Antarctic Treaty System Research Articles

An Ecological Reading of Sovereignty Claims in Antarctica

Abstract Article IV of the Antarctic Treaty has “frozen” the controversies over sovereignty in Antarctica. However, the seven States claiming sovereignty over the continent still have an important role in the Antarctic Treaty System. One of the areas where they show leadership is in environmental protection, which is a pivotal principle of Antarctica’s regime since the adoption of the Environmental Protocol in 1991. Their active role cannot be explained under a Westphalian interpretation of sovereignty, where states have absolute power over the exploitation of their natural resources. Notwithstanding, under a human-based interpretation of sovereignty, the conduct of the Claimant States may have a clearer explanation. This article will look into the practices of the Claimant States over the Antarctic to understand if and how their sovereignty claims may be linked to environmental protection.

Patterns of moss richness in Admiralty Bay, King George Island, cannot be explained by geological or ornithogenic drivers alone

AbstractWe set out to document the diversity and distribution of bryophytes in Admiralty Bay and thereby enable the identification of patterns in local diversity and their possible drivers. Combining data extracted from different sources and recent collections, we documented the presence of 63 species. Similarity analyses of moss species diversity in relation to underlying geology and ornithogenic influence identified an identical cophenetic correlation coefficient of 0.744 for both factors. The Sørensen index was < 0.6, indicating that the groups share < 60% of the species recorded. The data showed that the selected filters (ornithogenic soils, non-ornithogenic soils and different geological extracts) did not underlie consistent species groupings, and we conclude that other environmental and topographical factors are likely to be responsible for shaping the moss community structure in Admiralty Bay. To enable effective management of Antarctic Specially Managed Area (ASMA) No. 1 and Antarctic Specially Protected Area (ASPA) No. 128, robust assessments of the local ecosystem and biodiversity are necessary to assist in the decision-making processes mandated under the Antarctic Treaty System, one of whose founding principles is the preservation of the Antarctic ecosystem.

Antarctica in the gray zone

ABSTRACT All appears quiet on Australia’s southern front – Antarctica. The continent remains a beacon of cooperation, home to a continued system of international governance and scientific engagement, lauded as a political win from the depths of the Cold War. Beneath the surface, however, this article argues that strategic competition is now building. In Antarctica, this competition takes the form of gray zone activities. This article argues that the proliferation of gray zone challenges could jeopardize the future of the Antarctic Treaty System (ATS). This article analyses gray zone activity in Antarctica and highlights the growing complexity Australia faces, as Canberra pursues the dual objectives of protecting Australia’s territorial claim to the Australian Antarctic Territory (AAT) and bolstering the ATS.

Antarctic Treaty System at 60: fit for the future?

Antarctic Treaty System at 60: fit for the future?

Conservation Law in Antarctica and the Southern Ocean: the Antarctic Treaty System, conservation, and environmental protection

ABSTRACT The Antarctic Treaty System provides the corpus of law that governs the obligations of its Parties to protect and conserve the Antarctic environment. The System consists principally of the Antarctic Treaty (the Treaty), the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CAMLR Convention), and the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty (Environmental Protocol). The Antarctic Treaty establishes the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting – the body that makes decisions under the provisions of the Treaty and Environmental Protocol. The CAMLR Convention establishes the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) – its decision-making body. Together, these two international bodies are responsible for the modern-day conservation and environmental management regimes for Antarctica and the Southern Ocean. This paper looks at the scope of law developed under the Antarctic Treaty System and its evolution; and at the interaction between the different components of the Antarctic Treaty System. The paper also forecasts some of the future challenges to conservation and environmental protection in Antarctica and the Southern Ocean.

Legitimating the Antarctic Treaty System: from rich nations club to planetary ecological democracy?

