Economic Jurisdiction Research Articles

NORTH PACIFIC FISHERIES ENVIRONMENT: INTERNATIONAL ISSUES

The extension of economic jurisdiction to 200 nautical mile Exclusive Economic Zones or Fishing Limits enabled coastal and island nations to add vast wealth to their exclusively owned natural resource portfolios. Simultaneously, the rights of nations to distant water fisheries were, at best, reduced to privileges. The motives for enclosure were economic, political, and strategic. However, simple economic theory suggests certain potential outcomes. First, if fishery stocks remained constant, restrictions and charges would make fishing in foreign zones relatively more costly, fishing in the remaining high seas less costly, and fishing in the domestic zone possibly less costly. Relative costs also may favor exploitation of coastal and fresh water regions for aquaculture. Second, because stocks do not remain constant, depletion in some areas will alter relative costs. Investments in conservation will be limited to claimed areas, where investors capture the benefits. Third, wherever maritime claims overlap or otherwise are unsettled, international tension will mount. The analysis here demonstrates that these expectations have become reality in the North Pacific.

Down to the sea with stakes: The evolving law of the sea and the future of the deep seabed regime

Abstract International regimes almost always reflect two or more principles. In recent centuries the law of the sea has reflected a tradeoff between free access and national enclosure, and then recently a third principle, common heritage, was integrated into the regime. The relative prominence of these principles has been influenced by changing uses of the oceans, the distribution of benefits from alternative regulatory arrangements, and changes in the distribution of power. The 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea represents a complex balancing of the three principles. The extension of coastal‐state economic jurisdiction to 200 miles and the increased assurances of freedom of navigation have broad support, but the hybrid free‐access/common‐heritage regime for deep seabed mining has been challenged by some developed countries that favor greater weight for free access. These are, however, not likely to be the two alternatives. Rather they are likely to be a hybrid close to that in Part XI o...