Russian and Canadian Legal Frameworks on the Protection of the Arctic Biodiversity from Invasive ...

101 Pages·2017·1.06 MB·English

by  Maksim Lavrik

Russian and Canadian Legal Frameworks on the Protection of
the Arctic Biodiversity from Invasive Alien Species

University of Eastern Finland
Law School
Master’s Thesis
28 April 2018
Writer: Maksim Lavrik, 285280
Supervisor: Yulia Yamineva
II

Abstract
UNIVERSITY OF EASTERN FINLAND
Faculty Unit
Social Sciences and Business Studies Law School
Author
Maksim Lavrik
Name of the Thesis
Russian and Canadian Legal Frameworks on the Protection of the Arctic Biodiversity from
Invasive Alien Species
Major Description Date Pages
Environmental and Climate Master’s thesis 28 April 85
Change Law 2018
Abstract
The effects of climate change are becoming critical as rising temperatures threaten the resilience of vulnerable communities and the
environment. No more can this be seen than in the case of the Arctic. Although climate change can open new opportunities for economic
development, it also risks making ecosystems and communities more vulnerable. As temperatures continue to rise, ecosystems are
beginning to change and there is a prediction of rise in the amount of invasive alien species (IAS) entering the Arctic. Such invasive
migrations pose biodiversity threats and interferences with traditional community activities. Thus, this master’s thesis compares the
legislation of both Russia and Canada in order to assess the adequacy of biodiversity protection in the Arctic from IAS.
Article 8 (h) of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), to which both Canada and Russia are parties, acts as an umbrella norm
for international biodiversity commitments against IAS, while other international instruments, both hard law and soft law, general and
Arctic-specific contain provisions relevant to the issue. Biodiversity protection from IAS enhances the resilience of ecosystems, which
is a non-climate mean for the climate change adaptation of ecosystems.
This master’s thesis seeks to highlight that Russia and Canada do not yet have comprehensive legal frameworks for biodiversity
protection from IAS either in their general or in their Arctic-specific legislation. Nevertheless, the IAS problem is, to some extent,
framed within the legislation of each country. These countries use a diverse range of legal and policy documents towards the issue,
combining different instruments including sectoral regulation (aquatic, quarantine, border control, and other sectors), establishing of
lists of IAS, and others. Both countries have the capacity to use sources of general regulation to protect the Arctic’s biodiversity from
threats of IAS. Some sub-national entities of comparing countries established their own unique regulation on IAS which could be used
as a model for regulation in Arctic regions.
The constitutional arrangements are crucial, both for implementation of international commitments of the countries, and establishing
their legal frameworks. However, establishing federal environmental policy in Canada has proven problematic given each province has
such strong legislative powers. For example, provinces like Ontario have comprehensive IAS law with concrete mechanisms and strict
sanctions, while other Canadian provinces such as Quebec provide an example of interjurisdictional regulation towards the IAS problem
in cooperation with the states in the United States like Vermont and New York. In Russia, the federal level is authorized to establish
federal environmental policy, while the environmental law is in a joint jurisdiction of the federation and the regions (subjects). Current
federal law and policy documents in Russia concern IAS problem. Subjects of the Russian Federation launch their own regulation, on
the one hand, implementing federal policy and, one the other hand, reflecting regional specificity. Thus, the Sakhalin Region concerns
the problem of ballast water. Another Russian subject – the Ulyanovsk Region uses incentives instead of command and control methods
towards the problem. According to the regulation in the region, an absence of IAS on the territory of a settlement is a requirement for
participation in the regional competition for the best settlement.
This thesis seeks to offer several recommendations for the future development of legal and policy frameworks on IAS.
Key words
Biodiversity law, climate change law, adaptation to climate change, invasive alien species, Arctic, Russia, Canada
III