ABSTRACT Like other international institutions, the Antarctic Treaty System (ATS) relies on the goodwill and self-binding commitment of its members. Legitimacy, understood as the belief in the ‘rightfulness’ of a governing arrangement by its stakeholders, lies at the heart of the ATS’ success as a multilateral institution. Global warming and geopolitical power shifts are poised to challenge established forms of Antarctic legitimacy and effectiveness, with external calls for Antarctic democratisation and reform increasing. Using the concepts of input, output, and throughput legitimacy, this paper explores how the ATS has been legitimated as the only authoritative decision-making context for Antarctic matters, internally amongst Treaty Partners as well as externally towards the rest of the international community. It argues that the increase of input legitimacy through the inclusion of more consultative parties led to a perceived lack of output legitimacy for some especially environmental critics which illustrates the importance but also the limits of maintaining consensus about throughput legitimacy: the agreed upon processes and rules of decision-making. Finally, the analysis problematises the inhibiting centrality of nation states and the logic of sovereignty during times of global ecological and geopolitical change and asks how an ambitiously democratic future of Antarctic governance in the Anthropocene might look like.

The Kerguelen Plateau: Interactions between the Law of the Sea and the Antarctic Treaty

Australia has benefited immensely from the maritime zone provisions of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC), particularly the provisions for the Extended Continental Shelf under Article 76. Australia’s comprehensive submission of continental shelf data to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf in 2004 included data occurring inside the Antarctic Treaty Area for three separate Australian territories; the Australian Antarctic Territory, Heard Island and McDonald Islands, and Macquarie Island. This raises questions surrounding the interactions between the LOSC and the Antarctic Treaty in the Southern Ocean. The paper focuses on the Kerguelen Plateau continental shelf deliniation, offering a timely analysis of Australia’s strategic interests here, as Australia seeks to prepare a new or revised Extended Continental Shelf data submission for Williams Ridge. Australia has sought to strike a strategic balance between supporting its territorial interests and derived benefits under LOSC in the Southern Ocean, whilst maintaining and further enhancing some of the key values and norms of the Antarctic Treaty System (ATS). The Kergulen Plateau case represents a strategic pursuit of territorial interests, carefully balanced with a determination to strengthen Australia’s influence within the ATS and enhance the reach of its provisions, particularly in regard to environmental protection and the mining prohibition under the Madrid Protocol.

Turkey’s Antarctic Quest

In the past five years, Turkey has become active in Antarctica, although these efforts have been overlooked in political and academic debates on Turkish foreign policy. In this article, Ali Bilgic explains the underlying reasons for Turkey’s accelerated efforts in Antarctica as part of its status-seeking foreign policy with a global geopolitical scope. He argues that, while Ankara clearly wants to build influence around the world, including Antarctica, it is unlikely that Turkey is seeking significant changes in the Antarctic geopolitical balance. Nevertheless, the patterns in Ankara’s behaviour suggest if the Antarctic Treaty System parties ignore or reject Turkey’s status-seeking in the region, then there might be a change in Turkish strategy. ◼

Continental shelves in the Antarctic region: implications for resource management

ABSTRACT This paper will focus on the interaction between the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and the Antarctic Treaty System, particularly the tensions and interplay between these two governance structures in relation to territorial sovereignty over continental shelves and extended continental shelves within the Antarctic Treaty area. Given the wealth of mineral resources buried within these shelves and the extremely fragile nature of the Antarctic ecosystem, this paper outlines what legal parameters were in place regarding state sovereignty. The submissions of Australia, Argentina and the United Kingdom to the Commission for the Limits of the Continental Shelf will be outlined and contrasted alongside the notes verbales lodged following their submission. Finally, the paper will highlight how the form of CLCS submission of each state could impact their resource management potentials in the future concluding with what suggestions could be made for the yet to be finalised, Chilean submission.

