Maritime Studies
|
|
Home
| Databases
| WorldLII
| Search
| Feedback
Maritime Studies |
|
1. Despite an internationally agreed legal framework. ocean governance is fraught with problems of compliance, implementation and equity. The International Year of the Ocean heightened awareness of the inadequacy of institutional and political responses to the challenges, of the need to overcome narrow national and sectoral self interest and differing national, regional and international traditions, and of the urgency of adopting an integrated coordinated and equitable approach. A wider consciousness of the importance of oceans to the world’s wellbeing, a re-evaluation of society’s attitudes, a spirit of justice and equity, and a more determined approach to successful co-operation are all increasingly both urgent and important.
2. The three major current issues in ocean affairs have been identified as conservation (the integrated and sustainable management and use of marine resources, including ecosystems), the prevention of pollution and degradation of the marine environment from land based activities, and the need to promote better scientific understanding (of oceans and their resources, of the effects of pollution, and of the interaction of oceans and seas with the world climate system). Enforcement of internationally agreed measures is also a key factor.
3. Sustainable development of the oceans necessitates effective action in all four areas. In particular, it demands a creative, inclusive, equitable, and transparent approach to coordination, in both public and private sectors, from the grass roots upwards to national level, and including the small less powerful states at regional and international levels. Existing structures need to be adapted and new crosssectoral coordinating frameworks established at every level. At regional level, in Europe at least, it has been suggested that a European Oceans Agency might coordinate a European Ocean Policy, though difficulties in implementing this would be legion. There could, however, be ways in which the EU might improve its machinery for handling ocean affairs. At national level, arrangements for the UNCLOS negotiations between 1973 and 1982, where governments set up interdepartmental and interdisciplinary units, might provide some useful models of interdepartmental coordination.
4. An adequate legal framework for an overall system of ocean governance does exist: UNCLOS is supplemented by soft law establishing important principles and codes of practice. The problems lie chiefly in how unevenly states discharge their responsibilities, rights and duties, in ineffective sectoral policymaking and in inconsistent implementation. Implementation and enforcement are key issues since voluntary agreements are frequently not adhered to, and there is a need for regional authorities in particular, to have sufficient teeth to implement such enforcement provisions as do exist.
5. There is tension between differing perceptions of the appropriate role of governments (in consultation with private sector stakeholder interests as in the IMO), and that of the autonomous UN agencies, which some argue should be more proactive. A need is certainly seen for clarification and coordination of the overlapping functions of UN agencies. More transparency in the workings of the UN Administrative Council on Co-ordination and its subcommittees could have beneficial effects. The UN General Assembly could consider setting up an enforcement body for UNCLOS when the Law comes up for review. A system of compliance monitoring might be a more practical option, though still highly, controversial.
6. If the UN General Assembly (UNGA) successfully promotes necessary inter-governmental and interagency coordination and the strengthening of existing structures and mandates within the UN system, then any new coordinating institution is of debatable necessity. The idea has been floated, however, of bringing the partner agencies within the UN System together with intergovernmental organisations, civil society, and the contracting parties to the Regional Seas conventions, to form a Regional Ocean Assembly, which could deal effectively with the implementation of UNCED agreements and regional cooperation in an integrated way. It could possibly serve as a regional counterpart to the open-ended informal consultative process on ocean affairs in the UNGA, and would facilitate policy integration at UN and regional levels.
7. Meanwhile, UNEP’s revitalised and catalytic role, as the secretariat for the Global Plan of Action (GPA), in encouraging governments to implement the Regional Seas Conventions and Action Plans is widely endorsed. Its promotion of interagency co-ordination, its strategy of encouraging assessments and analyses for action, of mobilising action at national, regional and global levels, and evaluation and further development of the GPA is encouraged. The GPA could be an effective instrument for change and a tool for the strengthening of the Regional Seas Programme.
8. The effectiveness of and co-ordination between all the UN agencies arguably depends ultimately on the active commitment of national governments. ‘Partnership Market Meetings’ could promote this. These place the onus on a state or region to create credible and viable regional environmental assessments and action plans, to which potential partners from amongst donor organisations. UN and technical agencies, the private sector and academic and non governmental communities would subscribe and contribute. A sense of ‘ownership’. the development of broad based partnerships, improved coordination at the regional national and local levels and better use of loan and grant funds from international sources could improve the chances of effective action. A useful tool might be the development of spatial maps, demonstrating the operations of international and regional organisations within an area, and possibly also streamlining, publicising and popularising them.
9. Coordination is needed at every level but regional cross-sectoral approaches, linked to global initiatives are seen as the best way forward. They are a means of agreeing strategies and devising an ecosystem-based approach, of sharing specialised local marine expertise. building capacity. and technical cooperation. resolving conflicts. and facilitating local enforcement. But they can be bedevilled by a wide range of potential difficulties, including considerations of national chauvinism, independence and sovereignty, suspicions and double standards between potential partners of widely. varying resources, capacity, size and power; by security considerations. overlapping claims to maritime jurisdiction, a lack of agreed maritime boundaries, unilateral exclusive economic zones and sovereign resource rights.
