Contemporary initiatives on the future of the International Whaling Commission

In his term as Chairman of the International Whaling Commission between 2006 and 2009, Dr BillHogarth championed a process for finding a way forward for the IWC. In parallel with, and in places intertwined with the Hogarth Initiative, a number of other initiatives attempting to move the IWC forward have been proposed by a range of stakeholders; both governments and NGOs. This paper traces the more important suggestions, commenting on their likelihood of success.     

Modernisation of the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling

Modernisation of the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW) has long been proposed by some contracting states and outsiders as a way of resolving the “Whaling Dispute” within the International Whaling Commission (IWC); however, both sides of the debate have traditionally been unconvinced that they would gain enough benefit to make the process worthwhile.     

Compromise in the IWC: Is it possible or desirable?

It is widely assumed that a compromise position must be reached between pro- and anti-whaling groupings within the International Whaling Commission. This assumption is based on the belief that the Commission will collapse in the absence of any such compromise, and has been the driving force behind a number of compromise proposals in recent years. This paper argues that the fundamental positions of the two groups are so different, and that both groups are getting enough from the current position as to make it unattractive to either group to make any serious concessions toward a compromise position.The suggested solution is for the two groups to “agree to disagree”; using the resulting improvement in goodwill between them to focus on cooperation on those aspects of whale conservation on which they can agree.     

Japan׳s whaling following the International Court of Justice ruling: Brave New World – Or business as usual?

Since 1987, Japan has conducted extensive special permit whaling (“scientific whaling”) in the Antarctic and North Pacific. This has been viewed by many as a way to circumvent the International Whaling Commission׳s (IWC) moratorium on commercial whaling, which was implemented in 1985. Recently, Australia took Japan to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) over this issue. Using various criteria, the Court ruled that Japan׳s whaling was not “for purposes of scientific research” as required by Article VIII of the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling, and ordered Japan to immediately cease its JARPA II whaling program in the Antarctic. Despite optimism that the Court׳s ruling might spell the end of Japanese whaling in the Antarctic and even elsewhere, Japan has indicated that it will redesign its whaling programs and continue operations. Based upon Japan׳s history at the IWC, I argue here that this was an expected outcome; I predict the course of events over the next months, and suggest that the ICJ ruling, while satisfying as an independent vindication of Japan׳s critics, represents little more than a temporary setback for that nation׳s whaling enterprise.     

Whale watching, the Buenos Aires Group and the politics of the International Whaling Commission

Whale watching is now reputed to be a $2 billion a year industry. This industry has the potential to impact the politics of whaling, specifically the moratorium on all commercial whaling in three ways: by creating political and economic counterweights to whalers, by countering claims about who may legitimately manage whales and to what end and by transforming views about whales and whaling both within whaling states and beyond. This article examines whale watching in Latin America and the Caribbean and the alliance of Latin American and Caribbean members of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) known as the Buenos Aires Group (BAG). The BAG group has emerged as coherent group opposing the ending of the moratorium and championing the views of whale watchers. The article finds that whale watching creates a politically important interest group in an area lacking whaling operations; it argues that these regional opponents of whaling provide a counter weight to charges that opposition to whaling is exclusively the providence of rich, urban citizens of developed countries and draw upon politically powerful frames in justifying their opposition to the lifting of the moratorium. Finally, it finds limited evidence that whale-watching is associated with a rise in general concern for marine mammals in the region. There remains the question, however, of what the future of whale watching in the region will be over the longer term.     

Management and conservation at the International Whaling Commission: A dichotomy sandwiched within a shifting baseline

The International Whaling Commission's (IWC) Scientific Committee provides important advice to the IWC on a large variety of cetacean species, sub-species and populations and the issues affecting them. Cetaceans are facing increasing, non-whaling-related threats, and the Scientific Committee (SC), in accordance with the Commission's requests, has strengthened its conservation-oriented research work. A selection of the reports of the Scientific Committee from between 1986 and 2012 was assessed for its: (i) fundamental research; (ii) management; (iii) conservation; and (iv) administrative content, and to identify potential trends over time. Recommendations and their urgency were also examined, as implied from the language used by the SC in its reports. The analysis showed that the work of the Scientific Committee has increasingly been oriented towards conservation issues over the period reviewed, but at the same time this conservation work has received little funding. Increased support for conservation-related research projects is warranted to promote the long-term survival of cetaceans. Based on this review of the content and focus of the Committee reports, the analysis suggested that its issued advice be made clearer, whenever possible, and governments are urged to give due consideration to this science-based advice particularly when urgent conservation actions are needed. In addition, more consistent funding of the IWC's conservation-related research should be pursued to improve international conservation outputs regarding cetacean populations.     

