Abstract

By definition, marine protected areas (MPAs) and other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs) address spatial aspects of the ecological processes and marine features. Such a requirement is especially challenging in areas where there is no clearly defined jurisdiction. However, in these areas, assigning sovereignty and rights can be achieved through bilateral or multilateral agreements, or with the use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) tools such as mediation and arbitration. In some cases, states may engage in transboundary marine conservation initiatives to provide an entry point to enable wider collaboration. These processes can also evolve into a form of ‘environmental peacebuilding’ while ideally maintaining ecosystem functioning and resilience as a core goal. Conversely, MPAs and OECMs can also be used to assert maritime sovereignty rights over disputed waters, under the pretext of conserving marine habitats. This paper identifies emerging issues of conflict resolution and their interaction with transboundary marine conservation. While ADR focuses on negotiations and facilitated processes between state representatives (“track one diplomacy”), we also discuss other forms and levels of marine environmental peacebuilding and dispute resolution, particularly those between civil society organizations (“track two diplomacy”). The six case studies presented highlight areas of recent maritime conflict or border disputes in the Mediterranean Sea, the Red Sea, the West Indian Ocean, the Korean West Sea and the South China Sea. In all cases, high ecological value, vulnerable ecosystems, and the need to conserve ecosystem services provide a shared interest for cooperation despite on-going diplomatic difficulties. The strategies used in these cases are analyzed to determine what lessons might be learned from cross-border collaborative marine initiatives in situations of territorial dispute. The use of ADR tools and their ability to support joint marine initiatives are examined, as well as how such initiatives contribute to formal border negotiations. Other forms of inter-state dialogue and cooperation between local or civil organizations, circumventing formal treaties and negotiations between state leaders (‘track two’) are also investigated. Finally, other influencing factors, including third-party involvement, stakeholder interests, power dynamics, economic context, and socio-cultural aspects, are considered.

Highlights

  • Marine protected areas (MPAs), and other effective areabased conservation measures (OECMs) take various forms in regions of border disputes

  • The current paper primarily examines case studies that involve the more common, and identified, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) tools of mediation and arbitration, and as other types of conflict management or resolution, and various forms of diplomacy

  • As opposed to conflict resolution, can be found where unilateral steps were taken. These include unilateral declarations of sovereignty by a state over the disputed area, as in the cases of Croatia and Slovenia and Italy and Tunisia. This could be the unilateral establishment of MPAs in or near the disputed zone, as in the cases of the two Koreas, the South China Sea, and Israel and Lebanon

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Marine protected areas (MPAs), and other effective areabased conservation measures (OECMs) take various forms in regions of border disputes. Efforts include bilateral and multilateral initiatives between countries, peri-border ‘buffer’ zones or demilitarized zones (DMZs), as well as unilateral implementation of conservation areas to apply control over a region (Mackelworth et al, 2019) As on land, these transboundary initiatives can be used for improving interstate relations (i.e., ‘environmental peace-building’), as either a primary or secondary goal, alongside ecosystem protection or rehabilitation (Mackelworth, 2016; Portman and Teff-Seker, 2017). The article reviews case studies from Europe, the Middle East, South-East Asia and Africa, where MPAs and OECMs were either planned or implemented, describing their interaction with specific ADR tools (see Figure 1) These are all cases where the protection of ecologically significant areas interacts with important ecosystem services such as fisheries, tourism, and mineral extraction. Lessons learned from analyzing partial success, as well as failure (Giakoumi et al, 2018) may provide insights into these and other cases, where conserving marine biodiversity across borders, as well as in the area beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ), is becoming a priority

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call