31 May 2001
Report on Workshop on the Performance of the Exclusive Economic
Zones:
1. Background and
objective of workshop
The establishment of 200-mile Exclusive Economic Zones
(EEZs), bringing a substantial part of the world ocean under the jurisdiction
of coastal states, constitutes one of the most far-reaching institutional
changes in international society during the twentieth century. Vast ocean areas
with an enormous wealth of natural resources have been turned into assets of
coastal states. A principal justification for this change was the growing sense
during the decades leading up to the third United Nations Conference on the Law
of the Sea (UNCLOS III) that international efforts to manage human uses of
marine resources had failed. More than 100 EEZs are currently in force.
The principal goal of Performance of the Exclusive
Economic Zones project is to analyse the consequences resulting from the change
from a regime based on "open access" to the resources of the high
seas to enclosure of vast ocean areas into exclusive economic zones from the
1970's onwards. The core concern of this activity can be stated as:
How
has the establishment of EEZs and the resultant shift in jurisdiction over the
marine resources of more than one third of the world ocean affected our ability
to use these resources in a sustainable and equitable manner?
The Performance of Exclusive Economic Zones (PEEZ) project constitutes a
flagship activity of the international research project on the Institutional
Dimensions of Global Environmental Change (IDGEC). PEEZ seeks to contribute to
the work of IDGEC by addressing four prominent clusters of effects associated
with EEZ-based regimes: biophysical effects, socioeconomic effects,
legal-constitutive effects, and cognitive effects. PEEZ aims at producing
research yielding policy relevant results.
PEEZ works trough a
network of interested scientists contributing through their own projects. The
major means of collaboration is through workshops where selected groups of
scientists meet to address certain issues of relevance to PEEZ. The PEEZ core
areas are the Arctic and the Southeast Asian region. One workshop in each of
these regions has therefore been planned.
The first workshop was
held in Tromsø 30 March – 1 April 2001. The objective of the workshop was to
bring together prominent scientists and practitioners in the realm of ocean
governance, and to develop the research questions and strategies. In setting
out the themes of the workshop and in selecting the participants the main
criteria were 1) to identify the crucial research issues and to refine the
research questions, and 2) to bring the discussions to bear on the
international as well as the national and local levels of governance.
2. Themes
The workshop covered 4
substantial and 1 explorative sessions, with some 20 presentations
altogether. The substantial sessions
covered issues related to the following:
-
international
arrangements and governance for oceans management
-
domestic
arrangements and their effects in relation to the management of living marine
resources
-
institutional interplay and ocean
governance
-
ideas and
communities in oceans management
The theme of international
arrangements and governance for oceans management centers on the
institutions set up for the management of the oceans at the international
level. At a fundamental level, the Law of the Sea Convention defines the rights
and duties of states in this respect. From a legal point of view, the fisheries
provisions of the EEZ regime have been a success. The balance between various
interests in part V has on the whole been respected, in that practice has
adapted to the regime. The establishment of EEZs has triggered a dynamic
process where the ocean governance regime has been developed in significant
ways at the global, regional, national and local levels. At the global level,
the adoption and implementation of the 1995 UN Fish stocks Agreement has
brought new principles for fisheries management to the fore as well as linked
the right to fish at the high seas with a duty to cooperate through regional
fisheries management organizations. The agreement has also paved the ground for
more extensive enforcement schemes in the context of the management of
straddling and highly migratory fish stocks. As a consequence of these
developments, regional fisheries organizations are increasingly viewed as
“vehicles of good governance”. To improve the understanding of the preconditions
for their effective functioning it is however necessary to make analytical
distinctions between regional fisheries management organizations, regional
development and coordination organizations and regional scientific research
organizations. Studies exploring the character and evolutions of such dynamic
processes, where one set of changes – the establishment of the EEZs – are
leading to a whole stream of further institutional developments – are much
needed.
