The southern hemisphere is dominated by oceanic influences with 80% of its surface area consisting of ocean space. It hosts abundant marine biodiversity, which is under increasing pressure from activities such as fisheries and shipping as well as multiple sources of marine pollution and climate change impacts. The process initiated by the
The process initiated by the
The articles in this special issue examine key features of the existing global and regional ocean governance framework in the southern hemisphere and its relevance to the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity in
Southern Hemisphere Ocean Areas
The southern hemisphere is dominated by oceanic influences with 80% of its surface area consisting of ocean space as compared to 60.7% of the surface area of the northern hemisphere.4 It encompasses the majority of the Pacific Ocean and Indian Ocean as well as a substantial proportion of the Atlantic and the whole of the Southern Ocean. Many of these ocean areas host abundant and unique repositories of marine biodiversity, which are under increasing pressure from commercial-scale activities, such as fisheries and shipping, as well as land-based sources of marine pollution and climate change impacts.5
A recent scientific study identified six marine areas of exceptional biodiversity in the temperate and tropical regions of the Atlantic Ocean, Indian Ocean, and Pacific Ocean in the southern hemisphere which have been most affected by climate change pressures and industrial-scale fishing.6 These areas are located in the central-western Pacific waters of Peru and the Galápagos Archipelago, in the southwestern Atlantic Ocean in the Patagonian waters of Argentina and Uruguay, on the western side of the Indian Ocean along the coasts of South Africa, Mozambique, Tanzania, Kenya, and Madagascar, in a large area of the central-western Pacific Ocean, including water masses surrounding Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Papua New Guinea, Taiwan and the south of Japan, in waters surrounding New Zealand and Eastern and Southern Australia, in marine areas in Oceania, and in the central Pacific Ocean. These areas all exhibit local to regional increasing water temperatures, slowing current circulation, and decreasing primary productivity.7 This article enjoins the international community “to find solutions that go beyond the interests and borders of sovereign states to conserve the exceptional biodiversity” of these marine hot spots.8
The Convention on Biological Diversity (
Existing Governance Frameworks for Marine Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Use in Southern Hemisphere
A diverse array of binding international law agreements and non-binding arrangements at global and regional levels are relevant to the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity in southern hemisphere
In the shipping sector, the principal environmental protection measure applicable to southern hemisphere
In addition to the sector-based instruments, a variety of instruments and arrangements in the southern hemisphere are focused on oceanic conservation, but only some of these apply to
Taking into account the articles contained in this special issue, this section provides an overview of the biodiversity conservation provisions of key ocean governance instruments and arrangements in selected regions of the southern hemisphere and some of the measures taken to implement those provisions. It also reviews the challenges confronted by these regions in implementing these provisions. Finally, it highlights the interconnections between regional institutions established under these instruments, particularly in relation to biodiversity conservation and sustainable use obligations in
South West Pacific
The South West Pacific region is characterised by vast tracts of ocean space dotted with land masses which range from the continent of Australia and the sizeable island nation of New Zealand, to small-island developing States, such as Tuvalu and Niue.18 The majority of small-island States in the South West Pacific have land areas under 700 square kilometres and are heavily dependent on a healthy marine environment for their survival.19 The region has one of the highest quotients of marine biodiversity in the world, with a large population of rare and endangered species such as dugongs, turtles and whales.20 The
Notwithstanding these challenges, the South West Pacific displays a high level of coherence among its regional institutions devoted to ocean governance and ongoing political commitments exist among Pacific Island States to work towards marine biodiversity conservation and sustainable use within and beyond national jurisdiction.26 These commitments are underpinned by modern international environmental law principles and management approaches in instruments such as the Nouméa Convention and the Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (
The Nouméa Convention anticipates the collaboration of its parties in protecting the marine environment of the whole Convention Area, including its high seas enclaves. It commits its parties to prevent, reduce and control pollution of the Convention Area from any source and to ensure sound environmental management of natural resources.28 Although the Nouméa Convention pre-dates the 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity (
In recent years, additional initiatives have been taken at the Pacific-wide regional level to coalesce political will around oceanic conservation and sustainable use of marine resources. Quirk and Harden Davies in this issue review the evolution of the Pacific Islands Regional Oceans Policy (
South East Pacific
The South East Pacific region extends along the full length of the Pacific coast of South America—from Panama to Cape Horn off the coasts of Chile, Peru, Ecuador, Colombia and Panama—with the majority of the region lying in the Southern Hemisphere.40 As Durussel notes in this special issue, it supports one of the world’s most productive fisheries with the potential sustainable fisheries yield in 2013 estimated to be 8.9 million tonnes.41 In addition to its high fisheries quotient, the region also hosts multiple species of shellfish, birds, marine mammals, algae and reptiles.42 Two deep sea trenches, off the coasts of Peru, Chile and Central America and off the coasts of Ecuador and Colombia, host some of the world’s most unique species, habitats and ecosystems.43
The regional ocean governance framework is comprised of two
The Convention on the Conservation and Management of High Seas Living Resources in the South Pacific Ocean (
(c) maintain or restore populations of non-target and associated or dependent species to above levels at which their reproduction may become seriously threatened; and
(d) protect the habitats and marine ecosystems in which fishery resources and non-target and associated or dependent species occur from the impacts of fishing, including measures to prevent significant adverse impacts on vulnerable marine ecosystems and precautionary measures where it cannot adequately be determined whether vulnerable marine ecosystems are present or whether fishing would cause significant adverse impacts on vulnerable marine ecosystems.
