Follow us Now on Telegram ! Get daily 10 - 12 Interesting Updates. Join our Telegram Channel https://t.me/OhWomen
Download Telegram App before Joining the Channel
Even as food, culture, and climate are extremely linked, governments must take into account the inextricable connections when making decisions about the environment, scientists suggested on Friday.
In the study conducted by the University of Plymouth, UK, a multidisciplinary team of specialists in deep-sea ecology, environmental governance, ecosystem services, and law called for a reevaluation of the procedures used to make decisions that impact biodiversity.
The researchers urge a change in strategy to one of prudence, whereby any possible harm to human health should trigger preventive actions, even in the lack of measurable assurance.
"Regardless of how unclear the evidence may be, human rights law mandates its consideration in decision-making processes. We know very little about some significant parts of our planet, like the deep ocean. However, these areas are vital to global human well-being. Uncertainty in these relationships should not hinder decision-making." said Dr. Holly Niner, Global Challenge Research Fellow at the University of Plymouth.
In the study, published in the journal NPJ Ocean Sustainability, the team emphasised that biodiversity loss is not solely about measurable declines in habitats and species.
"To protect biodiversity for future generations, we need to challenge the current context of environmental decision-making. Biodiversity loss should be viewed as a human rights issue, aligning decision-making with advancements in international human rights law," said Dr. Sian Rees, Associate Professor of Social-Ecological Systems at the varsity.
The challenges of environmental governance are particularly pronounced in the deep ocean, which covers around 60 per cent of Earth's surface but remains largely unexplored.
Despite this, deep-sea habitats and biodiversity are crucial to the planet's health and humanity. The researchers argue that sufficient evidence exists to foresee harm and integrate these values into decisions that could risk biodiversity and human well-being.
Source- IANS
