Between Stockholm and Rio
Chapter Thirty-Two
Syllabus topic 2, "Development"
Pages 127 to 130 of 595
In one line
Between 1972 and 1992 the environment moved from being a pollution problem to being a development problem, and three documents and two disasters did most of the moving.
In the wording a student can write in an exam: the period between the Stockholm and Rio Conferences saw the World Conservation Strategy 1980, the World Charter for Nature 1982, the Brundtland Report 1987, the Vienna Convention 1985 with the Montreal Protocol 1987, and two industrial catastrophes, at Bhopal in 1984 and Chernobyl in 1986. Together they produced the phrase sustainable development, the first successful global environmental treaty regime, and in India the Environment (Protection) Act 1986.
The documents
The World Conservation Strategy, 1980. Prepared by the International Union for Conservation of Nature with the United Nations Environment Programme and the World Wide Fund for Nature. It is the document usually credited with first putting the words sustainable and development together in a policy text, and it argued that conservation and development are not opposed because conservation is what keeps development possible. Its three objectives were the maintenance of essential ecological processes and life-support systems, the preservation of genetic diversity, and the sustainable utilisation of species and ecosystems.
The World Charter for Nature, 1982. A General Assembly resolution, adopted with one State voting against. Its significance for this paper is that it is the most ecocentric instrument the General Assembly has adopted: it proclaims that every form of life is unique and warrants respect regardless of its worth to man, which is the position discussed in the chapter on ecocentrism, stated at the level of international law.
The Brundtland Report, 1987. Our Common Future, the report of the World Commission on Environment and Development, transmitted to the General Assembly as A/42/427. It is treated in the next chapter because its definition is the centre of this whole topic.
The treaties
The Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer 1985 and the Montreal Protocol 1987. Worth naming for one reason: they are the clearest case of the precautionary approach working before Rio named it. The Convention was agreed when the science of ozone depletion was still contested, the Protocol set binding reductions, and the regime was subsequently strengthened as the evidence firmed up. It is also the international regime most often described as successful, and it is differentiated: developing countries were given a grace period and a fund.
And what did not happen. No general treaty on liability for transboundary environmental damage, which Stockholm Principle 22 had called for. The gap noted in the previous chapter opened in this period and has not closed.
The disasters
Bhopal, December 1984. The release of methyl isocyanate from a pesticide plant, and the worst industrial accident on record. Its Indian legal consequences run through this whole book: the absolute liability rule of December 1986, the Bhopal Gas Leak Disaster (Processing of Claims) Act 1985 and its constitutional challenge, the Environment (Protection) Act 1986, and the Public Liability Insurance Act 1991.
Between Stockholm and Rio
Chernobyl, April 1986. A reactor accident whose contamination crossed national borders across Europe. Its significance here is that it demonstrated Stockholm Principle 21 in the most concrete way available: activities within the jurisdiction of one State causing damage to the environment of others, with no adequate legal mechanism for compensation.
Together they changed the subject. Before 1984 the international environmental agenda was chiefly about chronic pollution and about conservation. After 1984 and 1986 it was also about catastrophic industrial risk, and both the Indian statute book and the international agenda reflect that.
What changed in the way the problem was framed
Three shifts, and naming them is what makes this a chapter rather than a list.
From pollution to development. In 1972 the environment was a problem caused by industry. By 1987 it was a problem about the pattern of development itself, which is what the Brundtland framing does.
From national to global. The problems that came to prominence in this period, ozone depletion and then climate change, could not be addressed by any State alone. The Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Convention on Biological Diversity, both opened for signature at Rio, were negotiated during this period.
From protection to integration. Stockholm Principle 13 had asked for integrated planning. By 1992 that had become the environmental impact assessment as a legal requirement, and the Rio Declaration would state it as Principle 4: environmental protection shall constitute an integral part of the development process and cannot be considered in isolation from it.
Worked example
MU's 2019 paper asks about India's conservation strategy "from Stockholm to Rio and after". The middle of that phrase is this chapter.
