Environmental Law and Policy: A Study on Agriculture and Fisheries in Bangladesh

Abstract

The present study has observed that there are around two hundred environmental laws and policies in Bangladesh. Environmental law began with the enactment of the Public Health Act, 1875 passed by the British in India. The British passed several so called environmental laws, which are still in force in Bangladesh with some amendments and reformations. Bangladesh inherited those 57 laws passed in the British period, among them the Fatal Accidents Act, 1855, the Canals Act, 1864 the Explosives Act, 1884, the Vaccination Act, 1880 etc., are remarkable. The general aims of the present study are to examine the agriculture and fisheries laws and policies and to find out the deficiencies of those laws and policies. There are 24 agricultural laws and 7 policies passed by the government of Bangladesh to develop agriculture the largest environmental activities and to increase its production. Impact of those laws and policies on agriculture environment and other environmental sectors examined and found that due to these laws agriculture production increased significantly, but there are some adverse effects such as wetland degradation and deforestation due to conversion of those lands into agriculture. There are no enough provisions in the agriculture laws and policies to mitigate these problems. It is also found that existing agriculture laws and policies are inadequate to cope with the environmental problems such as fresh water fish and other aquatic resource scarcity, deceasing fertility rate, depleting indigenous crops species and so on arising from the modern technologies introduced in agriculture for more production. Laws and policies regarding flood control and irrigations for agriculture development are also creating some negative impacts on fish and other aquatic resources. The present study looked for some suggestions to repeal the existing laws and policies towards friendly environment agriculture development in Bangladesh. Wetland and fish is the part and parcel of people in Bangladesh and was the main protein source from time immemorial. Population increase and human interventions resulted natural fish scarcity in recent. The government of Bangladesh introduced 12 laws and 7 policies in different period to increase fish production for meeting up the increasing demand and to develop and conserve the fresh water and marine fisheries in Bangladesh. The present study found some positive and negative impacts of fisheries laws and policies on the natural fish and fisheries environment, other aquatic resources and other sectors of environment. It should be said that the existing fisheries laws and policies encourage cultured fish production instead of conserving and developing natural fisheries. As a result, indigenous fish species and other microorganism, aquatic plants and animals etc.; are degraded. Provisions of these laws and policies are also inadequate to conserve and develop the fresh water and marine fisheries. Moreover, there are no such provisions and authority in these laws and policies to mitigate the problems creating from other sectors such as pollution from industries, agriculture, degrading wetlands, agriculture extension, urban waste and sewerage management, marine pollution from urban area and oil tanker, ships, etc. There are some inadequacy of the present laws and policies to regulate and control indiscriminate catching and harvesting of fish and destruction of juvenile fish fry both in fresh water and marine in Bangladesh. Shrimp culture in coastal is creating some pollution and fish fry destruction activities causing fish environment degradation. For these reasons, indigenous fresh water fish species and other aquatic resources, marine fisheries and resources are depleting in Bangladesh resulting the extinction of some species and ecological imbalance. In this regard some suggestions are made for further development of laws and policies for sustainable wetland and marine fisheries and other aquatic resources development and conservation. It is observed that there are not enough substantive and procedural laws to punish agriculture and fisheries related offences, which encourage to some people and vested group to make agriculture and fisheries offences.