NationStates Jolt Archive

[completely OOC for OP but IC responses will receive IC in return]

I really was hoping to avoid posting this so soon as it’s not finished, I’m sure that there are significant adaptations to be made but the Clean Air Act (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=540391) has sent me into a frightful panic as I’ve been away from the UN forum for quite some time so I thought it would be wise to see what kind of reception it gets in its present form.

The hope is that this remains strictly international as it applies only to cases where “who did what to whom” is clear, and a further hope is that it’s complimentary to Resolution #222 by preventing environmentally detrimental effects such as acidification of water and subsequent loss of biodiversity.

Any comments or recommendations are very well welcome. Thank you very much for time.
The United Nations,

Recognising the adverse effects air pollution has on the environment,

Determined to promote relations and cooperation in the field of environmental protection,

Believing that member states have the sovereign right to exploit their own resources pursuant to their own environmental policies,

Also believing that member states have an obligation to ensure that activities within their jurisdictions do not cause damage to the environment of other States,

Hereby:

1. Defines “Air Pollution” as the non-natural introduction, directly or indirectly, of substances or energy into the air resulting in deleterious effects of such a nature as to endanger health, harm living resources and ecosystems and material property and impair or interfere with amenities and other legitimate uses of the environment;

2. Defines “transboundary air pollution” as air pollution whose physical origin is situated within the area under the national jurisdiction of one State and has adverse effects in the area under the jurisdiction of another State;

3. Requires member nations to provide the UN Environmental Agency (UNEA) with meteorological, physico-chemical, and biological data relating to the effects of transboundary air pollution with a view to establishing a scientific basis for dose/effect relationships designed to protect the environment;

4. Mandates the creation and maintenance of monitoring stations in member nations. The collection of data shall be carried out under the respective national jurisdictions of member nations;

5. Charges the UNEA with the following:
a. Creating and subsequently maintaining a list of air pollutants for the international community,
b. Establishing a standardised procedure for monitoring air pollutants that allows for effective comparison of data,
c. Creating models utilising data collected from member nations in order to better understand the transmission of air pollutants and their transboundary fluxes,
d. Assessing alternative economic, social, and environmental measures for attaining the objective of reducing transboundary air pollution,
e. Providing education and training schemes related to the environmental consequences of air pollution,
f. Acting as a mediator upon request if a member nation believes another to be responsible for environmental damages within their jurisdiction;

6. States that nations found to be liable for damages by the UNEA shall either provide reparations equal to the resources required to counteract environmental damages within the aggrieved nation, or consult with the UNEA to establish an economically feasible timetable to reduce the emission of air pollutants;

7.Encourages nations to research and develop low-/non-waste technologies in order to avoid the need for such mediation;

8. Requires member nations to provide the UNEA with notification of major changes in national policies and industrial development that will likely cause significant changes in transboundary air pollution;

9. Urges member nations to create national, sub-regional, and regional strategies to combat and control air pollution beyond the confines of this resolution.

Co-authored by Lots of Ants

That seems reasonable.
Shouldn't the International Meteorological Organisation also be involved in handling the data?

Shouldn't the International Meteorological Organisation also be involved in handling the data?
My apologies, I searched for everything relating to pollution but didn’t consider anything that might increase the efficiency of data collection. I’ll re-write to involve cooperation with the IMO to prevent needless duplication.

Edit: I have re-considered my earlier comment. Given that Fris ruled that the IRCO couldn’t be used for the Medical Aid Convention based on the potential for its original charter to be subject to a repeal then would that affect this too? My concern is that if I make the UNEA dependent on receiving meteorological data from the IMO then should Resolution #148 be hypothetically repealed then the IMO will cease to exist so the UNEA will be incapable of making realistic models.

Would that assessment be correct or have I completely misunderstood the ruling?

The rule on committees specifically states that existing committees may be charged with new duties by subsequent resolutions. If the resolution which established the committee is repealed, it continues to exist to perform those duties.

We'd suggest adding something like: "Charges the International Meteorological Organization with cooperating, as appropriate, in the collection and analysis of data."

We very much support the intent of the proposal. We're concerned, though, about Article 6. Who is going to determine the extent of the damages and assign liability for them? Mediation does not equal adjudication. We'd be happier if that article was deleted and the resolution kept strictly to a focus on developing sound scientific data on transboundary pollution.

