Ocean Fertilization policy on stage at the United Nations General Assembly
Issue: Negative language on ocean fertilization potentially being adopted by the UN General Assembly Background: The recent meeting of the UN General Assembly 63rd Session (Sept 23-29 New York) discussed the issue of ocean fertilization in the context of the annual UNGA resolution on oceans affairs. EU delegations have pushed for language that would endorse the resolution from the Convention on Biological Diversity pertaining to ocean fertilization, and for deletion of language in last year’s resolution that “encourage[d] States to support the further study and enhance understanding of ocean iron fertilization.” See UN General Assembly resolution 62/215, available here: http://www.imo.org/includes/blastData.asp/doc_id=10158/INF-4-Add-1.pdf Adopted last spring with little or no advance policy work or input from the scientific community, the CBD’s decision on ocean fertilization recommended that States place unreasonable restrictions on the research of ocean fertilization. It may be found here: http://www.cbd.int/doc/decisions/cop-09/cop-09-dec-16-en.pdf Immediately after the CBD resolution was published, an ad hoc consultative body established by the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission issued a response criticizing these restrictions and asking for clarification by CBD. This may be found here: http://www.ioc-unesco.org/index.php?option=com_oe&task=viewDocumentRecord&docID=2002, and is also reproduced below. Adoption of language endorsing the CBD’s restriction on ocean fertilization research would lend credence to that decision even as it has become clear since the decision that (a) the decision was poorly considered as matter of science; and (b) new publications strongly support additional research, rather than unreasonable restrictions on OIF research [Boyd et al., 2007; Buesseler et al., 2008; Lampitt et al., 2008; Smetacek et al, 2008]. As resolution 62/215 also notes, the London Convention and London Protocol are the proper UN bodies charged with developing an effective regulatory and policy framework around ocean fertilization. The Convention on Biological Diversity also acknowledges the authority of the LC/LP on this issue, yet still makes statements that would unreasonable restrict research. Resolution 62/215 should remain the final statement on ocean fertilization policy. As this language has been referred back to national delegations, there is still time for modification before final adoption. ******* Statement by IOC’s ad hoc Consultative Group on the CBD Resolution (IOC/INF – 1247): III. ADDENDUM (June 14, 2008): Response to the statement of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity on Ocean Fertilization Activities (30 May 2008) The Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) ad hoc Consultative Group on Ocean Fertilization is concerned that the statement on ocean fertilization activities issued by the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biodiversity in Bonn on 30 May 2008 places unnecessary and undue restriction on legitimate scientific activities. The statement reads, in part, “[The Conference of the Parties of the Convention on Biodiversity (COP of the CBD)] … urges other Governments, in accordance with the precautionary approach, to ensure that ocean fertilization activities do not take place until there is an adequate scientific basis on which to justify such activities, including assessing associated risks, and a global transparent and effective control and regulatory mechanism is in place for these activities; with the exception of small scale research studies within coastal waters.” The IOC ad hoc Consultative Group on Ocean Fertilization notes that: (1) The COP of the CBD recognizes “the ongoing scientific and legal analysis [of ocean fertilization] occurring under the auspices of the London Convention (1972) and the 1996 London Protocol.” (2) The CBD proposes that “ocean fertilization activities do not take place until there is an adequate scientific basis on which to justify such activities, …with the exception of small scale scientific research studies within coastal waters.” The restriction of experiments to coastal waters appears to be a new, arbitrary, and counterproductive limitation. The most useful ocean fertilization experiments to date have been performed in open ocean environments, as this is where marine productivity is most commonly limited by micronutrients. There is no scientific basis for limiting such experiments to coastal environments. (3) There are good scientific reasons to do larger experiments, including diminishing dilution near the center of the experimental area and obtaining better data relating to vertical transport processes. “Small scale” is a relative term. A circle 200 km in diameter would cover less than one ten-thousandth of the ocean. (4) We are concerned about the phrase in the CBD statement “global transparent and effective control and regulatory mechanism … for these activities”. We assume that “these activities” refers to ocean fertilization activities for the purpose of introducing additional carbon dioxide into the ocean, as distinct from purposes such as legitimate scientific investigation. It would be helpful if this phrase were clarified to make this important distinction evident (5) Preservation of biodiversity in marine systems may require good scientific information from manipulative experiments in the open ocean. A careful science-based “assessment of associated risks” depends on knowledge that could be gained by further experimentation. (6) It is essential for sound and unbiased scientific advice to be available to intergovernmental deliberations on the issue of ocean fertilization both to protect the marine environment and to ensure that marine scientific research is not unnecessarily hindered. The IOC should continue to provide scientific advice to the London Convention Scientific Group, as well as other international or intergovernmental deliberations, as requested. Boyd, P. W., et al. (2007), Mesoscale Iron Enrichment Experiments 1993-2005: Synthesis and Future Directions, Science, 315(5812), 612-617. Buesseler, K. O., et al. (2008), ENVIRONMENT: Ocean Iron Fertilization--Moving Forward in a Sea of Uncertainty, Science, 319(5860), 162. Lampitt, R. S., et al. (2008), Ocean Fertilisation: a potential means of geo-engineering?, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 366(1882), 3919-3945. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
