scholarly journals Incorporation of Indigenous and Local Knowledge in Central Arctic Ocean Fisheries Management

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (0) ◽  
pp. 130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valentin Schatz
Keyword(s):  
Arctic Ocean ◽  
Fisheries Management ◽  
Local Knowledge ◽  
Local Communities ◽  
Commercial Fishing ◽  
Central Arctic Ocean ◽  
Indigenous And Local Knowledge ◽  
High Seas

On October 3, 2018, the so-called “Arctic Five plus Five�1 concluded the Agreement to Prevent Unregulated High Seas Fisheries in the Central Arctic Ocean (CAOFA, CAOF Agreement or Ilulissat Agreement).2 The CAOFA establishes a precautionary framework for the regulation of fisheries in the high seas of the central Arctic Ocean (CAO), including a temporary moratorium on unregulated commercial fishing.3 The purpose of this debate article is not to discuss the CAOFA’s provisions on fisheries as such, but to take a look at a number of interesting and novel provisions concerning the interests of indigenous and local communities, particularly with respect to incorporation of indigenous and local knowledge into science-based fisheries management in the CAO.4

scholarly journals Utilizing existing legal frameworks to implement fisheries management in the arctic

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
OCTO
Keyword(s):  
Arctic Ocean ◽  
International Law ◽  
Fisheries Management ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Commercial Fishing ◽  
Central Arctic Ocean ◽  
Legal Frameworks ◽  
High Seas

As climate change contributes to accelerated melting of sea ice in the Arctic Ocean, areas that were previously off-limits to fishing will become accessible. While there are currently no internationally-agreed fishing regulations in the high seas of the Arctic, there is an effective moratorium on commercial fishing thanks to the non-binding “Oslo Declaration” (Declaration concerning the Prevention of Unregulated High Seas Fishing in the Central Arctic Ocean, from July 2015). The author investigates existing legal mechanisms which could be used to regulate an international Arctic fishery should commercial fishing begin.Currently, the Arctic Five (Canada, Denmark/Greenland, Norway, the Russian Federation, and the United States) plus Five (Iceland, the EU, China, South Korea, and Japan) are negotiating an agreement for fisheries management in the Central Arctic Ocean. The draft text, which has not reached consensus yet*, surprisingly does not seek to establish a regional fisheries management organization for this area. But, the Arctic 5 + 5 have agreed “to continue the moratorium on fishing on the high seas of Central Arctic until there is scientific evidence concerning sustainable fishing in the area.”The draft agreement further states, “the parties shall take measures consistent with international law to deter the activities of vessels entitled to fly the flags of non-parties that undermine the effective implementation of this Agreement.” But what measures ‘consistent with international law’ could member states adopt?

scholarly journals Fisheries Enforcement on the High Seas of the Arctic Ocean: Gaps, Solutions and the Potential Contribution of the European Union and Its Member States

2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 324-360 ◽  
Author(s):  
Efthymios Papastavridis
Keyword(s):  
Arctic Ocean ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Commercial Fishing ◽  
Potential Contribution ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Fishing Activity ◽  
Central Arctic Ocean ◽  
The North ◽  
Opening Up ◽  
High Seas

Abstract Although there is no fishing activity within the central Arctic Ocean at present, commercial fishing activity does occur in the high seas areas of the North Atlantic and North Pacific, and within the exclusive economic zone of the Arctic coastal States. Climate change will most probably lead to an increase in fishing activity, through the reduction in sea ice, opening up new areas of the Arctic to fisheries, including the Central Arctic Ocean. This prospect has fuelled intensive negotiations—still ongoing—for the signing of a legally binding agreement to prevent unregulated fisheries therein. What seems missing, though, from both the ongoing negotiations on this agreement and the scholarly literature is reference to fisheries enforcement in the Arctic. Accordingly, this article identifies the most effective tools that could be employed for fisheries enforcement purposes, including port and flag State measures, and addresses their potential application in the Arctic.

scholarly journals Fisheries Enforcement on the High Seas of the Arctic Ocean: Gaps, Solutions and the Potential Contribution of the European Union and its Member States

