Pub Date : 2019-07-03DOI: 10.1080/18366503.2019.1648991
M. Haward
{"title":"The Great Barrier Reef: Biology, Environment and Management","authors":"M. Haward","doi":"10.1080/18366503.2019.1648991","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/18366503.2019.1648991","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":37179,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Maritime and Ocean Affairs","volume":"62 1","pages":"199 - 200"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"91034042","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-06-23DOI: 10.1080/18366503.2019.1633988
J. Shaw
ABSTRACT Ocean governance has been portrayed as a challenge since the seas have many resources and valuable environmental features with interested parties across jurisdictions. Different types of ocean governance are recognised worldwide in countries ranging from law-centred practices to planning across set periods of time. Australia coasts and oceans have three layers of government with institutional arrangements across many layers of actors. Trends indicate uncertainty for many listed species, despite improving management in some areas, as reported in the Australian State of the Environment publications. Environmental governance has recently been used as a solution to deal with the scale of environmental problems of oceans and the associated blue economy. Environmental governance has dealt with processes of efficiency, effectiveness, institutional arrangements, social justice and capacity building, but much of this literature focuses on process and lacks an outcome and performance orientation. This paper presents a framework for environmental governance that addressed this lack of outcome and performance orientation. Examining the case study of marine reserves in Victoria, Australian insights are presented that may be significant for future ocean governance.
{"title":"A framework for oceans – lessons in environmental governance","authors":"J. Shaw","doi":"10.1080/18366503.2019.1633988","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/18366503.2019.1633988","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Ocean governance has been portrayed as a challenge since the seas have many resources and valuable environmental features with interested parties across jurisdictions. Different types of ocean governance are recognised worldwide in countries ranging from law-centred practices to planning across set periods of time. Australia coasts and oceans have three layers of government with institutional arrangements across many layers of actors. Trends indicate uncertainty for many listed species, despite improving management in some areas, as reported in the Australian State of the Environment publications. Environmental governance has recently been used as a solution to deal with the scale of environmental problems of oceans and the associated blue economy. Environmental governance has dealt with processes of efficiency, effectiveness, institutional arrangements, social justice and capacity building, but much of this literature focuses on process and lacks an outcome and performance orientation. This paper presents a framework for environmental governance that addressed this lack of outcome and performance orientation. Examining the case study of marine reserves in Victoria, Australian insights are presented that may be significant for future ocean governance.","PeriodicalId":37179,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Maritime and Ocean Affairs","volume":"113 1","pages":"149 - 164"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80562588","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-04-03DOI: 10.1080/18366503.2019.1634940
Jeffrey McGee, Nengye Liu
The Antarctic Treaty has effectively managed this tension by demilitarising the Antarctic continent and directing all human presence on the continent towards peaceful use and scientific research.
{"title":"The challenges for antarctic governance in the early twenty-first century","authors":"Jeffrey McGee, Nengye Liu","doi":"10.1080/18366503.2019.1634940","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/18366503.2019.1634940","url":null,"abstract":"The Antarctic Treaty has effectively managed this tension by demilitarising the Antarctic continent and directing all human presence on the continent towards peaceful use and scientific research.","PeriodicalId":37179,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Maritime and Ocean Affairs","volume":"101 1","pages":"73 - 77"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80445648","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-04-03DOI: 10.1080/18366503.2019.1611173
Mark Hoskin
ABSTRACT There have been recent claims in the media that Great Britain and other nations who operate Freedom of Navigations Operations ‘FONOPS’ in the South China Sea have taken no stance concerning the sovereignty of the three island groups that are the subject of dispute among the PRC, Philippines, and Vietnam. This paper investigates those claims through examination of the historical record from 1930 to 1941, during the Sino-Japanese conflict that was the East Asian precursor to World War Two. It utilises publications and statements made by a variety of government officials for findings of fact and continuity among nations, which can be seen by the International Court of Justice ‘ICJ’ and other judicial bodies as recognition by a reasonable person in being. Through an application of applicable laws and court findings, it utilises the results of the examination to arrive at an equitable viewpoint, in line with the statements made by British, Chinese, French, and Japanese officials in the course of their duties. The article finds that there was an overwhelming burden of evidence to support a finding that these nations have historically taken a stance concerning the sovereignty of now disputed island groups in the South China Sea.
