Ocean governance: strengthening the legal framework for conservation of marine biological diversity beyond areas of national jurisdiction

2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 65-78
Author(s):  
Kapil Narula
Keyword(s):  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Marine Biological ◽  
Ocean Governance ◽  
National Jurisdiction

Part III Marine Biodiversity Conservation and Global Ocean Governance, 8 Marine Biodiversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction: Securing a Sound Law of the Sea Instrument

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Millicay Fernanda
Keyword(s):  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Sustainable Use ◽  
Global Ocean ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Marine Biodiversity ◽  
Ocean Governance ◽  
Preparatory Committee ◽  
National Jurisdiction ◽  
Un General Assembly ◽  
United Nations Convention

This chapter examines the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ). It first provides an overview of the Preparatory Committee (PrepCom), convened by the UN General Assembly to make recommendations on the elements for a possible future multilateral agreement under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). The material scope of the PrepCom is constituted by ‘the package’ agreed upon in 2011 and includes the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction. The chapter discusses the challenges of the package, focusing on two interlinked dimensions of the package plus the big issue that underlies it. It also considers two main tasks facing PrepCom: the first is to clearly identify all elements of each substantive set of issues composing the package, and the second task is to understand the implications of each element of these three substantive sets of issues and the inter-linkages between them.

scholarly journals Managing Biodiversity in Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction

2007 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 89-124 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erik Molenaar
Keyword(s):  
Marine Protected Areas ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Traditional Approach ◽  
Sustainable Use ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Marine Biodiversity ◽  
Economic Interests ◽  
Fish Stocks ◽  
National Jurisdiction ◽  
Rate Loss

AbstractThe global loss of biological diversity (biodiversity), both terrestrial and marine, occurs currently at an alarming and probably unprecedented rate. The main purpose of this article—which focuses in particular on marine capture fisheries—is to identify shortcomings in the international legal framework relating to the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ) and possible solutions for selected shortcomings. The latter relate to discrete high seas fish stocks, deep-sea species and fisheries, integrated marine protected areas (MPAs) in ABNJ and, finally, to existing and new rights to conserve marine biodiversity. The main argument on this last topic is that in view of the current rate loss of marine biodiversity, reform should not just be limited to the traditional approach of strengthening, deepening and broadening obligations but should be balanced with optimizing use of existing rights and/or granting new rights to ensure that the overarching balance between socio-economic interests and the interests of marine biodiversity of present and future generations is archived.

scholarly journals Towards Integrated Management of Regional Marine Protected Area Networks

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 212-242
Author(s):  
James Harrison
Keyword(s):  
Marine Protected Area ◽  
Integrated Management ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Ocean Governance ◽  
Antarctic Marine ◽  
National Jurisdiction ◽  
Antarctic Treaty ◽  
The Antarctic ◽  
Institutional Fragmentation

Abstract Marine protected areas (MPA s) are an important tool for protecting marine ecosystems both within and beyond national jurisdiction, but the integrated management of MPA s is challenging due to the institutional fragmentation that exists in international ocean governance at global and regional levels. In the absence of fundamental reform of international ocean governance, integrated management of MPA s can at present only be achieved through cross-sectoral cooperation and coordination between relevant international institutions. Understanding regime interaction in this context requires an analysis of both the relevant legal framework and the manner in which coordination mechanisms operate in practice. This article carries out a case study of regime interaction between the Antarctic Treaty and the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources, as well as other relevant institutions, in order to identify the key opportunities and challenges for promoting the integrated management of regional MPA networks in practice. It will also consider how the cooperative arrangements for the regional management of the Southern Ocean may provide lessons for the development of a new legally binding instrument for the conservation and management of biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction.

scholarly journals Unity or Fragmentation in the Deep Blue: Choices in Institutional Design for Marine Biological Diversity in Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
David S. Berry
Keyword(s):  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Institutional Design ◽  
Sustainable Use ◽  
Institutional Structure ◽  
Global Ocean ◽  
Management Tools ◽  
Marine Biological ◽  
Deep Blue ◽  
Environmental Impact Assessments ◽  
National Jurisdiction

Delegations are in the final stages of negotiating the proposed Agreement under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ Agreement or Agreement). The Agreement will have tremendous scope. Geographically it covers all ocean areas beyond national jurisdiction, meaning approximately 60 percent of the earth’s surface. Substantively it deals with a range of complex topics necessary for the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction, including marine genetic resources, sharing of benefits, measures such as area-based management tools, including marine protected areas, environmental impact assessments and capacity-building and the transfer of marine technology. Existing scholarship primarily explores the substantive choices for the Agreement; little examines its proposed institutional structure. This article critically assesses the competing positions advanced during negotiations for the Agreement’s institutional structure – the ‘global’ and ‘regional’ positions – and reviews the middle, or ‘compromise’ position adopted by the draft text. It suggests that both global and regional actors will be necessary to conserve and sustainably use marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction, and that some form of coordinating mechanism is required to allocate responsibility for particular tasks. Two principles are proposed for use in combination to provide a mechanism to help coordinate Agreement organs (global) and regional or sectoral bodies, namely, the principles of subsidiarity and cooperation. These principles are found in existing international and regional structures but are advanced here in dynamic forms, allowing for temporary or quasi-permanent allocation of competences, which can change or evolve over time. This position is also grounded in the international law of treaties and furthers dynamic views of regional and global ocean governance by offering practical coordinating principles that work with the existing Agreement text.

scholarly journals Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction: Regimes and Their Interaction

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 112 ◽  
pp. 123-128 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margaret A. Young ◽  
Andrew Friedman
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
The South ◽  
East Atlantic ◽  
Adaptive Approach ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Marine Biological ◽  
National Jurisdiction ◽  
Fragmentation Of International Law ◽  
Law Making

International efforts to better conserve the marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ) through a new international legally binding instrument1 are developing in a context of established norms and institutions. Existing regimes already address specific marine sectors (such as shipping), regions (such as fishing in the South East Atlantic), species (such as whales), and even underlying customary international law and territorial concepts (including the boundaries of the “high seas”2). States have agreed that they will not “undermine” these existing frameworks.3 We seek to contextualize this commitment within the fragmentation of international law and the interaction between regimes.4 We argue that international law-making should not be overly restricted by deference to existing competencies and mandates, which are fluid and asymmetrically supported. An inclusive and adaptive approach to existing and future institutions is vital in the ongoing quest for integrated and effective oceans governance.

scholarly journals Unilateral Steps to End High Seas Fishing

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 259-296 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katrina M. Wyman
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
United States ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
The United States ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Marine Biological ◽  
National Jurisdiction ◽  
National Control ◽  
High Seas

In discussions about the overexploitation of the vast oceans that lie beyond national jurisdiction, one bold proposal is to close fishing entirely on the high seas. Existing research suggests that converting the high seas into a giant reserve for fish might increase overall global fish catches by boosting fish catches within the adjoining areas of the oceans under national control. This conversion also might help to protect marine biological diversity, which is particularly important in an era of climate change. This Essay identifies the potential that the United States—a significant importer of high seas fish—might unilaterally take steps to end fishing on the high seas, using its market leverage. This Essay then analyzes the advantages and disadvantages of taking unilateral steps to end fishing on the high seas and the conditions under which the United States might take such steps.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document