Lorelei M. Ahlmann
Ambassador-at-Large

We have to disagree with the Ausserland delegation; without some form of adjudicatory element, the proposal does nothing apart from mandate the spending of sizeable amount of money in producing data which, if past indications are anything to go by, this assembly will promptly ignore.

That said, we much prefer this proposal to the Carbon Trading exercise being discussed elsewhere, and congratulate the authors on taking a measured and careful approach.

(OOC: the obvious questions have to be asked: category and sub-category?)

(OOC: the obvious questions have to be asked: category and sub-category?)Environmental and All businesses would seem logical.

We very much support the intent of the proposal. We're concerned, though, about Article 6. Who is going to determine the extent of the damages and assign liability for them? Mediation does not equal adjudication. We'd be happier if that article was deleted and the resolution kept strictly to a focus on developing sound scientific data on transboundary pollution.
*A young woman with hair as bleach white as her robes stands and begins to speak*

We note your comments with interest and have achieved neural consensus. We are not willing to compromise on the measures recommended by Article 6 without significant additional information to justify how this would serve the greater interest but we shall have it re-drafted to ensure clarity of purpose.

We have observed with great dismay that Lower Beings in Ithania and other member nations are often incapable of correctly balancing their group’s interests against the suffering inflicted upon others. Instead, they default to selfishness and create unjustifiable unhappiness as a result. We cannot morally permit this to continue, in our assessment the neutrality of the United Nations bureaucracy can be safely utilised in order to protect more vulnerable nations from international egocentricity.

The only viable alternative we see is to require all nations to reduce their emissions in an economically practical manner determined via consultation with the UNEA. We consider this an unnecessary incursion into the domain of member nations and their respective group interests therefore wish to avoid this so that nations have the freedom to exploit resources as they so wish.

In any case, we consider a measure that protects nations from the pollution of others a complete necessity.

We'd suggest adding something like: "Charges the International Meteorological Organization with cooperating, as appropriate, in the collection and analysis of data."
Your recommendation is gratefully accepted; we appreciate the clarification and shall begin adapting the proposal to reduce inefficiency immediately.

We eagerly await further input so that we may re-asses the balance of overall happiness creation against the national happiness incursion. May the blessings of the Planners be upon you.

Embodiment Ganatra (http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s92/Ellevarna/Nationstates/EmbodimentGanatra.jpg),
The Council of Three.

(OOC: the obvious questions have to be asked: category and sub-category?)
I think Environmental and All Businesses would be okay, I wrote it with that in mind so hopefully it fits. I forgot to include that here.

Side note; I’m horrible with words. I thought mediation and adjudication were synonymous so I’ll fix that as soon as possible.

We have to disagree with the Ausserland delegation; without some form of adjudicatory element, the proposal does nothing apart from mandate the spending of sizeable amount of money in producing data which, if past indications are anything to go by, this assembly will promptly ignore.

That said, we much prefer this proposal to the Carbon Trading exercise being discussed elsewhere, and congratulate the authors on taking a measured and careful approach.

(OOC: the obvious questions have to be asked: category and sub-category?)

We don't have any strong objection to Article 6, although we suspect others might. If it's going to remain, though, there has to be something added clearly giving the UNEA the authority to assess damages and assign liability. As it stands, that's not mentioned among its functions.

Lorelei M. Ahlmann
Ambassador-at-Large

5. Charges the UNEA with the following:
a. Creating and subsequently maintaining a list of air pollutants for the international community,
c. Creating models utilising data collected from member nations in order to better understand the transmission of air pollutants and their transboundary fluxes, First we feel the term international is nor suitable as this is a universal issuse since many [B]member nations as well as non member nations are not on one world even realm... yet they all are effected in some way by polutions from others in their universe. Thus collecting it from member nations means you go outside or off one world into the universe.

As find that many nations here refuse to believe that nations exist outside some dream world (real world) thus look at things only from a close limit view of the real universe we exist in... and that the UN has to deal with not just one simple planet or realm. Until one starts thinking universal solutions they will not be able to solve those close to them that are effected by something beyond what they think exists.


OOC: This in simple terms indicates that folks are looking at problems in say the US, France, Canada, or England and trying to deal with them and forgetting Iran, Korea, Africa, and China exist. Thus instead of internatioal maybe universal is better term for NS... as it what has been said in the CLEAN AIR ACT proposal that has me concerned here.