The continental, the hemispheric and the global Antarctica: Southern perspectives of climate change and the governance of Antarctica

ABSTRACT The present paper seeks to examine southern perspectives on climate change and their effects on Antarctica. Following that objective, the paper analyses, from a theoretical/philosophical and historical perspective, three different images of Antarctica that have played key roles in shaping the governance of the continent. Thus, I distinguish between the idea of a continental Antarctica, characterised as exceptional and isolated; the idea of a hemispheric – or regional – Antarctica, which relates to the vicinity of the southern hemisphere countries, their environmental identity with the southern polar regions and the more direct and immediate linkages between the Antarctic and the southern countries’ environments; and the idea of a global Antarctica, which stress the planetary dynamics that interlink the continent with the global phenomena. Whether the Antarctic Treaty and the evolution of the Antarctic Treaty System seem to have incorporated those different images successfully, the evolving and increasing phenomenon of climate change has stressed the idea of the global Antarctica as opposed to the continental Antarctica, disregarding the image of the hemispheric Antarctica. That could lead to efforts to widen or even open up participation in the regime, an option that most likely would confront a strong rebuttal from existing southern member countries, in particular from those that hold territorial claims upon Antarctica. As a conclusion, I argue that any successful attempt to address the global problem of climate change needs to take into account the perspectives of the southern countries and their particular identity/links with the Antarctic region, including their environments; and that any possible governance framework would need to accommodate the three disparate visions of Antarctica in order to be successful and ensure that the Antarctic remains free from strong political discord and conflicts.

Problems of The Antarctic Treaty System (Political and Legal Aspects)

The article considers the key factors that affect the stability of the Antarctic Treaty System (ATS), erode its basic norms and provisions, lead to strengthening of political and legal contradictions between countries and, in general, to a prospective strengthening of interstate conflicts. Among those factors are the attempts of some claimant states to form maritime zones of sovereignty, sovereign rights and jurisdiction in the Antarctic waters and the process of defining the outer limits of the continental shelf within the framework of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf initiated by them. The author shows how justifying their actions with references to the rights and powers granted to them under modern international maritime law, and above all the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, leads to an imbalance of the entire System. The unresolved questions concerning the applicability of the concept of common heritage of mankind (CCH) to the Antarctic, the legality of the formation of maritime zones around the sub-Antarctic islands and restrictions on the exercise of national jurisdiction on the continent itself increase pressure on the sustainability of the established legal regime. It is in the interests of the Russian Federation not to allow the complete destruction of the established system of governance, and if it is inevitable, to be ready to pursue an active policy to defend its national interests.

Genetic Approach on Sanionia uncinata (Hedw.) Loeske to Evaluate Representativeness of in situ Conservation Areas Among Protected and Neighboring Free Access Areas in Maritime Antarctica and Southern Patagonia

The Antarctic Specially Protected Areas (ASPAs) are zones with restricted access to protect outstanding environmental, scientific, historic, aesthetic, or wilderness values adopted inside the Antarctic Treaty System. Meanwhile, in southern Patagonia, conservation initiatives are implemented by the state of Chile and private entities. However, both are considered unrepresentative. Our work evaluates the representativeness of thein situconservation through a genetic approach of the mossSanionia uncinata(Hedw.) Loeske among protected and neighboring free access areas in Maritime Antarctica and southern Patagonia. We discuss observed presence with both current and reconstructed past potential niche distributions (11 and 6 ka BP) in the Fildes Peninsula on King George Island. Results showed occurrence of several spatially genetic subpopulations distributed inside and among ASPA and free access sites. Some free access sites showed a higher amount of polymorphism compared with ASPA, having ancestry in populations developed in those places since 6 ka BP. The different spatial and temporal hierarchies in the analysis suggest that places for conservation of this species in Maritime Antarctica are not well-represented, and that some free access areas should be considered. This work represents a powerful multidisciplinary approach and a great challenge for decision-makers to improve the management plans and the sustainable development in Antarctica.