The theme of domestic
arrangements and their effects in relation to the management of living marine
resources explores the ways domestic regimes affect the management of
living marine resources. Such constitutive or legal effects of the
establishment of the EEZs opens up policy spaces at the regional and national
level that provide important arenas for developing ocean policies. The
influence organized interests bring to bear on management depends on the
characteristics of the fishing industry itself. In order to understand effects
of such influences it is thus important to understand the landscape of policy
preferences among firms in the fishing industry, and the conditions under which
intra-industry conflicts can be reconciled. Domestic politics may also impact
on international fisheries agreements. The empirical evidence from the North
Atlantic is that a country with a constrained domestic bargaining space is more
able to force an agreement close to its preference than countries with less
constrained bargaining spaces. In the Eastern North Pacific case the management
regime has more than anywhere else sought to include stakeholders in
decision-making. Ecosystem approaches are increasingly being applied in the
management of groundfish fisheries, e.g. in the Northeast Pacific. The approach
relies on public participation, reliance on scientific research and advice,
conservative catch quotas, comprehensive monitoring and enforcement, by-catch
controls, gear restrictions temporal and spatial distribution of the fisheries,
and habitat conservation areas. In this realm, comparative studies of different
national policies as well national policy responses are called for.
Institutional interplay and ocean governance as a theme is a concerned with the fact that institutions do not exist
in isolation, but interact with one another. Such interaction, or interplay,
affects the performance, or effectiveness, of institutions. The EEZ regime
interacts with a number of other global regimes. One case in point is that of
the global biodiversity regime, as laid down in the 1992 Biodiversity
Convention. The effects of the biodiversity regime on the EEZ fisheries regime
can be traced by exploring impacts on the functions of the EEZ regimes in terms
of research, regulations and enforcement on the one hand, and by looking at such
effects at the global, regional and national levels. A biodiversity perspective
on management appears to have certain significance at the global level, while
it seems to be negligible in a national context. Another area of interplay is
that between the EEZ regime and the international trade regime. One salient
issue here is that of the relationship between the 1995 WTO TRIPS Agreement
concerning access to and ownership of genetic resources and the provisions of
the EEZ regime regarding sovereign rights over natural resources and marine
scientific research in the EEZ. This issue also concerns the relationship to
the biodiversity regime’s provisions access to genetic resources. Still another
form of interplay concerns the vertical interaction within a given sector:
international commitments are in most cases implemented through national
regimes, and this “vertical interplay” is crucial to the actual performance of
the EEZ regimes, as demonstrated for example in the case of Russia. In the same
vein, there is also an interaction between international and national regimes
and the local level. Resource conservation phenomena may have an international
as well as localized character – Pacific salmon is a case in point. This theme
is at the core of current debates in the scholarly community, and is a research
focus in the IDGEC project.
The ideas and
communities theme address the issue of the relationship between ideas and
institutions. Ideas and perspectives can affect institutions and policies, and
institutions can influence the development of ideas. Extended coastal state
jurisdiction is but one example of how an idea has come to affect the way
oceans and resources are managed. Over the last decade or so ideas relating to
environmental conservation has gained increasing importance in the realm of
living marine resources management. “Environmental commitments” has a number of
implications not only for the requirements to fisheries policies (e.g. that
management be based on a precautionary approach), but also to the processes
through which policies are developed. An improved understanding of
participation – a stakeholder theory – is thus required. Another change
relating to the performance of EEZs here results from change in ownership and
access rights, which tends to affects knowledge production. That is, the way
the oceans management regime is organized affects the organization and quality
of science, which in turn has implications for policy and the effects of
management policies at the international, regional, national and local levels.
The ideas and communities theme is crosscutting in the sense that it is
relevant to the other themes under discussion here.
3. The way ahead
A final explorative
session addressed issues to be addressed in the future development of PEEZ, in
addition to those raised above. One question requiring further attention is
that of delimitation of EEZs between countries and division of fish stocks. An
analysis of delimitation models and important drivers in this context is
needed. Another issue is that of implementing EEZ legislation, in particular in
the Southeast Asian region, where many claims for ocean space are unsettled. A
third issue is that of a broader exploration and analysis of the relationship
between the international trade regime and the EEZ regime. Interplay between
these regimes occurs among other things with regard to trade prohibitions,
health standards, subsidies, ecolabelling and dispute resolution. A final issue
coming up is that of the relationship between knowledge and institutions,
relating also to scientific negotiations and the effectiveness of environmental
institutions.
