[ad_1]
While aspirational effects are important, especially in the international context, one likely questions what the actual effects of the resolution might be. After all, UNHRC resolutions are not legally binding. The greatest effect, per Special Rapporteur Boyd, is as a catalyst for government action. For example, member states might be encouraged to include the right to a healthy environment into their domestic constitutions, often the highest level of domestic law. As evidence of this, Special Rapporteur Boyd cites the effects of the recognition of the right to water in 2010. In response to that resolution, many national governments added the same right to their constitutions. Likewise, it is important to note that these additions had practical effects beyond the simple letter of the law. For example, in Mexico, following the addition of the right to water to the federal constitution, safe drinking water was extended to over a thousand rural communities.
While the Special Rapporteur’s comments paint a hopeful picture, one must question how realistic a level of change on par with that seen in Mexico would be for the global community with respect to the UNHRC’s newest resolution. Water is a basic human need, so the results of a lack of water are more readily and undeniably self-evident on an everyday basis. One can feel thirst and experience the results of drinking contaminated water. Likewise, the governmental goal to provide access to clean drinking water has been around for millennia, as evidenced by Roman aqueducts and public works projects, among other historical examples. This is distinguishable from climate change whose effects can extend far into the future and interact in complex and difficult to pinpoint ways.
While the hope of activists and the Special Rapporteur are certainly appreciated and well-founded, one must consider the potential impacts of the recent UNHRC resolution with a grain of salt. The climate crisis was first acknowledged as a scientific reality decades prior, yet the buildup of necessary political will to combat climate change since has been slow to say the least. Multiple international agreements from the Kyoto Protocol to the Paris Accords have failed as of yet to reach the full impact for which they were intended. Likewise, the United States, home to one of the world’s largest economies, has failed to pass any comprehensive climate legislation, and a currently pending budget plan to promote clean energy is being stonewalled and will likely be drastically curtailed, primarily thanks to the efforts of a single US senator from West Virginia.
Despite these limits, progress towards the protection of the right to a healthy environment is not meaningless. To say so would be overly pessimistic, and out of line with the success that has been seen as a result of international efforts, in combating various crises ranging from ozone depletion to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. As with all international efforts, activists and advocates must temper their expectations and continue to fight on for further progress. The passage of these UNHRC resolutions is a bold and worthwhile step in the right direction – the culmination of the work of many who have devoted a lifetime of their time and energy. Now, stakeholders must continue to pressure governments to act. As noted in the above example of the right to water in Mexico, international pressure is important and should not be discounted. Perhaps, global advocates can look to the successes of the past as they shape future advocacy. The gradual healing of the ozone layer is one such example. As pointed out by the New York Times Editorial Board, science, innovation, and global action have come together to work in the past. However, when effects of action are readily apparent on human lives, governments are more inclined to act. This can be seen in domestic responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, perhaps the most important means of driving conversation is by underscoring the human toll of climate change both present and future.
In sum, in order to turn the aspirations of the UNHRC into action, leading to practical effects, this initial step must be seen as the starting point for a broader conversation. Only then can these resolutions act as the catalyst for which they were intended, leading ultimately to fewer needless deaths annually and a healthier global environment.
[ad_2]