{"title":"Have Great Britain and other nations previously taken a stance concerning the islands in the South China Sea?","authors":"Mark Hoskin","doi":"10.1080/18366503.2019.1611173","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/18366503.2019.1611173","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT There have been recent claims in the media that Great Britain and other nations who operate Freedom of Navigations Operations ‘FONOPS’ in the South China Sea have taken no stance concerning the sovereignty of the three island groups that are the subject of dispute among the PRC, Philippines, and Vietnam. This paper investigates those claims through examination of the historical record from 1930 to 1941, during the Sino-Japanese conflict that was the East Asian precursor to World War Two. It utilises publications and statements made by a variety of government officials for findings of fact and continuity among nations, which can be seen by the International Court of Justice ‘ICJ’ and other judicial bodies as recognition by a reasonable person in being. Through an application of applicable laws and court findings, it utilises the results of the examination to arrive at an equitable viewpoint, in line with the statements made by British, Chinese, French, and Japanese officials in the course of their duties. The article finds that there was an overwhelming burden of evidence to support a finding that these nations have historically taken a stance concerning the sovereignty of now disputed island groups in the South China Sea.","PeriodicalId":37179,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Maritime and Ocean Affairs","volume":"42 1","pages":"132 - 145"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74561280","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-04-03DOI: 10.1080/18366503.2019.1637679
Jeffrey McGee, M. Haward
ABSTRACT The Antarctic Treaty System (ATS) is regarded as one of the more successful cases of international governance. For nearly 60 years, the ATS has provided the basis for peaceful use of the Antarctica and facilitated international cooperation on scientific research on the continent. The ATS now faces several new challenges largely driven by global environmental change from human activities carried out outside the region. Most prominently, human-induced climate change is impacting the Antarctic cryosphere and marine ecosystems of the Southern Ocean and increasing the scope of human activities in these areas. A key challenge for Antarctic governance will be managing regime interaction between the ATS and the growing number of environmental, resource management and wider regimes operating in the region. Given this institutional complexity, we argue that the concept of an ‘Antarctic regime complex' provides useful insights for understanding interaction between the ATS and other institutions operating within the region. Finally, we conclude that the ATS will likely require a new level of institutional resilience in interacting other regimes within the Antarctic regime complex, as it continues to perform a key role in shaping governance of the region.
{"title":"Antarctic governance in a climate changed world","authors":"Jeffrey McGee, M. Haward","doi":"10.1080/18366503.2019.1637679","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/18366503.2019.1637679","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The Antarctic Treaty System (ATS) is regarded as one of the more successful cases of international governance. For nearly 60 years, the ATS has provided the basis for peaceful use of the Antarctica and facilitated international cooperation on scientific research on the continent. The ATS now faces several new challenges largely driven by global environmental change from human activities carried out outside the region. Most prominently, human-induced climate change is impacting the Antarctic cryosphere and marine ecosystems of the Southern Ocean and increasing the scope of human activities in these areas. A key challenge for Antarctic governance will be managing regime interaction between the ATS and the growing number of environmental, resource management and wider regimes operating in the region. Given this institutional complexity, we argue that the concept of an ‘Antarctic regime complex' provides useful insights for understanding interaction between the ATS and other institutions operating within the region. Finally, we conclude that the ATS will likely require a new level of institutional resilience in interacting other regimes within the Antarctic regime complex, as it continues to perform a key role in shaping governance of the region.","PeriodicalId":37179,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Maritime and Ocean Affairs","volume":"9 1","pages":"78 - 93"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81850604","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-03-21DOI: 10.1080/18366503.2019.1589898
S. Scott
ABSTRACT Both the UNFCCC governing climate change and the Antarctic Treaty System that governs Antarctica can now be understood as multi-treaty regimes situated within an Antarctic and Southern Ocean regime complex. The theory of Cognitive Structures of Cooperation (CSC Theory) provides a framework within which to analyse normative developments within a regime complex. Using CSC Theory this paper compares the two regimes in terms of robustness and effectiveness, before considering their interaction within the Antarctic and Southern Ocean regime complex. It finds that both have prioritised regime robustness over effectiveness. This is contrary to an assumption implicit in the Paris Agreement – that as the climate change challenge becomes worse, ambition (to increase effectiveness) will increase. For the ATS, the risk of prioritising institutional robustness over effectiveness is ultimately a loss of relevance.
