Download (PDF, 6.71MB) - TEEB

FRAMEWORK AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR THE POLICY RESPONSE
Most people would agree that other species have a
right to co-exist with us on Earth and that it is important
to maintain biodiversity in a state able to provide
benefits to humans.
The above statement raises ethical issues and
practical questions of responsibility for policy
makers. Should a landowner have to stop using part
of his land to help a threatened species? Plant trees
to protect freshwater resources? Be compensated for
losses or reduced gains as a result of new biodiversity
policies? Should people have to leave land to which
they do not hold formally registered rights, even if they
have lived there for generations? When a pharmaceutical
company discovers an important drug derived
from a plant species in a tropical rainforest, who will
reap the benefits? The company? The country of origin?
The forest people?
At least three arguments support consideration of
property rights and distributional impacts as an
integral part of policy development:
• reasons of equity: fairness in addressing changes
of rights between individuals, groups, communities
and even generations is an important policy goal in
most countries;
• taking distributional issues into account makes it
much more feasible to achieve other goals when
addressing biodiversity loss, particularly related to
poverty alleviation and the Millennium Development
Goals (see Table 2.2 above);
Copyright by Scott Willis (USA).
• there are almost always winners and losers from
policy change and in most cases, loser groups will
oppose the policy measures. If distributional
aspects are considered when designing policies,
the chances of successful implementation can be
improved.
Rights to use, manage or benefit from natural resources
can take many forms (see Box 2.9).
Box 2.9: How do ‘property rights’ apply to
biodiversity and ecosystem services?
‘Property rights’ is a generic term covering a bundle
of different rights over a resource (P). Not all of these
are necessarily held by the same person:
• The Right to Use: A has a right to use P;
• The Right to Manage: A has a right to manage
P and may decide how and by whom P shall be
used;
• The Right to the Income: A has a right to the
income from P i.e. may use and enjoy the fruits,
rents, profits, etc. derived from P;
• The Right of Exclusion: others may use P if
and only if A consents:
· If A consents, it is prima facie not wrong for
others to use P;
· If A does not consent, it is prima facie wrong
for others to use P.
• The Right to Transfer: A may temporarily or
permanently transfer user rights to specific
other persons by consent.
• The Right to Compensation: If B damages or
uses P without A’s consent, then A typically has
a right to receive compensation from B.
In addition, two rules are considered relevant to
the concept of property rights:
• Punishment Rules: If B interferes with A’s use of
P or uses P without A’s consent, then B may be
punished in an appropriate way;
• Liability Rule: If use of P causes damage to the
person or property of B, then A (as P’s owner)
may be held responsible and face a claim for
damages.
Source: Birner 1999: 44
TEEB foR NATIoNAL AND INTERNATIoNAL PoLICy MAKERS - ChAPTER 2: PAGE 16