|
This
fall, Michigan State University Press publishes Evolution
of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement by longtime
Great Lakes citizen advocates Lee Botts and Paul Muldoon.
The book recounts the history of the U.S.-Canada Agreement,
first signed by the two nations in 1972, and explains
why it should be updated to help restore the Great Lakes.
Q.
What was the genesis of this book? Why should a reader
interested in the Great Lakes pick it up?
The
book began as a review of the first 25 years of the
Agreement, sponsored and issued in 1997 as a report
by the Institute for International Environmental Governance
because of the lack of a case history for the Great
Lakes in the growing literature on dealing with environmental
problems internationally. Between us, we have been directly
engaged with the Agreement since before it was originally
signed. Our motivation was conviction that the importance
of the Agreement was not appreciated and concern that
the implementation process was being weakened by withdrawal
of the governments from the processes that had been
successful in the past. We welcomed the opportunity
to update the history. We have tried in the book to
explain the successes of the Agreement in addressing
Great Lakes problems in the past and why the binational
process it calls for is even more essential now for
addressing new and growing problems.
Q.
Given all that is going on with Great Lakes issues today,
what lessons does the book provide about what might
and might not work with regard to Great Lakes restoration
and management in coming years?
There
are three principal lessons. First, that saving the
Great Lakes requires a binational approach between Canada
and the United States, involving both the governments
and the people working together across the international
boundary. Second, that such a process requires a forum
for cooperation and communication such as the International
Joint Commission was intended to provide under the principles
of the Boundary Waters Treaty. Third, that the political
will of the governments needed for success depends on
citizen involvement.
Q.
Would you say the Agreement has lost its relevance to
today's Great Lakes issues, or does it have unfulfilled
potential to help resolve them? Why?
The
Agreement is more important than ever for the future
of the Great Lakes because they are a shared resource.
The air, the water, the fish and other life do not recognize
the international or state boundaries. Attention should
be paid to how reduction in commitment of government
resources for dealing with Great Lakes problems declined
during the 1990s at the same time that the implementation
of the Agreement faltered. The flexibility that is one
of the Agreement's strengths offers opportunity in the
upcoming review to consider how to achieve the binational
coordination and cooperation that is essential and cannot
be achieved by either Canada or the U.S. alone.
Q.
Does the Agreement need to be rewritten and renegotiated,
and if so, in what ways?
The
Agreement should be reviewed and renewed. The review
should be far more comprehensive and open than in the
past because of greater understanding of the connection
between water quality, air quality and land use that
has resulted to a large extent from the research and
experience stimulated by the original Agreement process-also
between uses of water, such as for waste disposal and
for sustaining life. As reflected in the current debate
over the proposed Annex 2001 agreements for the Great
Lakes Charter, management of water quantity can no longer
be separate from management of water quality. The review
process should not be limited to an article-by-article,
annex-by-annex review of the existing Agreement but
rather be used for comprehensive consideration of how
to achieve long-term sustainable development for the
indefinite future. It is only based on this review that
one can assess whether the Agreement should be changed
and in what ways.
Q.
You've both tracked Great Lakes issues for dozens of
years. Are you hopeful or pessimistic about the state
of the Lakes over the next 10 to 20 years? And beyond
that?
We
are cautiously optimistic because of past experience
with the Great Lakes system both as a source of warning
on environmental problems and for solutions. Who thought
accelerated eutrophication could be reversed so quickly
in such a large system? Who could have foreseen that
Great Lakes science would become the basis for global
efforts to eliminate chemical contamination? Climate
change is the big uncertainty for the long term, but
existing short-term trends that offer some hope include
the growing recognition by business and industry of
the need for sustainable development and the love and
respect of people for the Great Lakes.
The
Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement at a glance
- Signed
in 1972 by U.S. President Richard Nixon and Canadian
Premier Pierre Trudeau to commit both nations to clean
up Great Lakes phosphorus pollution
- Credited
with contributing to the major Great Lakes recovery
of the 1970s
- Charges
the International Joint Commission with reporting
progress under the agreement to the public every two
years
o Renewed in 1978 with an emphasis on controlling
toxic pollution of the Great Lakes
- Sets
a policy that "the discharge of any or all persistent
toxic substances be virtually eliminated"
###
|
