International environmental strategy
53. As the Government's overarching Sustainable Development
Strategy, Securing the Future, identified, there is the
need to develop a "clear vision and coherent approach for
the UK to the protection and enhancement of natural resources".
The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA)
has identified that the existing framework for environmental protection
is overly complex and fragmented, and was "developed through
individual policies rather than by taking a strategic overview
of the whole of the natural environment". DEFRA recognised
that as a result of this policy situation:
We are unable to deal effectively with
cross-cutting issues such as environmental limits, the effects
of cumulative pressures, and how to value ecosystem services and
environmental assets.
We do not have a strategic vision for
the natural environment, which makes it difficult for us to communicate
our policy agenda, to prioritise effectively and to influence
other Government Departments.[77]
54. A review commissioned by DEFRA concluded that
"it is clear that a paradigm shift is required to put ecosystem
services at the centre of development management. The current
incremental approach provides a second best approach".[78]
DEFRA has since been working to develop a new strategy for publication
by the end of 2007. It published a draft vision for the new policy
framework in December 2006, drawing heavily on the Millennium
Ecosystem Assessment concept of ecosystem services and conceptual
frameworks, which we welcome greatly. The vision has a primary
focus on the domestic terrestrial environment, although it also
seeks to set a strategic direction to "provide a stronger
basis for the UK's engagement in the European Union and in other
international fora, ensuring that we have a clear and consistent
voice in negotiations".[79]
The need for a more holistic approach to international environmental
issues is apparent even in the draft vision document itself. For
example, the document fails to discuss the World Trade Organisation's
Committee on Trade and Environment, the importance of which was
highlighted in an earlier report by this Committee.[80]
55. The need for a new international strategic vision
for the natural environment is discussed in a report by Nick Mabey
of E3G. This states that the Government has "improved its
coordination and effectiveness on the environment" and that
it has "positioned itself as a leader on the environment
and innovative forms of foreign policy" since 1997, but that
this had not been backed up by sufficient financing or appropriate
environmental mainstreaming by DFID. He argued for the UK to adopt
an international strategy that includes the need to press the
EU into becoming "the environmental leader within
the international community", to focus much more on the need
to tackle the "environmental roots of poverty and conflict",
and for it to press for more effective international environmental
governance.[81] He called
for the Government to become:
… better at making the case for preventive investment
of political, financial and organisational capital to reduce the
risk of irreversible and catastrophic environmental losses. The
UK has led the world on building the moral and economic case for
poverty reduction. The Stern Review has provided part of the case
on climate change, but similar rigour needs to be applied to a
range of environmental problems.[82]
56. The development of an international environmental
strategy would provide "greater democratic accountability
and oversight over the UK's international policy on environmental
issues". Reforms, he argued, "must encompass… foreign
policy, development, trade and defence and integrate elements
of environment, energy, industry and law enforcement".[83]
He felt that the absence of such a strategy is "skewing the
UK towards a focus on climate change mitigation policy, while
ignoring that successful and peaceful adaptation to the inevitable
changes in the climate will require far more effective and resilient
governance of natural resources and ecosystems in the short to
medium term - especially given the proximate stresses of population
growth and economic development".[84]
A new international strategy must improve coordination between
departments. Witnesses stressed to the Sub-committee that currently
departments are failing to work together on these issues. IFAW
gave whaling as an example of this:
…DEFRA do a good job when they [attend] meetings
of the International Whaling Commission. They have appropriate
expertise, they prepare for the meeting and they achieve what
can be achieved at the meeting. Where the disconnect lies is…
outside the meeting[.] [There does] not appear to be very much
in the way of lobbying efforts beforehand and information-gathering
and all the work that you would expect FCO to do… [T]here
is not… joined-up thinking between the FCO and DEFRA.[85]
57. We are concerned to see that this alleged disconnect
between the FCO and DEFRA on biodiversity issues is reflected
in the FCO's Action Plan. In the section of the plan that describes
how the FCO will work with other government departments though
cross-government structures, it makes no mention of the Inter-Ministerial
Working Group on Biodiversity.[86]
The benefits of better coordination between departments was highlighted
by the FCO itself. It told us that there was "considerable
evidence" that the development of the International Energy
Strategy, which was the first Whitehall document to bring together
the Government's international objectives on energy security and
climate change in an integrated fashion, signed by FCO, DTI and
DEFRA, had led to more integrated policy making.[87]
The JNCC asserted that the FCO will be essential in developing
such a strategy due to its unique talents and knowledge. It argued
that "it can act, for example, as the face of the UK Government
abroad; it can help to provide an understanding of the social,
political and cultural context of environmental policies in other
countries; and it can also—and I think that this is particularly
important—provide leadership across government for international
issues."[88]
58. Failures
in the Government-wide Sustainable Development Strategy, Securing
the Future, might explain the lack of consideration
given to a number of international environmental issues in FCO
sustainable development documents, which are based upon it. However,
although it has its shortcomings, we were surprised to notice
that the 2006 White Paper, Active Diplomacy for a Changing
World, also a Government-wide strategy, does not refer to
or explain its links with Securing the Future. This is
a considerable oversight, and demonstrates the continuing lack
of coordination on sustainable development issues across Government.
59. Securing
the Future highlighted
the fragmented state of natural resource protection policy, and
the negative impact that this has on the UK's ability to meet
environmental challenges. DEFRA has stated that it will seek to
address this through the development of a coherent approach to
the natural environment, which will also take into account the
UK's international impact. However, we are concerned that the
international dimension will not receive the focus it requires
in this domestic strategy, and might fail to incorporate issues
including security, foreign policy, trade and development. Therefore,
a new international environmental strategy must be developed,
owned and delivered by a number of departments, including FCO,
DEFRA, DFID and DTI.
77 "Natural environment policy; Rationale and
vision", DEFRA website, 21 March 2006, www.defra.gov.uk Back
78
ADAS UK Ltd, NR0105 - Natural Resource Policy Framework Analysis,
April 2006, p51, www.defra.gov.uk Back
79
"Natural environment policy; Rationale and vision",
DEFRA website, 21 March 2006, www.defra.gov.uk Back
80
Environmental Audit Committee, Eleventh Report of Session 2005-2006,
Outflanked: The World Trade Organisation, International Trade
and Sustainable Development, HC 1455 Back
81
Nick Mabey, E3G working paper, Sustainability and foreign policy
(2007), p6, www.e3g.org Back
82
ibid Back
83
ibid Back
84
Ev 77 Back
85
Qu 12 [Mr Papastavrou] Back
86
Foreign and Commonwealth Office, UK International Priorities:
The FCO Sustainable Development Action Plan, January 2007,
p19 Back
87
Ev 46 Back
88
Ev 28 Back
|