The final output of
the Performance of the Exclusive Economic Zones project will be an edited
volume addressing the themes discussed above. There will be at least two papers
addressing each theme. Explicit efforts will be made to compare and contrast
the two priority regions: the Arctic and Southeast Asia.
A 2nd
workshop will be held (probably) late in 2001 in Australia, to be funded by
local funding sources. The Australia workshop will move the discussions from
the Tromsø workshop further, fleshing out the final chapter plan, and focus on the Southeast Asian context.
4. Funding and
practicalities
The workshop was made
possible thanks to generous grants from the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign
Affairs and the Norwegian Research Council. It was hosted by the Department of
Political Science at the University of Tromsø on March 30 – April 1. The
department contributed to the funding of the workshop through in kind
contributions.
The participants at
the workshop (see list of participants below) made 1-2 presentations each (see
program of presentations below), 20 altogether. The 14 participants came from
Australia, Italy, Norway, and the USA, and represented the following academic
disciplines: Law, political science and anthropology. We have aimed for young
and active scientists who are pursuing research issues at the core of the PEEZ
concern. We also included persons with experience from working in institutions
actually doing oceans management (FAO and NAMMCO), so as to have practical
experiences to bear on academic discussions.
Due to limited funding
the ambitions for the workshop had to be considerably reduced. The number of
participants was reduced relative to the original plan for the workshop.
An excursion was
arranged on Sunday 1 April to Sommarøya, a small fishing village outside
Tromsø.
29.03.01
PERFORMANCE
OF THE EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONES:
MANAGEMENT,
TRADE AND KNOWLEDGE
Department of Political Science, University of
Tromsø, 9037 Tromsø, Norway
Funded by the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Norwegian Research Council, and the Department of Political Science, University of Tromsø
0900 1st session: Introduction
and context
- Welcome and practicalities.
- Oran R. Young, Dartmouth College:
The Performance
of the Exclusive Economic Zones Project in the context of the Institutional
Dimensions of Global Environmental Change
- Alf Håkon Hoel, University of Tromsø:
The Performance of the Exclusive Economic Zones Project
1000 2nd
session: ideas and communities in oceans management
- Grete Hovelsrud, NAMMCO:
Managing
living marine resources in the high north: A local community perspective.
- Knut Mikalsen, University of Tromsø
Ideas and institutional change: the
"green" challenge to fisheries
(co-)management.
- Virginia Walsh, Rutgers University:
Changing ownership and access rights, changing knowledge.
1215 Lunch
1315 3rd session: international arrangements and governance for
oceans management
- Bill Edeson, FAO Legal Office
The development of the EEZ regime and its major
features.
- Tore Henriksen, University of Tromsø
The 1995 Fish Stocks Agreement.
- Are Sydnes, Norwegian College of Fisheries
Science
Regional fisheries management organizations: structure and functions.
1530 4th session: domestic arrangements and their effects in relation
to the management of living marine resources
- Frank Alcock, Harvard University
The Fault Lines of Conflict in North Atlantic
Fisheries.
- Aslaug Asgeirsdottir, Harvard University:
Cooperation
and Conflict in the North Atlantic and the Barents Sea.
- David Fluharty, University of Washington:
Prospects of Success and Spectre of Failure in Establishment of the US EEZ in the Northeast Pacific.
2000: Dinner at Arctandria
0900 5th session:
institutional interplay and ocean governance
- Alf Håkon Hoel, University of Tromsø
The challenges posed to EEZ management by the Biodiversity
Convention.
- Merrilyn Wasson, Australian
National University
Ownership of genetic resources in the EEZ: national claims, traditional claims, the Biodiversity Convention and intellectual property rights under WTO TRIPS.
- Geir Honneland, FNI:
The implementation of international commitments: the case of Russia.