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract ..................................................................................................................................II
TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................... III
REFERENCES .................................................................................................................... VI
ABBREVIATIONS .......................................................................................................... XIV
FIGURES AND TABLES ................................................................................................ XVI
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................... 1
1.1 Problem statement .................................................................................................. 1
1.1.1 Problem overview ...................................................................................... 1
1.1.2 Importance of the problem......................................................................... 2
1.1.3 The previous studies by others and the possible contribution of the
master’s thesis to the existing knowledge .......................................................... 2
1.2 Research objective and research questions ............................................................ 3
1.2.1 Planned achievement ................................................................................. 3
1.2.2 Main research question .............................................................................. 3
1.2.3 Sub-research questions .............................................................................. 3
1.3 Methods .................................................................................................................. 3
CHAPTER 2. THE SCIENCE AND REGULATION OF BIODIVERSITY PROTECTION
FROM INVASIVE ALIEN SPECIES................................................................................... 5
2.1 The science on biodiversity protection from invasive alien species ...................... 5
2.2 Regulation of biodiversity protection from invasive alien species ........................ 8
2.2.1 International regulation of biodiversity protection from invasive alien
species ................................................................................................................. 8
2.2.2 Regional and national approaches to regulation of biodiversity protection
from invasive alien species ............................................................................... 13
2.2.3 Climate change adaptation and its nexus with the regulation of
biodiversity protection from invasive alien species.......................................... 15
IV

2.2.4 Regulation of invasive alien species in the Arctic ................................... 19
2.3 Conclusion............................................................................................................ 22
CHAPTER 3. A LEGAL FRAMEWORK ON INVASIVE ALIEN SPECIES IN CANADA
............................................................................................................................................. 23
3.1 General outline ..................................................................................................... 23
3.2 Canadian legislation on invasive alien species .................................................... 26
3.2.1 Federal legislation.................................................................................... 26
3.2.2 Legislation of provinces .......................................................................... 29
3.3 Arctic-specific Canadian legislation relevant to the protection of Arctic
ecosystems from invasive alien species ..................................................................... 32
3.4 Conclusion............................................................................................................ 35
CHAPTER 4. A LEGAL FRAMEWORK ON INVASIVE ALIEN SPECIES IN RUSSIA
............................................................................................................................................. 37
4.1 General outline ..................................................................................................... 37
4.2 Russian legislation on invasive alien species ....................................................... 40
4.2.1 Federal legislation.................................................................................... 40
4.2.2 Legislation of the subjects of the Russian Federation ............................. 46
4.3 Arctic-specific Russian legislation relevant to the protection of Arctic ecosystems
from invasive alien species ........................................................................................ 50
4.4 Conclusions .......................................................................................................... 54
CHAPTER 5. COMPARISON OF RUSSIAN AND CANADIAN LEGAL
FRAMEWORKS ON INVASIVE ALIEN SPECIES ......................................................... 57
5.1 General remarks on comparative law analysis ..................................................... 57
5.2 General remarks on comparative environmental law........................................... 61
5.3 Comparison of federal (national) legal frameworks on invasive alien species in
Russia and Canada ..................................................................................................... 63
5.4 Comparison of regional (sub-national) legal frameworks on invasive alien species
in Russia and Canada ................................................................................................. 66
V

5.5 Comparison of the Arctic-specific legislation relevant to the protection of
ecosystems from invasive alien species in Russia and Canada.................................. 68
5.6 Conclusion............................................................................................................ 72
CHAPTER 6. ASSESSMENT OF ADEQUACY OF EXISTING LEGAL FRAMEWORKS,
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON THE COMPARISON ..... 74
6.1 Assessment of adequacy of existing legal frameworks and conclusions ............. 74
6.2 Recommendations based on the comparison ....................................................... 82
VI