Normalization of the International Whaling Commission

In 2006, the pro-whaling group within the International Whaling Commission introduced a programme of “Normalization” in an attempt to address its long held accusation that the Commission is dysfunctional. This paper traces the twin issues of dysfunctionality and normalization; it looks at the progress of the Normalization initiative so far, and assesses its likelihood of success. The paper also briefly examines “Modernization”, as an alternative for anti-whaling proponents to Normalization.     

The whaling issue: Conservation,confusion, and casuistry

Morishita's “multiple analysis” of the whaling issue [Morishita J. Multiple analysis of the whaling issue: Understanding the dispute by a matrix. Marine Policy 2006;30:802–8] is essentially a restatement of the Government of Japan's whaling policy, which confuses the issue through selective use of data, unsubstantiated facts, and the vilification of opposing perspectives. Here, we deconstruct the major problems with Morishita's article and provide an alternative view of the whaling dispute. For many people in this debate, the issue is not that some whales are not abundant, but that the whaling industry cannot be trusted to regulate itself or to honestly assess the status of potentially exploitable populations. This suspicion has its origin in Japan's poor use of science, its often implausible stock assessments, its insistence that culling is an appropriate way to manage marine mammal populations, and its relatively recent falsification of whaling and fisheries catch data combined with a refusal to accept true transparency in catch and market monitoring. Japanese policy on whaling cannot be viewed in isolation, but is part of a larger framework involving a perceived right to secure unlimited access to global marine resources. Whaling is inextricably tied to the international fisheries agreements on which Japan is strongly dependent; thus, concessions made at the IWC would have potentially serious ramifications in other fora.     

The scientific value of scientific whaling

Scientific whaling has polarized opinion for decades, and its scientific value has been intensely debated. Here, the output of scientific whaling programs is examined by comparing it to the scientific output pertaining to whales of countries that do not practice scientific whaling. Between 1986 and 2013, whaling and non-whaling countries produced, on average, similar total numbers of publications that were directly relevant to the goals of the scientific whaling permits issued by the International Whaling Commission (IWC), and similar numbers of papers that were relevant to whale ecology and conservation but not directly related to IWC goals. Half of the scientific productivity of scientific whaling countries resulted from non-lethal data collection. One-third of publications by whaling countries were published in peer-reviewed outlets, compared to twice as many for non-whaling countries. Publications by whaling countries were cited ~4 times less often than those of non-whaling countries, with no evidence of citation discrimination against whaling countries since the citation rates of papers that did and did not use lethal sampling were similar. These academic criteria suggest that although the overall volume of science produced by scientific whaling countries is similar to that of non-whaling countries, the quality of the science is not. Arguably, academic criteria are not the best way to assess the usefulness of science for management and conservation, but demonstrating links between the science produced by scientific whaling, its integration in management plans and actions, and shifts towards sustainable exploitation or recovery of whale populations is challenging.     

The Hogarth initiative on the future of the International Whaling Commission

Dr Bill Hogarth of the USA was the Chairman of the International Whaling Commission from 2006 to 2009. In a typical masterpiece of understatement, at the beginning of his term, he launched an initiative to reform the IWC with the words “it would be useful for the Commission to have a general discussion concerning the future of the IWC, given…the number of issues for which polarisation rather than consensus appears to be the norm”. This paper follows his initiative through three annual, and two intersessional meetings of the IWC, commenting on the major issues and events as well as the actions of the main players. It concludes with an analysis of the results of the initiative, and makes some predictions for the future of the IWC.     

The case for an international commission for the conservation and management of sharks (ICCMS)

The current rate of shark global exploitation and mortality is arguably so high under current management regimes that unless a renewed initiative is undertaken some species of shark will become effectively extinct. Current efforts to sustainably manage shark mortality are driven primarily by domestic laws in a few countries, big international non-governmental organizations (BINGOs) promoting environmental laws in the countries or regions where they exist, a handful of regional fisheries management organizations (e.g., IATTC and ICCAT), and inter-governmental organizations such as CITES. The absence of enforcement capability is often argued as the critical component in the failure to protect sharks from overexploitation. The remedy advanced here goes far beyond the need for stepped up enforcement, and calls for the creation of an entirely new international management regime, the International Commission for the Conservation and Management of Sharks (ICCMS). Such an agency could learn from the experiences of management bodies tasked with conservation of species biologically similar to sharks, such as the International Whaling Commission (IWC), to improve its efficacy. Critics have identified many organizational flaws that reduced the IWC’s effectiveness during its earliest years. Some of those flaws are examined here and remedies are suggested that an ICCMS could use to create a more effective management regime. The life histories of elasmobranches and large whales are compared to illustrate their similarities as a biological foundation for the selection of the IWC as a model.     