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Efthymios Papastavridis
Keyword(s):  
Arctic Ocean ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Commercial Fishing ◽  
Potential Contribution ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Fishing Activity ◽  
Central Arctic Ocean ◽  
The North ◽  
Opening Up ◽  
High Seas

Although there is no fishing activity within the central Arctic Ocean at present, commercial fishing activity does occur in the high seas areas of the North Atlantic and North Pacific, and within the exclusive economic zone of the Arctic coastal States. Climate change will most probably lead to an increase in fishing activity, through the reduction in sea ice, opening up new areas of the Arctic to fisheries, including the Central Arctic Ocean. This prospect has fuelled intensive negotiations - still ongoing - for the signing of a legally binding agreement to prevent unregulated fisheries therein. What seems missing, though, from both the ongoing negotiations on this agreement and the scholarly literature is reference to fisheries enforcement in the Arctic. Accordingly, this article identifies the most effective tools that could be employed for fisheries enforcement purposes, including port and flag State measures, and addresses their potential application in the Arctic.

United States Reaches Agreement to Limit Arctic Fishing

2018 ◽  
Vol 112 (2) ◽  
pp. 313-315
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Arctic Ocean ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Commercial Fishing ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Central Arctic Ocean ◽  
Precautionary Approach ◽  
Near Future ◽  
High Seas

On November 30, 2017, the United States concluded negotiations on an agreement to limit fishing in the Arctic, titled the Agreement to Prevent Unregulated High Seas Fisheries in the Central Arctic Ocean. Delegations from the European Union and nine countries—Canada, China, Denmark with regard to Greenland and the Faroe Islands, Iceland, Japan, Norway, Russia, South Korea, and the United States—participated in the negotiations, which began in December of 2015. According to a statement made by the U.S. State Department: The Agreement will prevent unregulated commercial fishing in the high seas portion of the central Arctic Ocean, an area that is roughly 2.8 million square kilometers in size, roughly the size of the Mediterranean Sea. Commercial fishing has never been known to occur in this area, nor is it likely to occur in the near future. However, given the changing conditions of the Arctic Ocean, the governments in question developed this Agreement in accordance with the precautionary approach to fisheries management.

Reply to Bridgewater (2021), 'Response to Davies et al., 'Towards a Universal Declaration of the Rights of Wetlands"

2021 ◽  
Vol 72 (10) ◽  
pp. 1401
Author(s):  
G. T. Davies ◽  
C. M. Finlayson ◽  
E. Okuno ◽  
N. C. Davidson ◽  
R. C. Gardner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Local Knowledge ◽  
Local Communities ◽  
Universal Declaration ◽  
Legal Rights ◽  
Indigenous And Local Knowledge ◽  
Rights Of Nature ◽  
Areas Of Concern ◽  
Management Approaches ◽  
Conservation And Management

We reply to the main concerns raised by Bridgewater (2021) in his response to Davies et al. (2021a), ‘Towards a Universal Declaration of the Rights of Wetlands’. We appreciate the contribution of Bridgewater (2021) to this emerging conversation and, although we disagree with some of his assessments and statements, we do not find his points to be incompatible with support for the Declaration of the Rights of Wetlands (ROW). This reply focuses on four areas of concern raised by Bridgewater (2021). First, we describe why a wetlands-specific declaration will add important value to other Rights of Nature declarations. Second, we discuss how the ROW does not detract from, but rather can contribute to and complement, existing conservation and management approaches and mechanisms. Third, we agree on the importance of weaving Indigenous and local knowledge with other knowledges and emphasise that the ROW should not be confused with or misused to undermine the rights of Indigenous peoples and local communities. Finally, we explain how legal rights can and have been granted to non-humans, including elements of Nature, such as wetlands.

