{"id":1734,"date":"2022-06-13T14:19:58","date_gmt":"2022-06-13T14:19:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/observatoirenature.org\/observatorio\/?p=1734"},"modified":"2022-07-27T00:04:07","modified_gmt":"2022-07-27T00:04:07","slug":"why-we-must-put-nature-first","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/observatoirenature.org\/observatorio\/2022\/06\/13\/why-we-must-put-nature-first\/","title":{"rendered":"Why we must put nature first"},"content":{"rendered":"\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n
\n

Jason Stocker, pour l\u2019Observatoire des droits de la Nature.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n

Sustainable development comes with a price. That price continues to rise as we entertain conflicting interpretations of what\u00a0sustainable <\/em>development entails. Difficulties are exacerbated by the way in which the current climate crisis forces a distinctly complicated question of how we ought to balance the economy and ecology. Thus, this \u2018price\u2019 is beyond mere economics. Despite the scientific consensus regarding climate change and the need for ecological concerns to guide our investments, governments continue to prioritize economic interests. Such discrepancies impede our ability for decisive action and increase the damages wrought by climate change. For these reasons, we promote the need for guardians of nature.<\/p>\n\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

A History of Neglect<\/u><\/strong>\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

Though we have been grappling with the climate crisis long before the 70\u2019s, alarms were officially raised on the global stage in 1987, in the Brundtland Report \u201cOur Common Future.\u201d This report put forth a robust analysis of sustainable development, which entails \u201cthe ability to make development sustainable to ensure that it meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.\u201d[1] Thus, sustainability means developing in a way that balances inter-generational concerns.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

Indeed, inter-generational issues are now prominent in economic fora, which aim at combating the imbalance of economic power. As we know, these issues were raised when three thousand leaders from across the globe met at this year\u2019s World Economic Forum in Davos to discuss sustainability. But in terms of the environment, they resolved little. The language and approach that was used further entrenched the challenges we face in securing a balance between the economy and the environment. It\u2019s clear that nature remains in the backseat, as a mere resource or asset for the economy. The devastation of nature remains mere externalities. As a result, serious harm continues in the name of profit.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

Wet\u2019suwet\u2019en and the Canadian Economy<\/u><\/strong>\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

We need not look beyond Canada. We find ourselves on the frontlines of this conflict, where protests across the country\u2014spearheaded by the hereditary chiefs of the Wet\u2019suwet\u2019en people\u2014face off against the interests of a multi-billion dollar gas pipeline.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

It\u2019s easy to understand why. Supposing for a moment that the economy ought to be privileged, there remain alarming contradictions. An analysis of the Trans Mountain pipeline shows that a single spill puts at risk 200,000 jobs in the lower mainland of Vancouver alone. It\u2019s estimated that a single spill could result in a 43% loss of employment among coastal industries. This is not to mention tourism, port trade, and agricultural industries across the greater area of BC. Overall, a spill means an estimated 300,000 jobs are at risk for every 50 jobs created by the pipeline. For all this, BC might earn an extra 0.7% in corporate tax revenues and $9.86 million per year. Then there is the cost of a clean up, which, based on past spills, can range from $725 million to over $41.6 billion. However, since cleanups are still ongoing it\u2019s impossible to tell the exact amount. Alarmingly, there has yet to be a guarantee regarding how much Kinder Morgan would cover such costs.[2]\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

Of course, the risks associated with Coastal Gaslink are different because they are meant to carry natural gas. Nonetheless, there remain risks of fires, explosions, and leaks, as well as threats to bird, mammal, and fish species. Most importantly, the Wet\u2019suwet\u2019en argue that such risks are insufficiently studied, and that too much is at stake to take the chance for short term economic benefit.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

However, we do know for sure that investing in the Coastal GasLink pipeline will increase the rate of human-induced climate change, which increases costs. Building the pipeline could increase our annual carbon pollution by up to four million tonnes.[3] It\u2019s estimated that the pipeline would transport up to five billion cubic feet of liquefied natural gas per day. If burned, this would result in 585.5 million pounds of CO2 per day,[4] which would make it increasingly difficult for Canada to meet its climate agreements.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

This will have significant costs. Antarctica recently reached its warmest temperature ever recorded, which means glaciers melting at higher speeds, and the threat of flooding is increased. This puts coastal regions, including major cities, at risk. Conservative flood maps strongly suggest that Richmond, Delta and parts of rural Abbotsford and Coquitlam will be permanently underwater by 2100. This puts\u00a0at least<\/em>\u00a0250,000 people at risk of becoming climate refugees in the Vancouver area alone. The Tantramar Marsh in New Brunswick faces a similar fate, through which $45 billion of trade passes each year.[5]<\/p>\n\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