Shifting baselines in scientific publications: A case study using cetacean research

The marine sciences have undergone a sequence of historical changes related to new methodologies, approaches and challenges. Most recently, deteriorating natural ecosystems and threatened component species have prompted a renewed change in the focus of scientific research on the marine environment. This study analyzes the scientific literature on cetaceans during the period 2005–2008 to demonstrate that a key focus of modern research is on conservation-related topics, and then compares it to the period 1970–1973 to demonstrate that this new focus represents a shift from basic biological and ecological issues. On average, approximately 46% of papers published on whales, dolphins and porpoises in 2005–2008 were categorized as conservation oriented versus focused on biology or ecology. This contrasts to approximately 10% in 1970–1973. This shift parallels other marine research subjects, such as benthic communities, coral reefs and sea turtles and reflects a general paradigm shift in marine research towards anthropogenic impacts. This is important guidance for institutions and organizations that wish to base their agendas and decisions on state-of-the-art scientific priorities.     

Small state,maritime great power? Norway’s strategies for influencing the maritime policy of the European Union

In 2007 the EU Commission published the so-called “Blue Book” aimed at developing an Integrated Maritime Policy for the Union. Even though Norway is not an EU member and is usually referred to as a small state, this article shows how the Norwegian government was able to exercise significant influence on EU maritime policy development, positioning itself as one of the key actors. Applying the negotiation theory and tracing the process as it unfolded, this analysis identifies causal relationships leading to increased influence for Norwegian actors—particularly in respect to how issues concerning the Arctic became an integrated part of the policy. The paper concludes that even though the Norwegian actors had a strategic point of departure, utilizing objective advantages to maximize their own utility, their influence may also have been due to competence and sharing of knowledge. The article relies on official documents, but is to a large extent also based on interviews with key EU Commission and Norwegian governmental representatives. On an elevated, substantive analytical level the article contributes to the “small state” research agenda and its interest in how small states in international relations might influence policy outcomes and thrive in the international community.     

Multiple analysis of the whaling issue: Understanding the dispute by a matrix

The contentious whaling dispute can be described as a scientific dispute over resource management, the collision between nations that regard whales as food and nations that see whales as special, political game played by politicians who like to be seen as environmentally conscious by opposing whaling, and economic interests of the whaling industry and fundraising anti-whaling organizations. All of these different interpretations are correct, however, none, by themselves, can explain the whole picture of the controversy. This paper, by constructing a matrix, presents a comprehensive picture of this complex dispute and some options for making a progress.     

Lessons in precaution: The International Whaling Commission experience with precautionary management

The precautionary principle (PP) only represents a new approach to managing uncertainty in so far that it requires proponents of an activity or substance to provide evidence that the activity/substance is harmless, as opposed to the more traditional “trial and error” approach that has instead placed the burden of proof that something is harmful on its opponents. This article critiques the PP as a policy making tool for managing uncertainty, focusing on the epistemological problems it raises, before then using the International Whaling Commission's experience with precautionary approaches to wildlife management to demonstrate the principle's limits and weaknesses when applied in a highly politicised policymaking environment. The article concludes that while the PP offers some benefits for managing uncertainty, its vagueness and openness to broad interpretation can also result in its application creating, rather than limiting, risks and uncertainty.     

The sustainable use and conservation of biodiversity in ABNJ: What can be achieved using existing international agreements?

While the international community debates the desirability and possible content of a new global instrument for the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction, alternative approaches to improving the application and implementation of existing agreements for the protection of biodiversity appear to have fallen off the agenda. Recent practice under existing global and regional agreements suggests that, given political will, significantly greater protections could be achieved through the more effective implementation of individual sectoral agreements. However, while single-sector measures have the potential to make a valuable contribution, ultimately only multi-sectoral, integrated, cooperative management can ensure the conservation and long-term sustainable use of marine biodiversity in ABNJ. This requires establishing mechanisms for cooperation both intra and inter-sectorally, as well as between the sectoral and global and regional conservation agreements. This paper examines recent initiatives within various sectoral and conservation treaty regimes aimed at improving their application within ABNJ as well as some of the challenges to, and options for, further and better cooperation and coordination among and between existing regimes, and it identifies a range of possible mechanisms for achieving more effective implementation and coordination among them. Greater use of existing mechanisms represents a sensible approach to making the most of existing arrangements without in any way foreclosing the possibility of the adoption of a more comprehensive, integrated global agreement for the protection of marine biodiversity in ABNJ.     