{"title":"Comparing the robustness and effectiveness of the Antarctic treaty system and the UNFCCC regime","authors":"S. Scott","doi":"10.1080/18366503.2019.1589898","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/18366503.2019.1589898","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Both the UNFCCC governing climate change and the Antarctic Treaty System that governs Antarctica can now be understood as multi-treaty regimes situated within an Antarctic and Southern Ocean regime complex. The theory of Cognitive Structures of Cooperation (CSC Theory) provides a framework within which to analyse normative developments within a regime complex. Using CSC Theory this paper compares the two regimes in terms of robustness and effectiveness, before considering their interaction within the Antarctic and Southern Ocean regime complex. It finds that both have prioritised regime robustness over effectiveness. This is contrary to an assumption implicit in the Paris Agreement – that as the climate change challenge becomes worse, ambition (to increase effectiveness) will increase. For the ATS, the risk of prioritising institutional robustness over effectiveness is ultimately a loss of relevance.","PeriodicalId":37179,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Maritime and Ocean Affairs","volume":"40 1","pages":"106 - 94"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75747687","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-03-15DOI: 10.1080/18366503.2019.1589899
Daniela Portella Sampaio
ABSTRACT Antarctica presents an exceptional governance framework. The expansion of sovereignty and territoriality primary institutions demanded a different norm localisation from international society, creating practices and identities unique to the region. In order to preserve peace, delimited territories with exclusive exercise of authority could not be replicated. This conundrum led to the suspension of sovereignty discussions by the Antarctic Treaty, and an emphasis on activities which could accommodate multiple understandings of authority. Scientific research and environmental protection provided the avenue which consolidated the Treaty by reinforcing its exceptional character. Decision-making has been exclusive to Consultative parties, a status awarded for those able to demonstrate substantive scientific research. Likewise, environmental protection has defined Antarctic territorial organisation by creating different protected areas. Nevertheless, joint proposals are still low. Therefore, this work concludes that the institutionalisation of the Antarctic Treaty has stabilised, and concrete cooperation still has a long way to go.
{"title":"The Antarctic exception: how science and environmental protection provided alternative authority deployment and territoriality in Antarctica","authors":"Daniela Portella Sampaio","doi":"10.1080/18366503.2019.1589899","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/18366503.2019.1589899","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Antarctica presents an exceptional governance framework. The expansion of sovereignty and territoriality primary institutions demanded a different norm localisation from international society, creating practices and identities unique to the region. In order to preserve peace, delimited territories with exclusive exercise of authority could not be replicated. This conundrum led to the suspension of sovereignty discussions by the Antarctic Treaty, and an emphasis on activities which could accommodate multiple understandings of authority. Scientific research and environmental protection provided the avenue which consolidated the Treaty by reinforcing its exceptional character. Decision-making has been exclusive to Consultative parties, a status awarded for those able to demonstrate substantive scientific research. Likewise, environmental protection has defined Antarctic territorial organisation by creating different protected areas. Nevertheless, joint proposals are still low. Therefore, this work concludes that the institutionalisation of the Antarctic Treaty has stabilised, and concrete cooperation still has a long way to go.","PeriodicalId":37179,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Maritime and Ocean Affairs","volume":"20 1","pages":"107 - 119"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89593563","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-03-05DOI: 10.1080/18366503.2019.1589897
Nengye Liu
ABSTRACT This paper examines three dimensions of China’s rise in Antarctica: (1) history (2) activities; and (3) governance. Historically, China was missing in Antarctic affairs for long time. Over the past four decades, as a reflection of China’s rapid economic growth after the adoption of ‘Open Door' policy, Chinese activities in the Antarctic can be seen as rising, especially in science, fisheries and tourism. Nevertheless, this paper argues that rather than having a secret agenda to pursue, China is still shaping up its general Antarctic policy. China’s capacity to advance its interests within the Antarctic Treaty System is not significant either. After defining what China’s rise in Antarctica is, the paper provides some suggestions regarding Australia’s China strategy in Antarctica in the future.
