Fildişi Ticaretindeki Uluslararası Yasağın Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma İlkeleri Işığında Değerlendirmesi

Öz

Afrika fili (Loxodanta africana), Nesli Tehlike Altında Olan Yabani Hayvan ve Bitki Türlerinin Uluslararası Ticaretine İlişkin Sözleşme kapsamında düzenlenmektedir ve genel bir kural olarak fildişi gibi parçaları da dahil olmak üzere uluslararası ticareti yasaklanmıştır. Çalışma boyunca, fildişi ticaretine getirilen uluslararası yasağın sürdürülebilir kalkınma ilkeleriyle tutarlı olup olmadığı eleştirel bir şekilde değerlendirilmektedir. Sürdürülebilir kalkınmanın tanımı, kapsamı ve ilkeleri çevre siyasetinde halihazırda tartışmalıdır. Bu yazıda sürdürülebilir kalkınma ilkeleri; Yeni Delhi Sürdürülebilir Kalkınmaya İlişkin Uluslararası Hukuk İlkeleri Bildirgesi doğrultusunda sürdürülebilir kullanım, eşitlik, ortak ancak farklılaştırılmış sorumluluklar, katılım, iyi yönetişim, bütünlük ve ihtiyatlılık ilkeleri olarak kabul edilmiştir. Bu yazıda, doğal kaynakların sürdürülebilir kullanımını, eşitliği, yerel halkın ihtiyaçlarını ve katılımını, iyi yönetişim gerekliliğini ve farklı politika alanlarının entegrasyonunu göz ardı ettiği için fildişi ticaretine ilişkin uluslararası yasağın bu ilkelerle tutarlı olmadığı savunulmaktadır. İhtiyatlılık ilkesi çerçevesinde çevresel risk almak yerine ticaret yasağına başvurmak makul gibi görünse de bu ilke de ticaret yasağı için tek başına dayanak oluşturmaz.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Fildişi
• Uluslararası Ticaret
• Sürdürülebilirlik

Assessment of the International Ban on the Trade of Ivory in Light of Sustainable Development Principles

Öz

The African elephant (Loxodanta africana) is regulated under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, and as a rule, international trade of it and of its parts such as ivory is banned. Throughout this study, the international ban on the trade of ivory is critically assessed as to whether it is consistent with the principles of sustainable development. The definition, scope and principles of sustainable development are already controversial in environmental politics. In this paper, the principles of sustainable development are regarded as sustainable use, equity, common but differentiated responsibilities, participation, good governance, integrity and precautionary principles in line with New Delhi Declaration of Principles of International Law Relating to Sustainable Development. In this paper, it is argued that the international ban on the trade of ivory is not consistent with these principles since it disregards sustainable use of natural resources, equity, needs and participation of local people, necessity of good governance and integration of different policy areas. While resorting to a trade ban might seem feasible as an alternative to taking environmental risks within the framework of the precautionary principle, this principle alone does not constitute the sole basis for a trade ban.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Ivory
• International Trade
• Sustainability

Kaynakça

1. Agyeman J. (2007). Environmental Justice and Sustainability. In G. Atkinson, S. Dietz, and E. Neumayer, (Eds.). Handbook of Sustainable Development, Cheltenham and Massachusetts: Edward Elgar, pp. 171-188.
2. Barbier B., Burgess JC., Swanson TM., Pearce DW. (1990). Elephants, Economics and Ivory. I. Eds. London: Earthscan Publications Ltd.
3. Bennett E. (2015). Legal ivory trade in a corrupt world and its impact on African elephant populations. Conservation Biology, 29(1), 54-60. [Online]. Available at: https://10.1111/cobi.12377.
4. Beder S. (2006). Environmental Principles and Policies: An Interdisciplinary Introduction. I. Eds. Sterling: Earthscan Publications Ltd.
5. Carolan MS. (2008) The politics in Environmental Science: The Endangered Species Act and the Preble’s Mouse Controversy. Environmental Politics, 17(3),449-465. Available at: https://10.1080/096440108020556836.
6. CITES (2022). Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, [Online]. Available at: https://cites.org/eng/disc/text.php, [Accessed 6 April 2022].
7. Cooney R. (2003). Conclusions: Looking Ahead – International Trade Regulation and Enforcement. In Oldfield, S. (Eds.). The Trade in Wildlife: Regulation for Conservation, I. Eds. London and Sterling: Earthscan Publications Ltd., pp. 196-204.
8. Cooney R., Abensperg-Traun M. (2013). Raising Local Community Voices: CITES, Livelihoods and Sustainable Use. Review of European Community & International Environmental Law, 22(3), 301-310. [Online]. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2021.631556.