Some Icelandic Perspectives on the Agreement to Prevent Unregulated High Seas Fisheries in the Central Arctic Ocean

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 268-284
Author(s):  
Jóhann Sigurjónsson
Keyword(s):  
Arctic Ocean ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Scientific Cooperation ◽  
Central Arctic Ocean ◽  
Fish Stocks ◽  
Management Measures ◽  
Interim Management ◽  
Ice Retreat ◽  
Sea Ice Retreat ◽  
High Seas

This paper reflects on several aspects of the Agreement to Prevent Unregulated High Seas Fisheries in the Central Arctic Ocean from the standpoint of Iceland, prior to, during and at the conclusion of the negotiations of the Agreement in late 2017. Particular reference is made to UNCLOS and coastal State interests, status of knowledge on the fish stocks and the importance of scientific cooperation which the Agreement facilitates. During the years 2008–2015, the so-called Arctic Five consulted on cooperation in Arctic matters including future management of fisheries in the central Arctic Ocean. These rather exclusive cooperative efforts were criticised by Iceland and other States that felt these matters were to be dealt with in a broader international context. It seems evident that Iceland’s desire to become a full participant in the process during the subsequent years was both based on legal arguments as well as fair and natural geopolitical reasons. Iceland became a participant in the negotiations in December 2015. The final version of the Agreement is a fully fledged platform for coordinating scientific research and it even allows for interim management measures until future regional management framework is in place. In essence, the Agreement can be taken as a regional fisheries management arrangement (RFMA), since most elements of relevance are incorporated in accordance with the 1995 UN Fish Stocks Agreement. The opening of the central Arctic Ocean for fishing is not likely to take place in the nearest future, although the development of sea ice retreat is currently faster than earlier anticipated. While the Agreement is today regarded as being historic due to its precautionary approach, future may prove that it was a timely arrangement in a fast-moving world with dramatic changes taking place in the Arctic Ocean.

The 2018 Agreement to Prevent Unregulated High Seas Fisheries in the Central Arctic Ocean: A Critical Analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 195-244 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valentin J. Schatz ◽  
Alexander Proelss ◽  
Nengye Liu
Keyword(s):  
Arctic Ocean ◽  
Critical Analysis ◽  
Specific Area ◽  
Central Arctic Ocean ◽  
Precautionary Approach ◽  
Governmental Organizations ◽  
Non Governmental Organizations ◽  
Conservation And Management ◽  
High Seas

Abstract Following almost ten years of negotiations, the Agreement to Prevent Unregulated High Seas Fisheries in the Central Arctic Ocean (CAOF Agreement) was concluded on 3 October 2018 in Ilulissat, Greenland. The CAOF Agreement is the first regional fisheries agreement adopted prior to the initiation of fishing in a specific area, and it has already been lauded as a science-based measure and a manifestation of the precautionary approach by representatives of States and Non-Governmental Organizations. This article provides a critical analysis of the content of the CAOF Agreement. It gives an overview of the negotiations which led to the conclusion of the CAOF Agreement and discusses its spatial and substantive scope. Particular attention is paid to the extent that the CAOF Agreement adopts a precautionary approach to conservation and management of high seas fisheries, and to the issue of participation in this regional fisheries treaty.

Warm Waters and Cold Shoulders: Jostling for Jurisdiction in Polar Oceans

2009 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 465-476 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosemary Rayfuse
Keyword(s):  
Arctic Ocean ◽  
International Community ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
Central Arctic Ocean ◽  
The Arctic Ocean ◽  
Polar Oceans ◽  
Ocean Ecosystem ◽  
High Seas

Abstract In May 2008 the five Arctic coastal states adopted the Ilullisat Declaration in which they asserted their role as stewards, for the international community, of the Arctic Ocean ecosystem. This paper discusses the legal basis for their claim to stewardship with particular reference to the high seas portion of the central Arctic Ocean, and their assertion that no need exists for a new comprehensive legal regime in respect of those high seas waters. It is argued that while the high seas regime of the Arctic may be extensive, it is not comprehensive. Thus, the legitimacy of the claim to stewardship rests on the willingness and ability of the Arctic coastal states to work to fill the lacunae and address the shortcomings in the legal regime for the high seas of the central Arctic Ocean.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document