{"title":"The rise of China and the Antarctic Treaty System?","authors":"Nengye Liu","doi":"10.1080/18366503.2019.1589897","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/18366503.2019.1589897","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper examines three dimensions of China’s rise in Antarctica: (1) history (2) activities; and (3) governance. Historically, China was missing in Antarctic affairs for long time. Over the past four decades, as a reflection of China’s rapid economic growth after the adoption of ‘Open Door' policy, Chinese activities in the Antarctic can be seen as rising, especially in science, fisheries and tourism. Nevertheless, this paper argues that rather than having a secret agenda to pursue, China is still shaping up its general Antarctic policy. China’s capacity to advance its interests within the Antarctic Treaty System is not significant either. After defining what China’s rise in Antarctica is, the paper provides some suggestions regarding Australia’s China strategy in Antarctica in the future.","PeriodicalId":37179,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Maritime and Ocean Affairs","volume":"138 1","pages":"120 - 131"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86526976","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-22DOI: 10.1080/18366503.2019.1572447
O. Krasnyak
{"title":"World history through the history of the oceans and seas","authors":"O. Krasnyak","doi":"10.1080/18366503.2019.1572447","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/18366503.2019.1572447","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":37179,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Maritime and Ocean Affairs","volume":"132 1","pages":"146 - 148"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86343431","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-02DOI: 10.1080/18366503.2018.1559524
P. V. Hung, Kwang-Soo Kim, Moonjin Lee
ABSTRACT Marine hazardous and noxious substances (HNS) and oil spills cause serious environmental pollution problem in the ASEAN region because it is prevalent in the Southeast Asia Sea and has a wide range of impacts and long-term consequences on the marine ecosystem, coastal resources, human health and socio economy. Transboundary HNS and oil pollution risk require a commensurate response capability. Therefore, building practical response capability in the ASEAN region according to an international framework appears to be necessary. This article examines historical pollution incidents in the ASEAN region caused by HNS and oil spill incidents and documents to a milestone in cooperation response to HNS and oil spills in the region, and proposes some recommendations of how to strengthen cooperation.
{"title":"Cooperative response to marine hazardous and noxious substances and oil spill incidents in the ASEAN region","authors":"P. V. Hung, Kwang-Soo Kim, Moonjin Lee","doi":"10.1080/18366503.2018.1559524","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/18366503.2018.1559524","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Marine hazardous and noxious substances (HNS) and oil spills cause serious environmental pollution problem in the ASEAN region because it is prevalent in the Southeast Asia Sea and has a wide range of impacts and long-term consequences on the marine ecosystem, coastal resources, human health and socio economy. Transboundary HNS and oil pollution risk require a commensurate response capability. Therefore, building practical response capability in the ASEAN region according to an international framework appears to be necessary. This article examines historical pollution incidents in the ASEAN region caused by HNS and oil spill incidents and documents to a milestone in cooperation response to HNS and oil spills in the region, and proposes some recommendations of how to strengthen cooperation.","PeriodicalId":37179,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Maritime and Ocean Affairs","volume":"79 1","pages":"61 - 72"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89168717","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：