What a candidate should be able to say about the Indian side of these two decades: the Forest (Conservation) Act 1980, which stopped diversion of forest land without central approval; the Air Act 1981; the Ministry in 1985; the Environment (Protection) Act 1986 as the direct legislative response to Bhopal; the National Forest Policy 1988, which reversed the object of forest policy from revenue to ecological balance; and the beginning of the judicial phase with the Dehradun quarrying case in 1985 and the absolute liability rule in 1986.
That is a period with a shape: two international documents, one catastrophe, and an Indian legislative and judicial response to both.
What this period did NOT produce
No binding general environmental obligation. The Charter for Nature is a resolution and the Brundtland Report is a report.
Between Stockholm and Rio
No liability regime. Stockholm Principle 22's undertaking went unfulfilled, which is why Bhopal was litigated under Indian law and under a special statute rather than under any international mechanism.
No agreement on population. The population conferences of this period, and the question of whether population growth was the driver of environmental damage, remained as contested as they had been at Stockholm.
Distinctions that carry marks
| Year | Instrument or event | Its contribution |
|---|---|---|
| 1980 | World Conservation Strategy | First policy text to join sustainable and development; conservation as what keeps development possible |
| 1982 | World Charter for Nature | The most ecocentric General Assembly instrument: every form of life warrants respect regardless of its worth to man |
| 1984 | Bhopal | Absolute liability, the 1985 claims Act, the 1986 Act, the 1991 insurance Act |
| 1985 and 1987 | Vienna Convention and Montreal Protocol | Precaution working before it was named; a differentiated and successful regime |
| 1986 | Chernobyl | Stockholm Principle 21 demonstrated, with no mechanism to answer it |
| 1987 | Brundtland Report | The definition of sustainable development |
Quick revision
- World Conservation Strategy 1980: three objectives, being essential ecological processes and life-support systems, genetic diversity, and sustainable utilisation of species and ecosystems.
- World Charter for Nature 1982: every form of life is unique and warrants respect regardless of its worth to man. The most ecocentric instrument the General Assembly has adopted.
- Vienna 1985 and Montreal 1987: precaution in practice before Rio named it, and a differentiated regime with a grace period and a fund for developing countries.
- Bhopal 1984 and Chernobyl 1986 added catastrophic industrial risk to an agenda that had been about chronic pollution.
- Brundtland 1987 supplied the definition.
- Three shifts: pollution to development, national to global, and protection to integration.
Test yourself
1. Which document first joined the words sustainable and development, and what did it argue?
The World Conservation Strategy of 1980, prepared by the International Union for Conservation of Nature with the United Nations Environment Programme and the World Wide Fund for Nature. It argued that conservation and development are not opposed, because conservation is what keeps development possible, and it set three objectives: maintaining essential ecological processes and life-support systems, preserving genetic diversity, and the sustainable utilisation of species and ecosystems.
2. Why is the World Charter for Nature relevant to the ecocentric argument?
Because it proclaims that every form of life is unique and warrants respect regardless of its worth to man. That is an ecocentric proposition adopted by the General Assembly, and it is the international counterpart of the compassion clause in Article 51A(g).
3. Why are the ozone treaties cited in a discussion of the precautionary principle?
Between Stockholm and Rio
Because the Vienna Convention was agreed in 1985 while the science of ozone depletion was still contested and the Montreal Protocol set binding reductions in 1987, with the regime strengthened as the evidence firmed up. That is the precautionary approach operating five years before Rio Principle 15 stated it.
4. What did Bhopal produce in Indian law?
The absolute liability rule laid down in December 1986; the Bhopal Gas Leak Disaster (Processing of Claims) Act 1985 and the constitutional challenge to it; the Environment (Protection) Act 1986 as an umbrella statute; and the Public Liability Insurance Act 1991 creating a no-fault remedy.
The rest of this subject
These notes are cut from the University's printed syllabus. Open the syllabus itself, or the past papers, for the same subject.