Weighing the Sources of International Law

Abstract There is a long-standing debate on the weight or preference given to different sources of international law in jurisprudence. This article aims to discuss the interplay of three pairs of sources of international law; namely between old treaties and new treaties, treaties and customs, and existing treaties and emerging treaties in the context of three regions which are featured with typical maritime related issues. In the Arctic region, the 1925 Svalbard Treaty and the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (unclos) become the sources of conflicts or different legal positions between Norway and some other States who are parties to both treaties. In the South China Sea, the major legal issue, among many other important ones such as island regime, is the relationship between unclos as a treaty law and historic rights as a customary international law. The Antarctic Treaty System (ATS) may be influenced by the new instrumental arrangements made by Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction (bbnj) negotiation, reflecting the importance of ensuring the emerging treaty will not interrupt the jurisdiction of established treaties.

Exploitation of Antarctic Iced Freshwater: A Call To Unfreeze Legal Discourse

While discussed within the Antarctic Treaty System during the 1970s-1980s, the idea of iceberg harvesting was laid on ice due to the lack of adequate technologies and scientific knowledge on the potential environmental implications. However, the State Parties to the ATS envisioned the possibility of reopening the legal discourse. For that purpose, iced freshwater resources exploitation was excluded from the scope of the Madrid Protocol containing a ban on all mineral mining activities within the scope ratione loci of the ATS. However, during the negotiations, it was agreed that if the prospect of iceberg harvesting was ever to be realised, the environmental protection provisions under the Madrid Protocol should apply. The present paper provides an analysis of whether the potential exploitation of iced freshwater resources proves realistic within the existing legal framework under the Antarctic Treaty System and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and discusses which rules States would need to adhere to when engaging in such activities. It arrives at the conclusion that, as to now, there is no prohibition of iceberg harvesting for freshwater use under international law. Nevertheless, both within the scope of the ATS and in the high seas, environmental regulations restrict the implementation of the activity and, therefore, require comprehensive environmental impact assessments to be conducted before the commencement of the activity. Furthermore, as ownership allocation of icebergs is not regulated under the relevant treaties, the present paper examines two legal regimes that may potentially govern iceberg acquisition in the high seas, namely, res nullius and res communis. Finally, as private efforts have become more far-reaching in the recent decades, an overview of the current state of practice is presented, highlighting the observed advantages and potential drawbacks. Conclusively, the present paper advocates for the reopening of the legal discourse on the subject matter before the commencement of exploitation activities so as to ensure that the fragile Antarctic environment is protected and preserved for the benefit of all humankind in accordance with the object and purpose of the ATS.

China and the Antarctic: Presence, policy, perception, and public diplomacy

China has made significant investments in Antarctica and has become an active participant in Antarctic governance. Its activities in Antarctica in particular appear to be designed to ensure that China will not be left out should there be beneficial opportunities in Antarctica in the future. In some Western narratives, China has become a so-called ‘challenger’ due to their perception of China being ‘aggressive’ in the polar regions. However, this point has its own counter argument based on the common practice of states to actively join international institutions and subsequently update their domestic law-making process. China appears to have taken a two-fold approach in Antarctic governance—being generally both supportive of the Antarctic Treaty System (ATS) and also keen to make its own mark in shaping future development of the ATS in a manner that promotes China’s interests. The outcomes of China’s polar investments may well bring as much benefit to itself as to many other interested players. It is important that China continues to support current norms that promote cooperation and limit competition or challenge them.

An international hierarchy of science: conquest, cooperation, and the 1959 Antarctic Treaty System

The Antarctic Treaty System (ATS), created in 1959 to govern the southern continent, is often lauded as an illustration of science’s potential to inspire peaceful and rational International Relations. This article critically examines this optimistic view of science’s role in international politics by focusing on how science as a global hierarchical structure operated as a gatekeeper to an exclusive Antarctic club. I argue that in the early 20th century, the conduct of science in Antarctica was entwined with global and imperial hierarchies. As what Mattern and Zarakol call a broad hierarchy, science worked both as a civilized marker of international status as well as a social performance that legitimated actors’ imperial interests in Antarctica. The 1959 ATS relied on science as an existing broad hierarchy to enable competing states to achieve a functional bargain and ‘freeze’ sovereignty claims, whilst at the same time institutionalizing and reinforcing the legitimacy of science in maintaining international inequalities. In making this argument, I stress the role of formal international institutions in bridging our analysis of broad and functional hierarchies while also highlighting the importance of scientific hierarchies in constituting the current international order.