REFERENCES
LITERATURE
Adelman, David. E. – Engel, Kirsten H.: Adaptive Federalism: The Case Against
Reallocating Environmental Regulatory Authority. 92 Minnesota Law Review. 2007-
2008, p. 1796-1850.
Van Asselt, Harro: Editorial. 24 (3) Review of European, Comparative and International
Environmental Law. 2015, p. 251-253.
Bodansky, Daniel: The Art and Craft of International Environmental Law. Cambridge,
Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2010.
Borgström, Suvi: Assessing the Capacity of Nature Conservation Law to Help Biodiversity
Adapt to Climate Change: The Case of Finland. 24 (1) Review of European,
Comparative and International Environmental Law 2015, p. 69-82.
Bunikowski, Dawid (eds.): Philosophy of the Law in the Arctic. Rovaniemi. University of
the Arctic, the Arctic Law Thematic Network, the Sub-group of Philosophy of Law in
the Arctic, 2016.
Byers, Michael – Baker, James: International Law and the Arctic. Cambridge University
Press, 2013.
Cryer, Robert – Hervey, Tamara – Sokhi-Bulley, Bal – Bohm, Alexandra: Research
Methodologies in EU and International Law. Oxford and Portland, Oregon: Hart
Publishing, 2011.
Gladun, Elena: Environmental Protection of the Arctic Region: Effective Mechanisms of
Legal Regulation. 3 (1) Russian Law Journal 2015, p. 92-109.
Glenn, Patrick H.: Comparative Legal Families and Comparative Legal Traditions. In book:
Reimann, Mathias – Zimmermann, Reinhard (eds.): The Oxford Handbook of
Comparative Law. Oxford University Press, 2006, p. 422-441.
Glicksman, Robert L.: From Cooperative to Inoperative Federalism: The Perverse Mutation
of Environmental Law and Policy. 41 Wake Forest Law Review. 2006, p. 719-803.
Graziadei, Michele: Comparative Law as the Study of Transplants and Receptions. In book:
Reimann, Mathias – Zimmermann, Reinhard (eds.): The Oxford Handbook of
Comparative Law. Oxford University Press, 2006, p. 442-477.
Dannemann, Gerhard: Comparative Law: Study of Similarities or Differences? In book:
Reimann, Mathias – Zimmermann, Reinhard (eds.): The Oxford Handbook of
Comparative Law. Oxford University Press, 2006, p. 384-421.
VII

Hansen, Harald Sakarias Brøvig: Three major challenges in managing non-native sedentary
Barents Sea snow crab (Chionoecetes opilio). 71 Marine Policy 2016, p. 38-43.
Hellmann, Jessica J. – Byers, James E. – Bierwagen, Britta G. – Dukes, Jeffrey S.: Five
Potential Consequences of Climate Change for Invasive Species. 22 (3) Conservation
Biology 2008, p. 534-543.
Huque, Ahmed Shafiquil – Watton, Nathan: Federalism and the Implementation of
Environmental Policy: Changing Trends in Canada and the United States. 10 (1) Public
Organization Review. 2010, p. 71-88.
Humrich, Christoph: Coping with Institutional Challenges for Arctic Environmental
Governance. In book: Keil, Katherin – Knecht, Sebastian (eds.): Governing Arctic
Change. Global Perspectives. Palgrave Macmillan. 2017, p. 81-99.
Hønneland, Geir – Jørgensen, Anne-Kristin: Implementing International Environmental
Agreements in Russia. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press. 2003.
Jansen, Nils: Comparative Law and Comparative Knowledge. In book: Reimann, Mathias –
Zimmermann, Reinhard (eds.): The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Law. Oxford
University Press, 2006, p. 306-337.
Johansson, Mattias L. – Chaganti, Subba Rao – Simard, Nathalie – Howland, Kimberly –
Winkler, Gesche – Rochon, André – Laget, Frederic – Tremblay, Pascal – Heath,
Daniel D. – Maclsaac, Hugh J.: Attenuation and modification of the ballast water
microbial community during voyages into the Canadian Arctic. 23 (5) Diversity and
Distributions. 2017, p. 567-576.
Kaswan, Alice: Cooperative federalism and adaptation. In book: Robbins, Kalyani (ed.): The
Law and Policy of Environmental Federalism. A Comparative Analysis. Cheltenham,
UK. Northampton, MA, USA. Edward Elgar Publishing, 2015, p. 188-209.
Koivurova, Timo: Arctic Resources: Exploitation of Natural Resources in the Arctic from
the Perspective of International Law. In book: Morgera, Elisa – Kulovesi, Kati (eds).:
Research Handbook on International Law and Natural Resources. Edward Elgar, 2016.
Köck, Wolfgang: The EU regulation on invasive alien species: The development of law
regarding invasive alien species in Germany and in the EU. 12 (2) Journal of European
Environmental & Planning Law. 2015, p. 156-172.
Lewis, Kristin C. – Porter Read D.: Global approaches to addressing biofuel-related invasive
species risks and incorporation into U.S. laws and policies. 84 (2) Ecological
Monographs. 2014, p. 171-201.
VIII

