Bridges Trade BioRes • Volume 3 • Number 20 • 11th November 2003
ALIEN INVASIVES AND SUBSIDIES DISCUSSED AT CBD SCIENTIFC BODYx
ALIEN INVASIVES AND SUBSIDIES DISCUSSED AT CBD SCIENTIFC BODYx
The Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice Body (SBSTTA) of the Convention on Biodiversity (CBD) is meeting in Montreal, Canada from the 10 - 14 November to discuss a work programme on protected areas, and technology transfer and cooperation. The meeting is also looking into, inter alia, the "draft" international regulatory framework regarding invasive alien species, and measures to remove or mitigate perverse incentives.
Alien Invasive Species
Working Group I of the SBSTTA committee considered on Wednesday gaps and inconsistencies related to the international regulatory framework relevant to invasive alien species. In particular, delegates discussed the contentious Decision V1/23 from COP-6 — the Guiding Principles on Alien Invasive Species (AIS) (see BRIDGES Trade BioRes, 2 May 2002). During the discussion, Australia, Argentina, Brazil, Canada, New Zealand and the US voiced their opposition to the previous COP decision and requested that their reservation be included in the document. These countries are concerned that the Guiding Principles’ Principle 7 dealing with measures to prevent the introduction of AIS might be used to implement measures that constitute disguised trade barriers, thereby contravening the WTO Agreement on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS). Similarly, ambiguous language on the precautionary approach (Principles 1 and 10) was seen as potentially conflicting with provisions under the SPS Agreement. New Zealand also called for language on the potential increasing risk through, amongst others, global trade to be removed from the Guiding Principles’ chapeau — a suggestion that was opposed by the EC and Norway. Finally, delegates also recommended that the CBD look further into linking its guidelines to other institutions and agreements already in place, such as for example the International Plant Protection Convention, and the Office International des Epizooties (OIE).
Perverse Incentives
Working Group I also considered proposals on removing or mitigating perverse incentives. The proposals were forwarded from the second Workshop on Incentive Measures for the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Components of Biological Diversity, held in Montreal 3-5 June 2003. The proposals (UNEP/CBD/SBSTAA/9/9/Add.3) address activities in relation to both perverse and positive incentives and how to assess the value of biodiversity. During the discussions, however, Argentina preferred to only focus on perverse subsidies, whereas an environmental NGO highlighted the need to clearly identify perverse subsidies as undermining biodiversity conservation and sustainable use.
Within the context of the CBD, a perverse incentive has been identified as a policy or practice that encourages resource uses leading to the degradation of biological diversity, as an unintended side effect in the design of the subsidy. The Secretariat has identified environmentally harmful government subsidies; persistence of environmental externalities; and laws or customary practices governing resource use as common types of perverse incentives. With regard to economic sectors, the discussion at the CBD has mainly focused on the effects of perverse subsidies in the fisheries, agriculture and forestry sectors.
The Committee is expected to finalise its discussions on Friday and forward relevant recommendations to the CBD COP-7, to be held on 9-20 February 2003 in Malaysia.
Additional Resources
For daily coverage and a final summary of the meeting, see ENB Daily Updates.
"SBSTTA-9 Highlights: Wednesday, 12 November 2003" IISD’s Earth Negotations Bulletin, 13 November 2003.