3. Antarctica

This report provides an overview of the legal and policy developments relating to Antarctica. It focuses on the forty-second Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting (ATCM), held in Prague, Czech Republic, on 1–11 July; the twenty-second meeting of the Committee for Environmental Protection (CEP), held in Prague on 1–5 July; and the thirty-eighth meeting of the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR-38), held in Hobart, Australia, from 21 October to 1 November. After a discussion of operational issues of the Antarctic Treaty System (ATS), the report emphasizes a few selected issues that were discussed at the ATCM and the CEP meetings, such as bioprospecting, tourism, and non-governmental activities and environmental protection. It then turns to some issues discussed at CCAMLR-38: marine protected areas (MPAs) and the impacts of climate change on the conservation of Antarctic marine living resources (all reports and documents relating to the ATCM and...

Legitimacy of the Antarctic Treaty System: is it time for a reform?

ABSTRACT The Antarctic Treaty System (ATS) has governed the Antarctic for the last six decades ensuring it to be a place of peace and scientific cooperation. Like any institution, the ATS exists in order to solve collective action problems through coordination and the creation of norms. But how do we know if a particular institution is the right one to solve a specific problem or address issues regarding the governance of a region? And when is it time to replace or reform such an institution? To answer these questions, we need an account of institutional legitimacy. An assessment of the legitimacy of the ATS is necessary in order to determine whether it is worthy of being empowered through support, or if it is time to reform some aspects of it. Building on the account of legitimacy of global governance institutions proposed by Buchanan and Keohane, the paper assesses the legitimacy of the ATS and argues that it is time to reform some components of it. Specifically, the paper assesses the legitimacy of the ATS based on the following criteria: minimal moral acceptability; comparative benefit; institutional integrity; and accountability. The paper highlights the ATS’ shortcomings based on these criteria and suggests reforms that will strengthen the legitimacy of the ATS

Introductory essay: Polar regions and multi-level governance

ABSTRACT This introductory essay synthesises the contributions to this special issue on polar regions and multi-level governance, showing how they address three important themes in the study of institutional complexes: interplay management; the influence that global institutions and processes exert on regional regimes; and the ways in which states and other actors pursue their interests within complexes of institutions. The institutional complexes in focus here comprise institutions relevant to Arctic Ocean governance, EU–Arctic relationships, Arctic maritime boundary disputes, the Antarctic Treaty System (including CCAMLR), the preservation of cultural heritage and the traditional economy in Newfoundland and Labrador, and scientific research in Svalbard.

Participation in the Antarctic Treaty

ABSTRACT Participation in the Antarctic Treaty and its main decision-making body – the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting (ATCM) – has been highly sensitive from the outset, in particular due to the fundamental issue of Antarctic territorial sovereignty and the ATCM’s decision-making by unanimity. Broader participation means enhanced applicability of the Antarctic Treaty and acts adopted by the ATCM, but does not necessarily improve effectiveness because each new participant obtains a de facto right to veto. There are multiple reasons why States want to participate in the Antarctic Treaty and other key instruments of the Antarctic Treaty System, including reasons related to the issue of Antarctic territorial sovereignty and the ability to engage in activities such as scientific research, tourism and exploitation of resources. The objective of this article is to analyse the grounds and requirements for participation in the Antarctic Treaty, their genesis during the negotiations on the Antarctic Treaty, and their subsequent operationalisation and application in practice.