太平洋島嶼国始め途上国から提案されたが、最終報告にはない原則の一つが ”equity・公平” である。シュタイン博士の平等原理を読んだ後だったの妙に記憶に残った。
CARICOM, PSIDS, LDCs and the High Seas Allianceが ”inter- and intra- generational equity”を強調。米国が反対。
”inter- and intra- generational” とはなんであろう？*
アフリカグループがCBDに沿った“fair and equitable benefit-sharing”を提案。
日本はequity が原則として含まれる事の重要性が理解されるべきであると注意（note）している。 "equity" って何？というのはまさにルソーやシュタイン、バークが議論しているのでここは気になる箇所であった。
Costa Rica, supported by Eritrea but opposed by the US and Japan, called for including equity. CARICOM, PSIDS, LDCs and the High Seas Alliance underscored inter- and intra- generational
equity, opposed by the US. The African Group proposed adding “fair and equitable benefit-sharing” in line with the CBD. Japan noted that the consequences of including equity as a guiding principle need to be better understood.
他に equity が出て来る箇所を記録しておく。BBNJのbenefit-sharingに関連して出て来ている。
Indonesia emphasized: inter-generational equity, and fair and equitable benefit-sharing; common concern of humankind; and respect for national jurisdiction over the outer continental shelf.
CARICOM emphasized inter-generational equity and benefitsharing by closing the marine science gap.
LDCs suggested “promoting effective and meaningful partnerships for MSR and economic exploration in ABNJ, and underscoring equity.”
The FSM emphasized that: access and benefit-sharing are two essential elements that should be reflected in benefit-sharing modalities; benefit-sharing must be fair and equitable, not nominal; and
a future review mechanism under the ILBI could also assess fairness and equity in benefit-sharing. Japan and the US opposed reference
*豪州のウーロンゴン大学のサイトにIntragenerational Equity と Intergenerational Equityを簡単にまとめているウェッブがあった。下記にコピーしておく。
Intergenerational equity is a concept that says that humans 'hold the natural and cultural environment of the Earth in common both with other members of the present generation and with other generations, past and future' (Weiss, 1990, p. 8). It means that we inherit the Earth from previous generations and have an obligation to pass it on in reasonable condition to future generations.
The idea behind not reducing the ability of future generations to meet their needs is that, although future generations might gain from economic progress, those gains might be more than offset by environmental deterioration. Most people would acknowledge a moral obligation to future generations, particularly as people who are not yet born can have no say in decisions taken today that may affect them.
There are two different ways of looking at the need to ensure that future generations can supply their needs. One is to view the environment in terms of the natural resources or natural capital that is available for wealth creation, and to say that future generations should have the same ability to create wealth as we have. Therefore, future generations will be adequately compensated for any loss of environmental amenity by having alternative sources of wealth creation. This is referred to as 'weak sustainability'.
The government's ESD working groups have argued that, unless substantial change occurs, the present generation may not be able to pass on an equivalent stock of environmental goods to the next generation. This would be due to three factors:
Firstly, the rates of loss of animal and plant species, arable land, water quality, tropical forests and cultural heritage are especially serious. Secondly, and perhaps more widely recognised, is the fact that we will not pass on to future generations the ozone layer or global climate system that the current generation inherited. A third factor that contributes overwhelmingly to the anxieties about the first two is the prospective impact of continuing population growth and the environmental consequences if rising standards of material income around the world produce the same sorts of consumption patterns that are characteristic of the currently industrialised countries. (ESD Working Group Chairs 1992, p. 10)
The other way is to view the environment as offering more than just economic potential that cannot be replaced by man-made wealth and to argue that future generations should not inherit a degraded environment, no matter how many extra sources of wealth are available to them. This is referred to as 'strong sustainability'.
Source: Sharon Beder, The Nature of Sustainable Development, 2nd edition, Scribe, Newham, Vic.,1996.
Intragenerational equity is concerned with equity between people of the same generation. This is separate from intergenerational equity, which is about equity between present and future generations. Intragenerational equity includes considerations of distribution of resources and justice between nations. It also includes considerations of what is fair for people within any one nation.
"Equity as a concept is fundamental to sustainable development. The Brundtland Commission's definition of sustainable development is based on intergenerational equity: 'development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs'"