Manulak, Michael W.: Multilateral solutions to bilateral problems: The 1972 Stockholm
conference and Canadian foreign environmental policy. 70 (1) International Journal
2015, p. 4-22.
Mehling, Michael: The Comparative Law of Climate Change. 24 (3) Review of European,
Comparative and International Environmental Law. 2015, p. 341-352.
Modley, Margaret D.: Aquatic invasive species rapid response planning partnerships in the
Lake Champlain basin: Bridging international, political, social, and economical gaps.
34 (4. Spec. Iss.) Water SA. 2008, p. 476-480.
Morgera, Elisa:
- Global Environmental Law and Comparative Legal Methods. 24 (3) Review of
European, Comparative and International Environmental Law. 2015, p. 254-263.
- No Need to Reinvent the Wheel for Human Rights-Based Approach to Tackling
Climate Change: The Contribution of International Biodiversity Law. In a book:
Hollo, Erkki, J. – Kulovesi, Kati – Mehling, Michael (eds.): Climate Change and the
Law. Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice, vol 21. Springer,
Dordrecht 2013, p. 359-390.
Olonova, M.V. – Zhang, Y.: Alien Invasive Species in Siberia. 5 (4) Journal of Arid Land.
2013, p. 428-433.
Preston, Brian J.: The adequacy of the law in achieving climate change justice – some
preliminary comments. 34 (1) Journal of Energy & Natural Resources Law 2016, p.
45-50.
Ralf, Michaels: The Functional Method of Comparative Law. In book: Reimann, Mathias –
Zimmermann, Reinhard (eds.): The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Law. Oxford
University Press, 2006, p. 340-383.
Redgwell, Catherine: National Implementation. In book: Bodansky, Daniel – Brunnée, Jutta
– Hey, Ellen: The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law 2008, p.
923-946.
Riley, Sophie: Invasive Alien Species and the Protection of Biodiversity: The Role of
Quarantine Laws in Resolving Inadequacies in the International Legal Regime. 17 (3)
Journal of Environmental Law. 2005, p. 323-359.
Smith, Andrea L. – Bazely, Dawn R. – Yan, Norman: Are legislative frameworks in Canada
and Ontario up to the task of addressing invasive alien species? 16 (7) Biological
Invasions. 2014, p. 1325-1344.
IX

