Can existing institutions protect biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction? Experiences from two on-going processes

United Nations discussions on the governance of marine areas beyond national jurisdiction have questioned, but not yet reached a decision, on whether existing institutional agreements and structures are sufficient to meet global commitments to protect marine biodiversity, or if additional mechanisms may be required. This paper considers two very different efforts to protect marine biodiversity in these areas: (1) in the North-East Atlantic through the efforts of OSPAR Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic; and (2) in the central Atlantic, through the efforts of the Sargasso Sea Alliance led by the Bermuda government. In each case, action has been strongly supported by non-governmental organisations and subsequent progress has hinged upon on-going dedicated efforts of “champion” governments to bring other States on board. This paper outlines the difficulties that they have faced, and consequently why they have been time-consuming, and are not yet completed. The paper then considers 10 common recommendations that can be drawn from the experiences of these two distinct initiatives, and their relevance to on-going UN deliberations.     

A systematic approach towards the identification and protection of vulnerable marine ecosystems

The United Nations General Assembly in 2006 and 2009 adopted resolutions that call for the identification and protection of vulnerable marine ecosystems (VMEs) from significant adverse impacts of bottom fishing. While general criteria have been produced, there are no guidelines or protocols that elaborate on the process from initial identification through to the protection of VMEs. Here, based upon an expert review of existing practices, a 10-step framework is proposed: (1) Comparatively assess potential VME indicator taxa and habitats in a region; (2) determine VME thresholds; (3) consider areas already known for their ecological importance; (4) compile information on the distributions of likely VME taxa and habitats, as well as related environmental data; (5) develop predictive distribution models for VME indicator taxa and habitats; (6) compile known or likely fishing impacts; (7) produce a predicted VME naturalness distribution (areas of low cumulative impacts); (8) identify areas of higher value to user groups; (9) conduct management strategy evaluations to produce trade-off scenarios; (10) review and re-iterate, until spatial management scenarios are developed that fulfil international obligations and regional conservation and management objectives. To date, regional progress has been piecemeal and incremental. The proposed 10-step framework combines these various experiences into a systematic approach.     

Innovating for change in global fisheries governance: an introduction

On 23 September 2016, a workshop entitled “Innovating for change in global fisheries governance” was held in Tromsø, hosted by the K. G. Jebsen Centre for the Law of the Sea (JCLOS) at the Faculty of Law of UiT, The Arctic University of Norway. The aim of the workshop was to address the following question: How can international law be used as an innovative mechanism for change in global fisheries governance? Seven of the papers presented at the workshop, each one addressing a particular aspect of this overarching question, are published here in this special issue of Marine Policy.