- Syma Ebbin, Dartmouth College:
Examining
International-Local Linkages: The Effect of the MFCMA on the Co-management of
Salmon in the US Pacific Northwest
- Oran Young, Darmouth College:
Where are we?
1200 Lunch
1300: 6th session:
where do we go?
- Aslaug Asgeirsdottir, Harvard University:
Dividing the Pie: Overlapping Interests and Cooperative Outcomes.
- Bill Edeson, FAO:
The South East Asia EEZ arrangements and their implementation
- Alf Håkon Hoel, University of Tromsø:
Trade, Environment and Living Marine Resources: EEZ Management of living marine resources and the international trade regime
- Virginia Walsh, Rutgers University:
Project on institutions and knowledge
1800: Closure
1900: Party at Bamsestien 7.
Sunday 1 April: Excursion
List of participants
Research
Fellow Frank Alcock
Belfer
Center for Science Int. Affairs
Harvard
University
John F.
Kennedy St.
Cambridge,
MA 02138
Tel:
(617) 496-0426
Fax:
(617) 496-0606
Email: Frank_alcock@harvard.edu
Research
Fellow Aslaug Asgeirsdottir
Center
for basic Research in the Social Sciences
Harvard
University
34
Kirkland St.
Cambridge,
MA 02138 USA
Tel: (617) 496-3871
Email: aasgeirs@latte.harvard.EDU
Executive
Officer Syma Ebbin
IDGEC-IPO
6214
Fairchild
Dartmouth
College
Hanover,
NH 03755 USA
Tel:
(603) 646-1455
Fax:
(603) 646-1279
Email: syma.ebbin@dartmouth.edu
Legal
advisor Bill Edeson
Legal
Office
FAO
Rome
00100 ITALY
Tel:
(0039) 06-57053476
Email: william.edeson@FAO.org
Prof.
David Fluharty
School
of Marine Affairs
University
of Washington
3707
Brooklyn Ave. NE
Seattle,
Washington 98105 USA
Tel:
(206) 685-2518
Fax:
(206) 543-1417
Email: Fluharty@u.washington.edu
Research
Fellow Tore Henriksen
Faculty
of Law
University
of Tromso
Breivika
N-9037
Tromso NORWAY
Tel: (47) 77645237 (w)
Email: tore.henriksen@jus.uit.no
Prof.
Alf Håkon Hoel
Dept.
of Political Science
9037
Tromsø NORWAY
Tel:
+47-77-64-55-42
Email: hoel@sv.uit.no
Secretary
General Grete Hovelsrud-Broda
NAMMCO
University
of Tromsø
9037
Tromsø NORWAY
Tel:
(47)77645908/04
Fax: (47)77645905
Email: gretehb@nammco.no
Research
Fellow Geir Hønneland
The
Fridtjof Nansen Institute
Box 326
N1326 Lysaker
NORWAY
Tel:
(47) 6711 1900/19
Fax:
(47) 67 11 19 10
Email: geir.honneland@fni.no
Prof. Knut Mikalsen
Dept.
of Political Sciences
University
of Tromso
9037
Tromso NORWAY
Tel:(47)
776-44312
Email: Knutm@sv.uit.no
Research
Fellow Are K. Sydnes
Norwegian
College of Fisheries Science
University
of Tromso
9037
Tromso, NORWAY
Tel:
(47) 77646085
Email: ares@nfh.uit.no
Prof.
Virginia Walsh
Rutgers
University
#6 East Mill Rd.
Long
Valley, NJ USA 07853
Tel (908) 876-3570
Fax: (973)353-5103
Email: vwalsh@andromeda.rutgers.edu
Dr.
Merrilyn Wasson
Ecosystem
Dynamics Group, RSBS
Australian
National University
ACT
0200 AUSTRALIA
Tel: 61
2 6125 4020 or 0175
Fax: 61
2 6125 5095
Email: wasson@anu.edu.au
Prof.
Oran R. Young
Institute
on Int. Environmental Governance
6214
Fairchild
Dartmouth
College
Hanover
NH 03755 USA
Tel:(603)
646-1253
Fax:(603)
646-1279
Email: oran.young@Dartmouth.edu