In addition, rising temperatures have caused the great lakes to reach their highest levels in over 100 years. Areas surrounding the great lakes will face the economic burden of mitigating the risks that come with.[6]\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

Thus, the Wet\u2019suwet\u2019en movement to protect nature is part of the greater conflict between economy and nature, and it further reveals the irrationality of privileging short term economic projects over the protection of nature. There is no doubt that the greatest asset to the economy is a healthy and stable environment. The cost of neglecting nature is clear, and the longer we wait to invest in sustainable energy, the higher the risks become.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

Bioculturalism and Self-determination<\/u><\/strong>\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

But for the Wet\u2019suwet\u2019en, and for many, the pipeline threatens more than a balance between economy and nature. For them, nature is fundamental to their bioculturalism. Bulldozing a pipeline through the heart of their lands is synonymous with piercing through the heart of their culture. They understand not only their right, but their duty, as \u2018Landkeepers\u2019. This is why the issue is more than a matter of protesting the environmental risks of an economic project, it\u2019s more than a balance between economy and nature. It is an existential threat. It threatens their way of being and their right for self-determination. This is because the land, environment, and fellow species are sacred, and cannot be compared to other sorts of interests\u2014they have value in their own right.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

Importantly, their right to self-determination and duties as landkeepers are recognized by the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous peoples (UNDRIP). Canada endorsed this declaration in 2010, and since then the BC legislature has adopted the\u00a0Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act<\/em>\u00a0and the NWT Government has committed to Implement UNDRIP within the constitutional framework of Canada. Although BC\u2019s bill 41 doesn\u2019t necessarily grant indigenous peoples the right to sue their government or the right to veto projects, it does suggest that building a pipeline without the hereditary chiefs\u2019 consent is contradictory to our Canadian values. Nonetheless, experts say that such bills reinforce the rights granted by Section 35 of the Canadian constitution, which guarantees treaty rights. Moreover, some believe that such colonial regulation carries no weight on unceded territory.[7]\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

Where do we go from here?<\/u><\/strong>\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

Our history of ineffective political posturing has failed to realize concrete solutions. It\u2019s not enough to hope that world leaders, who are torn between ecological and economic interests, will do the right thing. Climate predictions show that there is no time to be wavering between the two poles of ecology and economy.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

Since climate change is a manifestation of the way in which we treat nature as a mere economical asset, a fundamental paradigm shift is needed. We need to replace the broken paradigm that maintains humans at the centre of the universe. In solidarity with the Wet\u2019suwet\u2019en, we need to recognize nature, rivers, forests, mountains, and species as living entities, as living environments, as subjects with rights beyond our own interests. This does not entail granting the entire scope of human rights to nature, but at least the rights to be protected, preserved, and represented before courts so that nature may be compensated for anthropogenic destruction on its own terms.<\/p>\n\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

As a subject of rights, nature needs guardians to protect its existence and ensure that its needs are heard in light of risky projects such as pipelines. Such projects threaten the health of other species and the balance of nature as a whole. Furthermore, such projects jeopardize indigenous values by imposing on them the colonial ideals of an ever-growing economy. Moreover, they threaten our very ability to live in harmony with nature.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

The Wet\u2019suwet\u2019en community already seems to act as guardians of nature, invoking not only nature\u2019s right to be preserved, but their own biocultural rights that should be protected, rights that are inextricably linked to the right to self-determination.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

For these reasons, we support the Wet\u2019suwet\u2019en in their fight as \u2018Landkeepers\u2019. As such, we insist that the best solution is to recognize the rights of nature and implement guardians with power, decisive voices, and budgets that enable them to protect such rights. This is a powerful way to establish a safe balance between ecology and economy. Guardians would ensure that \u201cSustainable development\u201d harmonizes with our natural surroundings and respects the dignity and political structure of indigenous communities and the interests of future generations.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