9. Cooney R., Challender DWS., Broad S., Roe D., Natusch, DJD. (2021). Think Before You Act: Improving the Conservation Outcomes of CITES Listing Decisions. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution, [Online]. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2021.631556.
10. Cordonier Segger MC., Khalfan A. (2006). Sustainable Development Law: Principles, Practices, & Prospects. I. Eds. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
11. COMEST (World Commission on the Ethics of Scientific Knowledge and Technology), (2005). The Precautionary Principle. Paris: The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.
12. Dickson B. (2000). Precaution at the Heart of CITES? In Hutton J, and Dickson B, (Eds.). Endangered Species Threatened Convention: The Past, Present and Future of CITES.I. Eds. London: Earthscan Publications Ltd., pp. 38-46.
13. Dryzek J.S. (2013). The Politics of the Earth: Environmental Discourses. 3rd Eds. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
14. Du Plessis MA. (2000). CITES and the Causes of Extinction. In Hutton J, and Dickson B, (Eds.). Endangered Species Threatened Convention: The Past, Present and Future of CITES.I. Eds. London: Earthscan Publications Ltd., pp. 13-29.
15. Gardener SM. (2006). A Core Precautionary Principle. Journal of Political Philosophy, 14(1), 33-60. Available at: https://doi-org.libproxy.york. ac.uk/10.1111/j.1467-9760.2006.00237.x.
16. Gladwin TN., Kennely JJ., Krause TS. (1995). Shifting Paradigms for Sustainable Development: Implications for Management Theory and Research. The Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 874-907.
17. Jenkins R. (2000). The Significant Trade Process: Making Appendix II Work. In Hutton J, and Dickson B, (Eds.). Endangered Species Threatened Convention: The Past, Present and Future of CITES.I. Eds. London: Earthscan Publications Ltd., pp. 47-57.
18. Lafferty WM. (1996) The politics of sustainable development: Global norms for national implementation. Environmental Politics,5 (2), 185- 208.
19. Lee P., Lindsay K. (2016). Conserving Africa’s remaining elephants and ending the threat of ivory trade: the ’Big Five’ proposals for CITES. Pachyderm, 57, 125-127. [Online]. Available at:https://pachydermjournal.org/index.php/pachyderm/article/view/402.
20. Lusseau D., Lee P. (2016). Can We Sustainably Harvest Ivory? Current Biology, 26(21), 2951-2956. [Online]. Available at: https://doi. org/10.1016/j.cub.2016.08.060
21. Martin RB. (2000). When CITES Works and When It Does Not. In Hutton J, and Dickson B, (Eds.). Endangered Species Threatened Convention: The Past, Present and Future of CITES.I. Eds. London: Earthscan Publications Ltd., pp. 29-37.
22. Mofson P. (2000). Zimbabwe and CITES: Influencing the International Regime. In Hutton J, and Dickson B, (Eds.). Endangered Species Threatened Convention: The Past, Present and Future of CITES.I. Eds. London: Earthscan Publications Ltd., pp. 107-125.
23. Moore L. (2011). The Neoliberal Elephant: Exploring The Impacts Of The Trade Ban In Ivory On The Commodification And Neoliberalisation Of Elephants. Geoforum, 42, 51-60.
24. Moyle B. (2003). Regulation, Conservation and Incentives. In Oldfield, S. (Eds.). The Trade in Wildlife: Regulation for Conservation, I. Eds. London and Sterling: Earthscan Publications Ltd., pp. 41-51.
25. Redclift M. (2005). Sustainable Development (1987–2005):An Oxymoron Comes of Age. Sustainable Development, 13, 212–227. [Online]. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.281.
26. Reeve R. (2002). Policing International Trade in Endangered Species: The CITES Treaty and Compliance. I. Eds. London: Earthscan Publications Ltd.
27. Reid D. (1995). Sustainable Development: An Introductory Guide. I. Eds. London: Earthscan Publications Ltd.
28. Reid CT. (2009). Nature Conservation Law. 3rd Eds. London: Thomson Reuters.
29. Sands P., Peel J., Fabra A., MacKenzie R. (2018). Principles of International Environmental Law. 4th Eds. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
30. Sas-Rolfes M. (2000). Assessing CITES: Four Case Studies. In Hutton J, and Dickson B, (Eds.). Endangered Species Threatened Convention: The Past, Present and Future of CITES.I. Eds. London: Earthscan Publications Ltd., pp. 69-88.
31. Sas-Rolfes M., Moyle B., Stiles, D. (2014). The Complex Policy Issue Of Elephant Ivory Stockpile Management. Pachyderm, 55, 62-77.
32. Sinclair-Brown N. (2003). Regulatory Design. In Oldfield, S. (Eds.). The Trade in Wildlife: Regulation for Conservation, I. Eds. London and Sterling: Earthscan Publications Ltd., pp. 33-40.
33. Swanson T. (2000). Developing CITES: Making The Convention Work for All of the Parties. In Hutton J, and Dickson B, (Eds.). Endangered Species Threatened Convention: The Past, Present and Future of CITES.I. Eds. London: Earthscan Publications Ltd., pp.134-152.
34. Sunstein CR. (2005). Laws of Fear: Beyond The Precautionary Principle. I. Eds. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
35. The United Nations (1987). Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future. [online] Available at https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/5987our-common-future.pdf, [Accessed 2 April 2022].
36. The United Nations (2002). A/CONF.199/8 - Letter dated 6 August 2002 from the Permanent Representative of Bangladesh to the United Nations and the Chargé d’affaires a.i. of the Permanent Mission of the Netherlands to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations[online] Available at https://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/CONF.199/8&Lang=E, [Accessed 2 April 2022].
37. Trade Map (2023). [online] Available at https://www.trademap.org/Index.aspx, [Accessed 2 October 2023].
38. Wittemyer G., Northrup J., Douglas-Hamilton I., Omondi P., Burnham KP. (2014). Illegal Killing For Ivory Drives Global Decline In African Elephants. Proceedings Of The National Academy Of Sciences, 11(36), 13117-13121. [Online]. Available at: https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.1403984111.
39. Yu Y., Wetzler A., Yang X., Tang R., Zhang L. (2017). Significant and Timely Ivory Trade Restrictions in Both China and the United States are Critical to Save Elephants. Conservation Letters, 10(5), 596–601.