Assessment of IUU fishing for Southern Bluefin Tuna

Illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing is recognized as one of the largest threats to the sustainability of the world's fisheries. This paper focuses on IUU fishing in the context of unreported catches by members or co-operating non-members of regional fisheries management organizations (RFMOs) and their implications for scientific assessments of stock status and management advice. A review of Japanese market statistics was undertaken in 2006 by an independent panel in relation to catches of southern bluefin tuna (SBT). Based on this review, the Commission for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna (CCSBT) concluded that very substantial and continuous unreported catches of SBT had been taken by longline vessels since at least the early 1990s. While uncertainty exists about the fleets contributing to these IUU catches, the assumption used within the CCSBT Scientific Committee is that a significant proportion of these were taken by Japanese longliners. Implications of these unreported catches for the stock assessments by RFMOs are discussed in light of the central role that Japanese vessel reported data have in the assessment of the world's tuna and billfish stocks. Results indicate that it is plausible that the unreported catches of SBT stem from the misreporting of catches as other tuna species and/or the location of fishing effort. The magnitude and extended period of the unreported SBT catches highlight the wide-spread risks of relying on fishery dependent logbook data in the absence of verification. An urgent need exists for minimum standards of verification of catch, effort and landing statistics for use in scientific assessments. The fisheries science community needs to be more pro-active in the development of such standards and the implementation of independent monitoring and verification. In addition, there is a need to reform the operation of the scientific bodies of RFMOs in terms of transparency, the treatment of uncertainty and the burden of proof if they are to be effective in providing objective scientific advice consistent with the intent of international agreements.     

Power Europe: EU and the illegal,unreported and unregulated tuna fisheries regulation in the West and Central Pacific Ocean

Illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing activities are widely considered a main cause of unsustainable fisheries across the globe. The EU has taken a leading role in the fight against IUU fishing, using both its market and normative power to advance its EU IUU Regulation (no. 1005/2008) and wider fisheries sustainability agenda outside its territory. This paper examines how successful the EU has been in using its market and normative power to influence regulatory strategies and frameworks governing tuna fisheries in the Pacific Islands region of the Western Pacific Ocean. The results indicate that while the market power of the EU remains an influential factor, the diminishing normative power of the EU in WCPO is weakening any attempts to implement its IUU fishing regulation and Pacific Island nations have promoted their own regulatory agenda. We conclude that the changing asymmetries between market and normative power has led to a differentiated geography of regulatory uptake, and while market power will remain a dominant strategy for the EU, normative power, when exercised should focus on cooperation rather than ‘teaching’ the benefits of an EU regulatory approach.     

A new (old) approach to inshore resources management in Samoa

Increasing populations and development in many of the small Pacific Island nations have placed heavy pressures on coastal environments and on inshore fisheries. The population of Samoa, in the Southwestern Pacific, has increased 5–6-fold in the past 150 years. Wetlands, lagoons and coral reefs have been seriously degraded because of inappropriate land-use and fisheries practices and recent catastrophic cyclones, and many fish and invertebrate stocks have declined in the past 10–15 years. A research program was established in 1990 to determine the status of the coastal and inshore environments, to monitor inshore subsistence and commercial fisheries, to determine the status of stocks, and to identify potential management actions. An inventory of inshore resources was produced using aerial photography and ground and underwater surveys. Fisheries catch and effort were established through a national census, questionnaire surveys in households and schools, and creel and market surveys. A major aid program was commenced in 1995 by the Australian government (AusAID) to assist Samoa to establish an effective inshore fisheries and environment management program. A key strategy was the devolution of powers in inshore fisheries management back from the national government to the villages and local fishers. A culturally appropriate co-management model was developed and tested, and has now been adopted by many villages. An inshore fisheries extension capability was developed within Samoa's Fisheries Division to assist villagers to undertake their own environmental and fisheries surveys; identify major factors affecting fisheries; identify ways of reducing these factors; establish an agreed (between village council and national government) plan of management and regulations; and establish their own fisheries management bodies. By the end of 1997 the Inshore Fisheries Extension Service had been established and trained; 26 villages had entered the co-management program and established their own plans of management; and 20 fisheries reserves had been established. The techniques for inshore environmental and fisheries assessment and management developed for Samoa are applicable, with appropriate modification, to subsistence fishing communities elsewhere in the South Pacific.     

The global potential for whale watching

Whaling as a commercial enterprise is now defunct, not least due to the moratorium placed on it by the International Whaling Commission (IWC) almost 20 years ago. However, two distinct groups, one in favor of ‘sustainable’ whaling and one completely opposed to any killing of whales, continue to argue at the IWC and other political arenas. Almost ignored in this debate is the current growth of the whale watching industry, a logical alternative use for whale populations. Based on ecological and socio-economic criteria, the potential for whale watching is estimated for maritime countries that do not currently engage in this industry. Results suggest that whale watching could generate an additional 413 million USD (2009) in yearly revenue, supporting 5,700 jobs. Together with current global estimates, this would bring the total potential for the whale watching industry to over 2.5 billion USD in yearly revenue and about 19,000 jobs around the world. These results are discussed from an economic and conservation policy perspective, with emphasis on potential benefits and limitations.