As the UN Environment Program Executive Director Inger Andersen said, \u201c2020 is a year for urgency, ambition, and action to address the crisis facing nature; it is also an opportunity to more fully incorporate nature-based solutions into global climate action.\u201d[8] But in order to balance ecology and economy we must value nature more than the fantasy of an ever-growing economy, and we can secure such value through the power of legal guardians. Guardians would ensure that we follow the lead of the Convention on Biological Diversity as stated in their comprehensive vision of \u201cLiving in Harmony with Nature.\u201d They would enforce the recognition of nature as a subject with rights\u2014and not merely as an asset of the Economy. Enforcing the rights of nature will empower nature as a partner, as an equal, and as a stakeholder. Only then will there be a decisive voice among the faltering world leaders. Only then will we see a real change around the world and secure a healthy future for all.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

    \n
  1. [1] Commission, United Nations. \u201cReport of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future.\u201d 1987. Online: https:\/\/sustainabledevelopment.un.org\/content\/documents\/5987our-common-future.pdf [2] Assessing the risks of Kinder Morgan\u2019s proposed new Trans Mountain pipeline. February 2013. Conversations for Responsible Economic Development. Online: http:\/\/credbc.ca\/assessing-the-risks\/ [3] Spriggs, Alastair. \u201cB.C.\u2019s emissions rising, figures show, as activists point finger at LNG.\u201d January 2019. Online: https:\/\/www.theglobeandmail.com\/canada\/british-columbia\/article-bcs-emissions-rising-figures-show-as-activists-point-finger-at\/. [4] Hollarsmith, Jordan. \u201cB.C. cannot afford the Coastal GasLink pipeline.\u201d January 2020. Online:\u00a0https:\/\/theprovince.com\/opinion\/jordan-hollarsmith-b-c-cannot-afford-the-coastal-gaslink-pipeline<\/a>. [5] Cain, Patrick. \u201cTwo Canadian places that could be under water in 100 years \u2014 or sooner.\u201d November 2017. Online: https:\/\/globalnews.ca\/news\/3845545\/how-climate-change-affects-canada\/. [6] Radio-Canada. \u201cGrands Lacs : le niveau des eaux le plus \u00e9lev\u00e9 depuis 100 ans.\u201d February 2020. Online:\u00a0https:\/\/ici.radio-canada.ca\/nouvelle\/1511572\/lac-huron-lac-ontario-precipitations-eau-douce\u00a0<\/a>[7] Last, John. \u201cWhat does \u2018implementing UNDRIP\u2019 actually mean?\u201d November 2019. Online:\u00a0https:\/\/www.cbc.ca\/news\/canada\/north\/implementing-undrip-bc-nwt-1.5344825\u00a0<\/a>[8] Anderson, Inger. \u201cColombia to host 2020 World Environment Day on biodiversity.\u201d January 2020. Online: https:\/\/www.unenvironment.org\/cep\/news\/editorial\/colombia-host-2020-world-environment-day-biodiversity.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/section>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Jason Stocker, pour l\u2019Observatoire des droits de la Nature. Sustainable development comes with a price. That price continues to rise as we entertain conflicting interpretations of what\u00a0sustainable development entails. Difficulties are exacerbated by the way in which the current climate crisis forces a distinctly complicated question of how we ought to balance the economy and […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":1371,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"site-sidebar-layout":"default","site-content-layout":"","ast-site-content-layout":"default","site-content-style":"default","site-sidebar-style":"default","ast-global-header-display":"","ast-banner-title-visibility":"","ast-main-header-display":"","ast-hfb-above-header-display":"","ast-hfb-below-header-display":"","ast-hfb-mobile-header-display":"","site-post-title":"","ast-breadcrumbs-content":"","ast-featured-img":"","footer-sml-layout":"","ast-disable-related-posts":"","theme-transparent-header-meta":"","adv-header-id-meta":"","stick-header-meta":"","header-above-stick-meta":"","header-main-stick-meta":"","header-below-stick-meta":"","astra-migrate-meta-layouts":"default","ast-page-background-enabled":"default","ast-page-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"ast-content-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[53],"class_list":["post-1734","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-why-we-must-put-nature-first"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/observatoirenature.org\/observatorio\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1734","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/observatoirenature.org\/observatorio\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/observatoirenature.org\/observatorio\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/observatoirenature.org\/observatorio\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/observatoirenature.org\/observatorio\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1734"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/observatoirenature.org\/observatorio\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1734\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2524,"href":"https:\/\/observatoirenature.org\/observatorio\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1734\/revisions\/2524"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/observatoirenature.org\/observatorio\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1371"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/observatoirenature.org\/observatorio\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1734"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/observatoirenature.org\/observatorio\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1734"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/observatoirenature.org\/observatorio\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1734"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}