss also finds grounding in human rights law, albeit necessitating a re-evaluation of certain aspects of freedom, similar to what has been explored in the context of climate protection. Moreover, the article underscores that various other biodiversity-related regulations within international law, including those laid out in the CBD, the Aichi Targets, and the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, also carry partial legal significance. Nonetheless, it is crucial to note that these regulations, including the Kunming–Montreal Framework, do not modify the obligation mandate to halt biodiversity loss, which was established at the latest when the CBD entered into force in 1993. Because this obligation has been violated since then, states could potentially be subject to legal action before international or domestic courts for their actions or inactions contributing to global biodiversity loss.

【 授权许可】

CC BY   
© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2023