10. If regionally based approaches are to be successful, there is a need for a new mindset based on maritime cooperation to replace that based on sovereignty, unilateral rights and agreed maritime boundaries. Overarching political frameworks, as in the South Pacific and Europe, are helpful in facilitating productive outcomes. Regional ‘second track’ fora on issues of ocean governance, including wide industrial and NGO interests could be a useful way to prepare the ground for effective action, addressing sensitive issues and helping the capacity-building process while facilitating development of political support for regional action.
11. Orchestrated regional initiatives are also seen as the best way to approach integrated management of coastal areas where 40 per cent of the world’s population lives. Commercial and recreational activity, the burden of waste and agrochemical discharges, gross mis-management and over-exploitation of fisheries, and disruption of ecosystems by introduction of alien species are chief amongst factors putting such areas under severe pressure. Action to protect the marine environment from land-based activities must be a continuing major policy priority. UNEP-encouraged focus on sewage pollutants and the development of the GPA clearing house mechanism will hopefully yield models for application to other pollutants.
12. Meanwhile, the local and national levels also need attention. Lessons from the experience of initiatives on coastal management, as in the Philippines, South Africa and Mozambique illustrate the need to raise discussion from the technical to the political level, the importance of political will and national, and especially, local community ownership of schemes (even if necessarily financed by donor agencies), and need for a highly consultative broad-based approach. The first priority may be to raise awareness of the costs of pollution, illustrating to local communities its relevant economic and health implications.
13. At global level, sustainable marine fisheries provide a major source of protein for low income groups and developing countries, and direct and indirect employment for some 200 million people. The major problem of over-fishing is encouraged by the overcapacity of some 30-40 per cent in world fishing fleets, primarily from developed countries. Precautionary thinking and, within national waters, on the high seas and globally for shared and straddling stocks, the cessation of harvesting too close to the Maximum Sustainable Yield, are urgent necessities. Ways to share common fishery resources need to be developed. Rigorous application and enforcement of the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries and the UN Fish Stock agreement would ease the problems, but enforcement is problematic. Technological developments have too often been geared to maximising catches rather than to surveillance and control, an emphasis which should be reversed. More satellite monitoring via black boxes, technically and economically feasible, may be a way forward. Fishing rights may have to be curtailed to specific times and places. One idea is for states to go beyond the strengthening of bilateral arrangements and local fishing commissions, to set up a multinational corporation in which shares in the revenues earned by a licensed fleet are paid to those ceding such rights.
14. The exploitation by foreign fleets of the offshore resources of less developed countries has strong ethical, as well as practical dimensions. Notions of global commons, of equity and stewardship, as well as ultimately, of security, demand that the raw imperatives of the market economy be moderated in a situation where the interests of the North and of the rich dominate those of the South and the poor. Small Island Developing States (SIDS), particularly vulnerable, are foremost amongst those needing assistance both to protect and to exploit appropriately the resources of their Exclusive Economic Zones. This could include technical and scientific collaboration and advice, as well as practical assistance with satellite surveillance, procurement of Offshore Patrol Vessels to police territorial seas, regional cooperation in monitoring compliance and legality, avoidance of pollution and dumping, early agreement on delimitation of Maritime Zones, and help in settlement of differences involving disputed territories. SIDS are outposts of critical importance in protecting the natural balance and ecosystems of oceans and such assistance would bring universal, not merely local benefit.
15. The sectoral development paradigm is the world’s inheritance, and often, as in ocean affairs, its burden. Stronger concepts of, and institutions for, integrated Ocean governance have to develop, however, in an environment where there are conflicting pressures. The need is for a stronger political will to find the ways and means to enforce existing law, to bring together national governments, international institutions and the major groups in Agenda 21, and to build bridges between the knowledge groups, politicians and their administrators, and industrialists. If the Oceans consultative process at the UN as well as bilateral and multilateral consultations in other fora can address the major issues and their implications decisively, and can bring to them new attitudes, new mechanisms, and new partnerships, the cause of effective ocean governance will be significantly advanced.
Virginia Crowe
Associate Director
February 2000
Wilton Park Reports are brief summaries of the main points and conclusions of conferences. The reports reflect rapporteurs’ personal interpretations of the proceedings – as such they do not constitute any institutional policy of Wilton Park nor do they necessarily represent the views of rapporteurs.
Information on future conferences of interest at Wilton Park may be obtained from the Wilton Park website: http://www.wiltonpark.org.uk
[1] Wilton Park is one of the world’s leading centres for the discussion of international issues. It holds over forty conferences each year bringing together policy-makers, politicians, NGO representatives, academics, business people and journalists from all over the world. It is an academically independent and non-profit making Executive Agency of the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office. The conferences are held at Wiston House, a restored sixteenth century English country house, located near Brighton in West Sussex, just over 80 kilometres south of London.
AustLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/MarStudies/2000/4.html