Legal Protection of Biodiversity
By Sami Backleh
This week in Palestine

It is a known fact that Palestine contains a great wealth of biodiversity resources in terms of the number of species, ecosystems, and landscapes.

Although considered small in terms of landmass, Palestine displays a wide variation in elevations and geology, leading to a broad range of habitats, which is reflected in a high diversity of plants and animals.

This diversity is needed for humanity to survive. People all over the world depend on plants and animals for food, medicine, and raw materials to manufacture clothing and building materials. Species and ecosystems regulate our climate, clean our freshwater, regulate and clean atmospheric gases, treat our waste, generate and clean our soil, recycle nutrients, and pollinate our crops. In other words, at no cost to us, biodiversity supports the human being.

When there is less diversity in nature, ecosystems become less productive.

Species and biological communities have difficulty adapting to change, but humans suffer too. Economic opportunities and the quality of life of future generations are put at risk.

Yet it has been asserted that virtually all the earth’s ecosystems have been dramatically transformed through human actions, and ecosystems continue to be converted for agricultural and other uses. It has been said that the current loss of biodiversity and the related changes in the environment are now occurring faster than ever before in human history and there is no sign of this process slowing down. Many animal and plant populations have declined in numbers and geographical spread. Species extinction is a natural part of the earth’s history. Yet scientists have revealed that human activity has increased the extinction rate by at least 100 times compared to the natural rate.

he Palestine case is not far from this international dilemma. The biodiversity in Palestine is continuously under threat due to various factors. Hence, the Palestinian Authority and Palestinian NGOs are constantly trying to make considerable progress in identifying, analyzing, and evaluating key environmental concerns, in a way to conserve the environment and the elements of biodiversity.

But how can the country legally protect its biodiversity? Conserving biodiversity is like a puzzle - every piece is important to create a complete picture. Many wildlife biologists believe that the best way to conserve biodiversity is a precautionary approach that protects a diversity of habitats

- and thus a diversity of wildlife - on a local, regional, and international scale. Part of the puzzle involves setting up effective and sufficient policy papers and legislation to ensure the protection of nature resources and biodiversity elements in a sustainable manner both on the national and global levels.

National governments are vital to the preservation of biodiversity through their efforts to pass laws that ensure the protection of species and habitats. If national laws do not protect species, then there is little hope of preserving them. However, it is not enough just to have laws; there must also be the will and the resources to enforce them. Even in economically developed nations, the necessary resources to properly enforce laws are not always made available. In under-developed nations, even the most basic resources for enforcement may be lacking. In addition, national laws may not, in the end, translate into local action, in which case they do not accomplish much. In democratic nations, national laws are also driven to a large extent by public opinion. They may in some cases be drafted more as a response to emotion than by actual scientific need.

Several international conventions exist for the preservation of biodiversity.

These include such conventions as the Ramsar Convention (1976), which provides for the conservation of internationally important wetlands, and the Bern Convention (1979), which requires the protection of endangered and vulnerable species of flora and fauna and their habitats. There are many others. Signatory nations to these conventions must ratify national laws to ensure compliance with the conventions.

However, in Palestine - and due to the prolonged occupation and political conflict - lack of control over planning and implementation and the fact that the occupation power has neglected the development of Palestine have led to the deterioration of biodiversity. Maintenance and restoration of the environment and nature resources have been neglected, resulting in environmental degradation and a low standard of services. Hence any developmental plans for urban and rural areas have been unrealistically restricted.

In addition, there is no unified legal regime in the Palestinian territories. In fact, there are different laws that are applicable in these territories. This is due to the fact that Palestine has been subjected to various rulers since the end of nineteenth century. The British Mandate, Jordan, Egypt, and the Israeli occupation have promulgated extensive legislation, some of which is still applicable in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

However, the Oslo I and Oslo II accords provide for the creation of institutional structures by the Palestinian Authority (PA), such as the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC) as well as civil departments and ministries for many sectors, including the environment portfolio. As a result of the Oslo I and Oslo II accords, moreover, the Environmental Quality Authority - as an offshoot of the Palestinian Environmental Authority - and several other ministries have been formed. Some of these ministries and authorities have environment-related tasks.

A study performed by a group of experts from the United Nations Environmental Programmes (UNEP) in 2003 revealed that many of the laws for the protection of the environment that relate to each ministry are contradictory and overlap. The legislation was weak, piecemeal, and sector-based. This was due to the fact that the newly formed environmental laws promulgated by the PA were simply additions to the inherited ones.

Due to this contradiction between existing laws and responsible bodies, national policies relevant to biodiversity conservation and environmental protection lack the adequate coverage of certain policies that cover integrated aspects of mainstreaming biodiversity conservation. Such integration could be regulations related to species-specific and habitat-specific protection, and whether they meet with international standards. In addition, specific regulatory tools and incentives to promote and reward conservation of the above-mentioned aspects are not well formulated within the national policies.

In addition to the national policies, one should bear in mind that species and ecosystems are seldom neatly confined within national boundaries. Many species roam across countless national borders and are owned by none. Thus biodiversity conservation is an international problem that requires an international solution. The role of international conservation organisations is a vital one here, particularly in terms of brokering international agreements between governments concerned with protecting their national interests. The most far-reaching agreement on biodiversity in recent years is the Convention on Biodiversity, signed by 156 nations at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (the Earth Summit) in Rio in 1992. Many others have signed since, and as they ratify the convention, governments accept responsibility for safeguarding biodiversity in their nations. Unfortunately, Palestine is not a participant in many of these international conventions and environmental agreements. Although the Palestinian Authority is unable to adhere to such treaties, there are clear environmental benefits from participation, not only for Palestine but also for the region as a whole. The Palestinian Authority is committed to supporting the principles and objectives of many of these agreements. It has, for example, prepared a National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP), with international support, in anticipation of becoming a party to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).

Anyone concerned about conservation needs to question whether the innumerable strategies and policies in place are actually being delivered. International conventions and national laws are, in the end, only ideas on pieces of paper.

These must be translated into concrete action in local situations for anything to be truly accomplished.

Sami Backleh is a conservation biologist who works as a Middle East Program Coordinator at Quebec-Labrador Foundation/Atlantic Center for the Environment (www.qlf.org). He can be reached at sbackleh@qlf.org