This is environmental legislation that is truly international in scope, doesn't assume that we're on the brink of a horrific pollution based death (like so much other environmental legislation), and is workable in past tech nations, largely as it doesn't go into too much detail by leaving it in the hands of a comittee (i.e. if you had countered CO2 emmissions as being international due to the unproved - in NS - existance of global warming through the greenhouse effect, most past tech nations would be metaphorically rogered by a large spiky pole).

Plus, it doesn't concern us overly. Our situation means that pollution leaving Cobdenian airspace becomes automatically less pollutative (in one instance, a cloud of Sulphur Dioxide turned into a jelly bean shower). To paraphrase the now vanished Representative from Cluichstan: We got a friggin' time vortex...

His Excellency Sir Cyril G. M. R. C. O'M. A. DeD. von H. W. U.-G. B. S. M'B. V. MacLehose-Strangways-Jones III, KCRC, LOG
His Cobdenian Excellency's Permanent Representative to the United Nations

(OOC: Sorry for the delay and if the new additions are perceived as quick fixes to larger problems then feel free to be blunt.)

<snip> the UN has to deal with not just one simple planet or realm. <snip>
*the Embodiment raises her eyebrow slightly*

We are a members of such a society; Ithania is the name of our home planet thus we believe that we are fully capable of appreciating the existence of other solar systems and dimensions. We utilised the term “international” because it is not affected by location, it refers to any issues that is of importance to more than one state. We shall be retaining it but rest assured that your recommendation was considered and appreciated.

<snippy> This is environmental legislation that is truly international in scope, doesn't assume that we're on the brink of a horrific pollution based death (like so much other environmental legislation). <snippy>

In our brief time amongst the Lower Beings here we have noted erratic behaviour and extreme proposals so we are genuinely confused by this statement. Does the ambassador consider a lack of such hysteria to be positive or negative?

On to relevant matters; we wish to progress with this proposal for the sake of the greater good therefore we submit a reviewed draft for your assessment, we would greatly appreciate continued cooperation in this matter and your alternative view points are valued.

May the blessings of The Planners be upon you.

Embodiment Ganatra (http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s92/Ellevarna/Nationstates/EmbodimentGanatra.jpg),
The Council of Three.

The United Nations,

Recognising the adverse effects air pollution has on the environment,

Determined to promote relations and cooperation in the field of environmental protection,

Believing that member states have the sovereign right to exploit their own resources pursuant to their own environmental policies,

Also believing that member states have an obligation to ensure that activities within their jurisdictions do not cause damage to the environment of other States,

Hereby:

1. Defines “Air Pollution” as the non-natural introduction, directly or indirectly, of substances or energy into the air resulting in deleterious effects of such a nature as to endanger health, harm living resources and ecosystems and material property and impair or interfere with amenities and other legitimate uses of the environment;

2. Defines “transboundary air pollution” as air pollution whose physical origin is situated within the area under the national jurisdiction of one State and has adverse effects in the area under the jurisdiction of another State;

3. Requires member nations to provide the UN Environmental Agency (UNEA) with meteorological, physico-chemical, and biological data relating to the effects of transboundary air pollution with a view to establishing a scientific basis for dose/effect relationships designed to protect the environment;

4. Mandates the creation and maintenance of monitoring stations in member nations. The collection of data shall be carried out under the respective national jurisdictions of member nations;

5. Tasks the International Meteorological Organisation with cooperating, as appropriate, in the collection and analysis of data to prevent unnecessary bureaucratic duplication;

6. Charges the UNEA with the following:
a. Creating and subsequently maintaining a list of air pollutants for international use,
b. Establishing a standardised procedure for monitoring air pollutants that allows for effective comparison of data,
c. Creating models utilising data collected from member nations in order to better understand the transmission of air pollutants and their transboundary fluxes,
d. Assessing alternative economic, social, and environmental measures for attaining the objective of reducing transboundary air pollution,
e. Providing education and training schemes related to the environmental consequences of air pollution,
f. Acting as independent adjudication upon request if a member nation believes another to be responsible for environmental damages within their jurisdiction;
g. Objectively assessing whether there is quantifiable environmental damage and whether a causal link between the accused nation(s) and any damage can be established based on collected data;
h. Assigning liability for damages in cases where a causal link is established.

