wise use of mires and peatlands - Peatland Ecology Research Group

138 FRAMEWORK FOR WISE USEcircumstances in which codes of conductmight be drawn up - for example governingthe afteruse of cutaway peatland. An exampleof an existing document which could be usedas a code of conduct in particularcircumstances would be the list of actionsappended to the Penang Statement onTropical Peatlands 65 .Codes of conduct can be drawn up to replaceparts of this Framework. For example, incountries or provinces which do not have inplace some or all of the “instruments at anational level” codes of conduct could beused in their stead.5.8 NON-ANTHROPOCENTRICAPPROACHES 66In §3.2 the question of attributing intrinsicvalue to entities other than human beings wasraised. In §4.10 a brief outline of nonanthropocentricapproaches was given.The acknowledgement of a right tosubsistence, freedom, and autonomy of nonhumanentities - independent of theircontribution to the fulfilment of human needsand wants - leads to competing moral claimswhen the interests of human beings and nonhumanentities clash 67 .Conflicts between human and non-humaninterests cannot be resolved by simply givinggreater weight to human claims 68 and therebyletting them override the competing claims ofnon-human entities. This does not imply thatwe may never harm other entities under anycircumstances whatever 69 . Any harm weinflict, however, must be justified by a validmoral reason 70 .Attributing intrinsic value to non-humanentities (such as species and ecosystems)would impose additional boundaries 71 tohuman behaviour 72 . Additional rules wouldalso be required because non-human entitiescannot defend their own position 73 . Whereasinformation exchange, discussion,negotiation, and fair compromises maycontribute substantially to resolving interhumanconflicts, in conflicts between humanand non-human interests only human beingscan decide to adjust their behaviour.Parallel to the Universal Declaration of HumanRights, a non-anthropocentric approachwould imply that no harm be done to anyentity with intrinsic value 74 and that noconstraints be placed on the freedom of suchentities 75 . These veto duties 76 would prohibitthe doing of harm, but would not prescribethe counteracting of harm that is not causedby human beings 77 .Additional principles of a nonanthropocentricapproach might include:The principle of self-defence:Interventions in the basic interests of nonhumanentities, including their killing ordestruction, are allowed if no otherpossibility exists to save human lives fromserious threats arising from these entities.This principle is based on the fact, that - ina situation of equal value of differententities - it can not be expected that onesacrifices oneself when another entity (e.g.an animal, a virus, a storm, a meteorite)behaves harmfully.The principle of proportionality: Wherethere is a conflict between human interestsand those of non-human entities, basicinterests (“needs”) prevail over non-basicinterests (“wants”), no matter from whichentities, human or other, the competingclaims arise.This principle would reflect GeneralConsideration 1 of the anthropocentricapproach in §5.3. To asses the needs ofnon-human entities, human beings canseek to understand their standpoint andjudge what is, from their point of view,important or not important for their overall