Jockeying for Position

The Falklands War was a reminder that naval conflict could mean massive restrictions on the use of the oceans. Meanwhile, few Western countries ratified the Convention in the decade after it was finalized. With the Convention stalled, the United States conducted “freedom of navigation” operations to ensure that countries did not claim more of the oceans than Washington thought legal. US operations led to a clash with Libya and a confrontation with the Soviet Union. Other countries focused on sharpening claims to islands, which could give governments rights to nearby waters. At the same time, pressure grew on countries to grapple with overfishing. The costs of unrestricted high-seas fishing became evident in the Bering Sea, where a multinational fleet exhausted fish stocks. The thawing of the Cold War led to diplomatic breakthroughs on both high-seas fishing and seabed mining, paving the way for large-scale ratifications of the Convention.

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

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.

Effective Governance and Policy Implementation in Governing High Seas Fisheries: A Comparative Study of Three Regional Fisheries Management Organizations

<p>Two-thirds of fish stocks commercially fished on the high seas are either depleted or overexploited. Regional Fisheries Management Organizations (RFMOs) are key international actors having the legal competence to establish fishery conservation and management measures to improve the optimal and sustainable utilization of high seas fisheries resources. The literature suggests that their effectiveness is varied. While some RFMOs are making progress towards more sustainable fisheries, some are facing fish stock depletion. The literature indicates that organizational governance design and quality of implementation are central to the disparities. Thus far, while most of the discussion has focused on the effectiveness, and how to enhance the transparency of RFMOs, very little research has explored the designs of governance arrangements and implementation of RFMOs. Accordingly, this study contributes to the literature on governance arrangements and policy implementation of the high seas by offering in-depth case studies of the selected RFMOs. It employs qualitative methods to analyze data collected from semi-structured interviews with 24 actors (i.e., officials, delegations, and fisheries experts), as well as a collection of published and unpublished documents regarding three selected RFMOs. The three selected RFMOs are the Commission for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna (CCSBT), the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC), and the South Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Organization (SPRFMO). The findings show that it is possible to apply Ostrom’s (1990) design principles to uncover how RFMOs can be designed for higher performance in governing high seas fisheries. However, adjusted and additional design principles are necessary to have a better understanding of the factors that contribute to sustainable high seas fisheries. For example, the design principles should include policy learning and adaption, particularly in the regional and global contexts, so as to address complexities and uncertainties. Furthermore, the research reveals a number of critical factors of RFMO policy implementation, such as strong political will and commitment, the availability of proper resources and coalitions. This study concludes with recommendations for policymakers of the RFMOs to better achieve their overarching objectives.</p>

Effective Governance and Policy Implementation in Governing High Seas Fisheries: A Comparative Study of Three Regional Fisheries Management Organizations

<p>Two-thirds of fish stocks commercially fished on the high seas are either depleted or overexploited. Regional Fisheries Management Organizations (RFMOs) are key international actors having the legal competence to establish fishery conservation and management measures to improve the optimal and sustainable utilization of high seas fisheries resources. The literature suggests that their effectiveness is varied. While some RFMOs are making progress towards more sustainable fisheries, some are facing fish stock depletion. The literature indicates that organizational governance design and quality of implementation are central to the disparities. Thus far, while most of the discussion has focused on the effectiveness, and how to enhance the transparency of RFMOs, very little research has explored the designs of governance arrangements and implementation of RFMOs. Accordingly, this study contributes to the literature on governance arrangements and policy implementation of the high seas by offering in-depth case studies of the selected RFMOs. It employs qualitative methods to analyze data collected from semi-structured interviews with 24 actors (i.e., officials, delegations, and fisheries experts), as well as a collection of published and unpublished documents regarding three selected RFMOs. The three selected RFMOs are the Commission for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna (CCSBT), the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC), and the South Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Organization (SPRFMO). The findings show that it is possible to apply Ostrom’s (1990) design principles to uncover how RFMOs can be designed for higher performance in governing high seas fisheries. However, adjusted and additional design principles are necessary to have a better understanding of the factors that contribute to sustainable high seas fisheries. For example, the design principles should include policy learning and adaption, particularly in the regional and global contexts, so as to address complexities and uncertainties. Furthermore, the research reveals a number of critical factors of RFMO policy implementation, such as strong political will and commitment, the availability of proper resources and coalitions. This study concludes with recommendations for policymakers of the RFMOs to better achieve their overarching objectives.</p>