7. States that nations found to be liable for damages by the UNEA shall either provide reparations equal to the resources required to remediate and prevent environmental damages within the aggrieved nation, or consult with the UNEA to establish an economically feasible timetable to reduce the emission of air pollutants;

8. Encourages nations to research and develop low-/non-waste technologies, in addition to effective preventative measures, to avoid the need for such adjudication;

9. Requires member nations to provide the UNEA with notification of major changes in national policies and industrial development that will likely cause significant changes in transboundary air pollution;

10. Urges member nations to create national, sub-regional, and regional strategies to combat and control air pollution beyond the confines of this resolution.

Co-authored by Lots of Ants

(In our brief time amongst the Lower Beings here we have noted erratic behaviour and extreme proposals so we are genuinely confused by this statement. Does the ambassador consider a lack of such hysteria to be positive or negative?

Positive - there's nothing worse then a proposal that says "stop carz or teh world will be deated"

OOC: Should I start a debate on British English vs. American English so this stays alive? Oh and yes indeedy, this is a shameless little bump. Please just say if you think I’m wasting my time but if no problems are found then it’ll be submitted soon.

This is MUCH better than the Clean Air Act which (rightfully) got you into a frenzy.

Okey dokey, please don’t pin this please lovingly modlings if this manages to get into the queue *crosses fingers*. I’d like to make a clean start in a separate topic with an IC FAQ introduction if this gets enough approvals.

Here ya go (www.nationstates.net/page=UN_proposal1/match=air). Good luck. [Er, 96 approvals already?!? :eek:]

Oh, and opposed. But that's to be expected.

*mumbles profanities under her breath*

I’ve been sat here waiting for one more darn approval for about an hour so I can start the new In Queue topic but it has simply refused to materialise. I’m afraid I need sleep now so apologies if it does manage to get into the queue before update because it might be a few hours before I make a new topic (unless somebody does it for me, it would be greatly appreciated).

Thank you to everybody that has given their support in one way or another getting to this important stage, it has made my first attempt a great deal of fun and low on stress so far.

If only you'd waited that extra 10 minutes. ;)

It's in queue now, and given the author's desire to start a new topic, this one should probably be locked.

There are several things we like about this new piece of UN legislation and yet several we don't. It starts out promoting the reduction of air pollution and calls on member nations to provide data and equipment and send findings to the UNEA.

However, it doesn't specify how the member nations are to afford it all, how the data is being used, what else the members of UNEA might do with the data, nor how these monitoring stations are to be used.

The UNEA is gathering a lot of biological and chemical data, that if placed in the wrong hands can spell disaster for the member nations it is trying to help. How is the UNEA safeguarding the data it is collecting. Who is doing the background checks on the members of the UNEA and what protections are the members of the UNEA being afforded as they perform this "service" for our global community?

Monitoring stations with no specified purpose, just an assumed one, is a major red flag when it comes to protection from invasion of privacy. Stations will be created in every member nation, with no idea who is running them, what data they are gathering, since this legislation doesn't specify it, nor where that information is going.

Should member nations be found liable for damages by the UNEA, then reparations are to be made. In what amount are these reparations going to be decided and based on what criteria? "Equal to the resources required to remediate and prevent environmental damages within the aggrieved nation, or consult with the UNEA to establish an economically feasible timetable to reduce the emission of air pollutants." Hmm, pay reparations or reduce emissions over time? (Which one would you pick?) If you were to pay reparations and can't afford the figures proposed by the nation with the complaint, your economy could go bankrupt. If your society is mostly industrial and that industry is the only source of income for your nation, reducing emissions might be impossible and unaffordable.

Lastly, the UNEA is collecting more information that poses a security risk to many member nations with regard to "notification of major changes in national policies and industrial development that will likely cause significant changes in transboundary air pollution" If your nation has a breakthrough in industrial development, perhaps trade military secrets or biochemical secrets that would benefit your nation, but harm many nations if shared openly with the UNEA, is your nation just going to hand that information over?

There are many holes in this legislation that are "polluting" our common sense that need to be plugged up before we agree to go through with it.

For these reasons we can not support this resolution at this time and are voting against it.

HawaiianFreedom - Delegate to the HawaiianFreedom nation