(Un)claiming rights, resources, and ocean spaces: Marine genetic resources and area-based management tools in high seas governance negotiations

IF 3 2区 社会学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Environment and Planning. E, Nature and Space Pub Date : 2022-10-27 DOI:10.1177/25148486221132832
Emily C Melvin, L. Acton, L. Campbell
{"title":"(Un)claiming rights, resources, and ocean spaces: Marine genetic resources and area-based management tools in high seas governance negotiations","authors":"Emily C Melvin, L. Acton, L. Campbell","doi":"10.1177/25148486221132832","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"After years of informal efforts, the parties to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) are negotiating an international legally binding instrument to address governance gaps that have impeded attempts to conserve biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ). Though these discussions were initiated in response to concerns about biodiversity, states have used them to advance competing claims regarding rights of access, ownership, and control of ocean spaces and resources. This paper examines how states have discussed ocean space in negotiations regarding area-based management tools (ABMTs) and marine genetic resources (MGRs) at the first three intergovernmental conferences regarding biodiversity in ABNJ. ABMTs, which have become widespread in governing ocean space for conservation, are premised on an ontological framing that ocean space can be divided by geographical boundaries into territories for management. MGRs, on the other hand, are newly recognized governance objects that cross existing spatial boundaries: between areas of national and international jurisdiction, between the seafloor and water column, and between the ocean and the laboratory. Through their mobility, MGRs reveal how territorial forms of governance over material resources intersect with other forms of exclusion, control, and rights-based institutions, suggesting the need to develop creative management regimes that go beyond territorial approaches.","PeriodicalId":11723,"journal":{"name":"Environment and Planning. E, Nature and Space","volume":"70 1","pages":"1661 - 1681"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environment and Planning. E, Nature and Space","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/25148486221132832","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

After years of informal efforts, the parties to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) are negotiating an international legally binding instrument to address governance gaps that have impeded attempts to conserve biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ). Though these discussions were initiated in response to concerns about biodiversity, states have used them to advance competing claims regarding rights of access, ownership, and control of ocean spaces and resources. This paper examines how states have discussed ocean space in negotiations regarding area-based management tools (ABMTs) and marine genetic resources (MGRs) at the first three intergovernmental conferences regarding biodiversity in ABNJ. ABMTs, which have become widespread in governing ocean space for conservation, are premised on an ontological framing that ocean space can be divided by geographical boundaries into territories for management. MGRs, on the other hand, are newly recognized governance objects that cross existing spatial boundaries: between areas of national and international jurisdiction, between the seafloor and water column, and between the ocean and the laboratory. Through their mobility, MGRs reveal how territorial forms of governance over material resources intersect with other forms of exclusion, control, and rights-based institutions, suggesting the need to develop creative management regimes that go beyond territorial approaches.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
要求权利、资源和海洋空间:公海治理谈判中的海洋遗传资源和区域管理工具
经过多年的非正式努力,《联合国海洋法公约》(UNCLOS)缔约方正在就一项具有国际法律约束力的文书进行谈判,以解决阻碍在国家管辖范围以外地区保护生物多样性的治理差距。虽然这些讨论是为了回应对生物多样性的担忧而发起的,但各国利用它们来推进有关海洋空间和资源的使用权、所有权和控制权的竞争性主张。本文考察了在前三次关于ABNJ生物多样性的政府间会议上,各国如何在关于基于区域的管理工具(ABMTs)和海洋遗传资源(mgr)的谈判中讨论海洋空间。abmt在管理海洋空间以进行保护方面已得到广泛应用,其前提是海洋空间可以按地理边界划分为管理领域的本体论框架。另一方面,mgr是新认识到的跨越现有空间边界的治理对象:国家和国际管辖区域之间、海底与水柱之间、海洋与实验室之间。通过其可移动性,mrr揭示了对物质资源的地域性治理形式如何与其他形式的排斥、控制和基于权利的机构相互交叉,这表明有必要制定超越地域性方法的创造性管理制度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
13.80%
发文量
101
期刊最新文献
Expertise, trading zones and the planning system: A case study of an energy-from-biomass plant Grass versus trees: A proxy debate for deeper anxieties about competing stream worlds Everyday youth climate politics and performances of climate citizenship in Aotearoa New Zealand Political ecologies of a university and land at Cairo's urban periphery: The American University in Cairo's suburban desert campus ‘My body tells me to stay here’: Materiality, identity and everyday politics in Wentang Town, China
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1