Dr Ted Christie: Environmental Dispute Resolution and Sustainable Solutions

“ P rotecting cultural heritage and development are not mutually exclusive; we can have both, but projects have to be well-designed.” Federal Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek (2024).   The recent decision by the Federal Environment Minister to shut down a tailings dam for a gold mine development, to protect Indigenous cultural heritage, has ignited controversy and conflict.   The controversy is not only over the decision’s impact on the viability of the Regis Resources’ Gold Mine Project at Orange, Central-Western NSW.  It has also highlighted the complexity of the problem when cultural heritage protection (with its focus on Traditional knowledge) and  development (with its focus on Western science) collide over future land use. There is now  community concern that history may repeat in Australia for development projects proposed on Indigenous owned and controlled lands. However, there would be little dispute that the above statement by the Federal Environment

  The recent announcement by the leader of the Federal Liberal National Party for a climate action plan for Australia’s transition to net zero emissions based on seven nuclear plants with a mix of renewables of gas and renewables, has ignited concern and controversy. This is not surprising given the latest independent polling (18 June 2024) on this issue in Australia by the Essential Report  which indicated that: - “People think the best way to achieve our net zero by 2050 target is by developing renewables rather than developing nuclear (63% to 37%) ”. The poll highlighted the reason why public interest environmental controversies continue to ignite conflict when environment/anti-nuclear positions and development/pro-nuclear positions collide. T he unfortunate outcome for the information conflict situation, in this case, is a red corner ~v~ blue corner scenario! Instead, the focus should be on managing the information conflict created by divergent opinion ove

    1.0            In 2023, the U.N. Secretary-General, António Guterres identified the  “ Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities” [ CBDR-RC Principle]  as a key driver for achieving net zero deadlines - subject to a significant condition: “Every country must be part of  the solution. Demanding others move first only ensures humanity comes last”. 2.0            Existing issues that have limited the adoption of the CPDR-RC Principle over time are identified e.g., c onflicts over inequality and competitive advantage; the wide disparity in national contributions of global CO 2 emissions between all countries . 3.0            The article outlines the framework for a level playing field for reducing emissions, equitably, to reach net zero by 2050, based on the linkage between the CPDR-RC Principle and the fair treatment Equity guideline.  The CPDR-RC Principle and Equity are both legally binding obligations under the Paris Agreement. 4.0