Smith, Andrea L. - Hewitt, Nina - Klenk, Nicole - Bazely, Dawn R. - Yan, Norman - Wood,
Stepan - Henriques, Irene - MacLellan, James I. - Lipsig-Mummé, Carla: Effects of
climate change on the distribution of invasive alien species in Canada: a knowledge
synthesis of range change projections in a warming world. 20 Environmental Reviews,
2012, p. 1-16.
Stokke, Olav Schram: Environmental Security in the Arctic: The case for multilevel
governance. 66 (4) International Journal. 2011, p. 835-848.
Trouwborst, Arie:
- Bird Conservation and Climate Change in the Marine Arctic and Antarctic: Classic
and Novel International Law Challenges Converging in the Polar Regions. 16 (1)
Journal of International Wildlife Law & Policy. 2013, p. 1-40.
- Climate change adaptation and biodiversity law. In book: Verschuuren, Jonathan
(ed.): Research Handbook on Climate Change Adaptation Law. Edward Elgar.
Cheltenham, UK. Northampton, MA, USA. 2013, p. 298-324.
- International Nature Conservation Law and the Adaptation of Biodiversity to
Climate Change: a Mismatch? 21 (3) Journal of Environmental Law 2009, p. 419-
442.
Vogenauer, Stefan: Sources of Law and Legal Method in Comparative Law. In book:
Reimann, Mathias – Zimmermann, Reinhard (eds.): The Oxford Handbook of
Comparative Law. Oxford University Press, 2006, p. 870-899.
Yamineva, Yulia – Kulovesi, Kati: Keeping the Arctic White: The Legal and Governance
Landscape for Reducing Short-Lived Climate Pollutants in the Arctic Region.
Transnational Environmental Law 2018, p. 1-27.
Zysk, Katarzyna: Russia turns north, again: interests, policies and the search for coherence.
In book: Jensen, Leif Christian – Hønneland, Geir (eds.): Handbook of the Politics of
the Arctic. Cheltenham, UK. Northampton, MA, USA. Edward Elgar Publishing.
2015, p. 437-461.
Абрамова Л.А.: Экспансия чужеродных видов растений на Южном Урале (Республика
Башкортостан): Анализ причин и экологических угроз. 5 Экология 2012, с. 324-
330. (Abramova, L.A.: Expansion of alien plants at the Southern Urals (Republic of
Bashkortostan): An analysis of reasons and ecological threats).
Корзун, А.С. – Кассал Б.Ю.: Распределение чужеродных видов рыб в водоемах
Омской области. 4 Российский Журнал Биологических Инвазий 2012, с. 57-65.
X

(Korzun, A.S. – Kassal, B.Y.: The distribution of invasive fish in basins of Omsk
Region).
Корзун, Владимир: Арктика: горячая пора. 4 (144) Прямые инвестиции 2014, с. 38-43.
(Korzun, Vladimir: Arctic: the Hot Season).
Стародубцева Е.А. – Морозова О.В. – Григорьевская А.Я.: Материалы к «Черной
книге Воронежской области». 2 Российский журнал Биологических Инвазий
2014, с. 133-149. (Starodubtseva, E.A. – Morozova O.V. – Grigorjevskaya, A.Ja.:
Materials to the Black book of Voronezh Region).
Хлуденева Н.И.: Перспективы развития правовой охраны арктических экосистем. 11
Журнал российского права 2015, с. 114-122. (Khludeneva, N.I.: Development
prospects of Arctic Ecosystems Legal Protection).
Щука Т.А. – Щука С.А.: Динамика количественных характеристик чужеродных видов
зоопланктона в Юго-Восточной части Балтийского моря в июле 2003-2015 гг. в
связи с термохалинными условиями. XXVII (1) ПЭММЭ 2016, с. 86-108
(Shchuka, T.A. – Shchuka, S.A.: The dynamics of quantitative characteristics of alien
species of zooplankton in the South-Eastern part of the Baltic Sea in July of the years
2003-2015 in connection with the thermohaline conditions).

OFFICIAL SOURCES
United Nations Documents
CBD Decisions
CBD COP 13 Decision XIII/4 “Biodiversity and climate change” (10 December 2016)
CBD/COP/DEC/XIII/4.
CBD COP 12 Decision XII/16 “Invasive alien species: management of risks associated with
introduction of alien species as pets, aquarium and terrarium, and as live bait, and live
food, and related issues” (17 October 2014) UNEP/CBD/COP/DEC/XII/16.
CBD COP 10 Decision X/2 “Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 and the Aichi
Biodiversity Targets” (29 October 2010) UNEP/CBD/COP/DEC/X/2 (the Aichi
Biodiversity Targets).
CBD COP 10 Decision X/33 “Biodiversity and climate change” (29 October 2010)
UNEP/CBD/DEC/X/33.
CBD COP 6 Decision VI/23 “Alien Species that threaten ecosystems, habitats or species”
UNEP/CBD/COP/DEC/VI/23