Managing the frozen south: the creation and evolution of the Antarctic Treaty System and Antarctic mineral exploitation: the emerging legal framework

1989 ◽  
Vol 65 (2) ◽  
pp. 389-390
Author(s):  
Peter J. Beck
Keyword(s):  
Legal Framework ◽  
Antarctic Treaty ◽  
The Creation ◽  
The Antarctic ◽  
Antarctic Treaty System

scholarly journals Antarctic politics and Antarctic science — are they at loggerheads?

1991 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 123-123
Author(s):  
John A Heap
Keyword(s):  
Legal Framework ◽  
Scientific Investigation ◽  
Antarctic Treaty ◽  
The Creation ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Many ◽  
The Antarctic ◽  
Antarctic Environment

“Antarctica shall be used for peaceful purposes only …… Freedom of scientific investigation and co-operation toward that end …… shall continue, subject to the provisions of the present Treaty.”These are the fundamental objectives of the Antarctic Treaty as expressed in Articles I and II. What follows in the Treaty, and in most of the many “Recommendations” to the Governments of Antarctic Treaty Consultative Parties (ATCPs), is aimed at securing these objectives by the creation of a framework of law. Unusually for a system of laws, most of this legal framework is hortatory rather than mandatory in character - it cajoles rather than orders. Perhaps not surprisingly this has given rise to damaging suggestions about its ability to provide adequate protection for the Antarctic environment. The response of the ATCPs to this criticism has been to embark on a review of existing Antarctic law, to make it more consistent, reduce overlaps and more especially, make much of it mandatory. This process began at the XIth Special Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting in Chile last November. Since it aims to provide greater clarity, accessibility and certainty in the law, it must be welcomed. But within these admirable objectives a prospect of loggerheads begins to loom.

Politics, Diplomacy, and the Creation of Antarctic Consensus

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 243-261
Author(s):  
Andrew Jackson
Keyword(s):  
Mineral Resource ◽  
Primary Mechanism ◽  
Antarctic Treaty ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Environmental Measures ◽  
New Research ◽  
The Antarctic ◽  
Unanimous Agreement ◽  
Antarctic Treaty System

This paper examines the operation of consensus within the Antarctic Treaty System, examining its role as the primary mechanism for achieving important decisions affecting Antarctic governance. It points out that consensus does not equal unanimous agreement, but it does rely on the absence of formal objection. As an example, the paper focuses on the shift from the 1988 Antarctic minerals convention (which regulated possible mineral resource activities) to the 1991 environmental protocol (which prohibited such activities and put in place comprehensive environmental measures). The events and processes associated with this short but important period in Antarctic history are examined to present a picture of the complexity of factors that can influence the achievement of consensus. The paper draws on new research sources, made possible by the recent release of government archives relating to the events discussed. It thus complements existing analyses which relied on the limited publicly accessible records of the inner workings of Treaty meetings and the diplomatic interactions of Treaty Parties. It concludes by pointing to the ongoing importance of consensus as the Treaty System continues to grow.

scholarly journals Exploitation of Antarctic Iced Freshwater: A Call To Unfreeze Legal Discourse

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-77
Author(s):  
Ana Costov ◽  
Jessica Appelmann
Keyword(s):  
Legal Discourse ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Environmental Implications ◽  
Freshwater Resources ◽  
Environmental Impact Assessments ◽  
Antarctic Treaty ◽  
Resources Exploitation ◽  
The Antarctic ◽  
Antarctic Treaty System ◽  
High Seas

While discussed within the Antarctic Treaty System during the 1970s-1980s, the idea of iceberg harvesting was laid on ice due to the lack of adequate technologies and scientific knowledge on the potential environmental implications. However, the State Parties to the ATS envisioned the possibility of reopening the legal discourse. For that purpose, iced freshwater resources exploitation was excluded from the scope of the Madrid Protocol containing a ban on all mineral mining activities within the scope ratione loci of the ATS. However, during the negotiations, it was agreed that if the prospect of iceberg harvesting was ever to be realised, the environmental protection provisions under the Madrid Protocol should apply. The present paper provides an analysis of whether the potential exploitation of iced freshwater resources proves realistic within the existing legal framework under the Antarctic Treaty System and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and discusses which rules States would need to adhere to when engaging in such activities. It arrives at the conclusion that, as to now, there is no prohibition of iceberg harvesting for freshwater use under international law. Nevertheless, both within the scope of the ATS and in the high seas, environmental regulations restrict the implementation of the activity and, therefore, require comprehensive environmental impact assessments to be conducted before the commencement of the activity. Furthermore, as ownership allocation of icebergs is not regulated under the relevant treaties, the present paper examines two legal regimes that may potentially govern iceberg acquisition in the high seas, namely, res nullius and res communis. Finally, as private efforts have become more far-reaching in the recent decades, an overview of the current state of practice is presented, highlighting the observed advantages and potential drawbacks. Conclusively, the present paper advocates for the reopening of the legal discourse on the subject matter before the commencement of exploitation activities so as to ensure that the fragile Antarctic environment is protected and preserved for the benefit of all humankind in accordance with the object and purpose of the ATS. 

An international hierarchy of science: conquest, cooperation, and the 1959 Antarctic Treaty System

2021 ◽  
pp. 135406612110338
Author(s):  
Joanne Yao
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
20Th Century ◽  
International Institutions ◽  
Social Performance ◽  
Early 20Th Century ◽  
Antarctic Treaty ◽  
The Antarctic ◽  
International Status ◽  
Antarctic Treaty System

The Antarctic Treaty System (ATS), created in 1959 to govern the southern continent, is often lauded as an illustration of science’s potential to inspire peaceful and rational International Relations. This article critically examines this optimistic view of science’s role in international politics by focusing on how science as a global hierarchical structure operated as a gatekeeper to an exclusive Antarctic club. I argue that in the early 20th century, the conduct of science in Antarctica was entwined with global and imperial hierarchies. As what Mattern and Zarakol call a broad hierarchy, science worked both as a civilized marker of international status as well as a social performance that legitimated actors’ imperial interests in Antarctica. The 1959 ATS relied on science as an existing broad hierarchy to enable competing states to achieve a functional bargain and ‘freeze’ sovereignty claims, whilst at the same time institutionalizing and reinforcing the legitimacy of science in maintaining international inequalities. In making this argument, I stress the role of formal international institutions in bridging our analysis of broad and functional hierarchies while also highlighting the importance of scientific hierarchies in constituting the current international order.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document