Consistent with its biodiversity conservation obligations,
The 1981 Convention on the Protection of the Marine Environment and Coastal Area of the South East Pacific (Lima Convention)55 and the South East Pacific Action Plan were originally adopted by Chile, Ecuador and Peru in 1981 to provide a legal and institutional framework for the marine environmental protection of the region.56 Panama and Colombia have since joined the Lima Convention. The
The Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (
As a first step in creating a network of
Johnson notes in this special issue that
Western Indian Ocean
The Western Indian Ocean is characterised by the long continental coastlines of South Africa, Kenya and Somalia on the eastern side of the African continent, and by remote small islands and groups of islands such as the Comoros Islands, the Seychelles, the Maldives, the Chagos archipelago, Réunion and Mauritius.72 This oceanic region is recognised as a centre of biodiversity which hosts an array of distinctive species including dugongs, different species of sea turtles, the coelacanth and endemic molluscs, such as the double harp and the violet spider conch, as well as cetaceans and reef fish.73 The waters between Madagascar and Africa have been estimated to contain one of the highest levels of coral diversity worldwide, with 369 coral species identified in a recent study and more still to be identified.74 The key threats to the region’s biodiversity are unsustainable fisheries practices and climate change impacts. Pelagic fish stocks, particularly shark and tuna, have been heavily exploited by local and distant-water fishing fleets and the region’s coral reefs have been subject to several coral bleaching events in recent decades.75
Wright and Rochette in this special issue describe the regional ocean governance architecture for the Western Indian Ocean region, whose key elements comprise the Nairobi Convention76 for the protection, management and development of the coastal and marine environment of the Western Indian Ocean, the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission (
The Indian Ocean Tuna Commission (
The key challenges facing the Western Indian Ocean region in
South Atlantic Ocean
The South Atlantic Ocean generally covers the area south of the equator and north of the Antarctic Convergence.90 Turra et al. in Chapter 36B of the First Global Integrated Marine Assessment note that the main topographical feature in the South Atlantic is the Mid-Atlantic Ridge which runs between Africa and South America from approximately 58 degrees south to Iceland in the north.91 The predominant currents and upwelling processes in the South Atlantic provide varied habitats for pelagic biodiversity and productive fisheries.92 Benthic communities beyond the continental shelf break in the South Atlantic are not as well understood at this stage due to lack of research.93
As Ribeiro notes in this special issue, the ocean governance framework of the South Atlantic is quite sparse with no regional seas organization covering any part of
The Role of the
ilbi in Developing More Integrated and Cross-Sectoral Frameworks for Marine Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Use in Southern Hemisphere abnj
With the right mix of flexible and supportive provisions tailored to the needs of particular regions and sectors, the
The Role of the
ilbi in the South West Pacific
The South West Pacific is distinguished by the high level of coherence and integration between its regional institutions, including those related to oceans governance and biodiversity conservation.107 Collective support for the Pacific Islands Forum and the Council of Regional Organisations of the Pacific (
They also raise the issue of compatibility between the biodiversity conservation and sustainable use measures already in place in the South West Pacific within the national jurisdiction of Pacific Island Countries (
Effective conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity in all regions depends on access to relevant scientific data and knowledge to make informed decisions on
She also argues that strengthening links between regional institutions, scientists and technical personnel in the South West Pacific and international organizations, such as
The Role of the
ilbi in the South East Pacific
Both Durussel et al. in this special issue and a recent
Durussel et al. also suggest that the three regional organizations establish a common scientific and data exchange mechanism, as well as a monitoring programme, to ensure that environmental and climatic information necessary for both fisheries management and biodiversity conservation is available to all three bodies. Once established, the scientific information repository of the
The Role of the
ilbi in the Western Indian Ocean
Wright et al. in this issue identify a range of opportunities to coordinate regional action on conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity in
From a shipping perspective, Wright et al. suggest that the member States of regional bodies such as the Nairobi Convention could evaluate the shipping threats to marine biodiversity in regional
The Role of the
ilbi in the South Atlantic
A defining feature of the regional ocean governance architecture of the South Atlantic is its uneven nature.114 Ribeiro in this special issue identifies the complete lack of any regional arrangements for marine environmental protection and sustainable use of fisheries resources in the Southwest Atlantic as a “notorious gap.” Elsewhere in the South Atlantic, the two regional sea conventions, the Cartagena Convention115 and the Abidjan Convention,116 only cover marine areas within national jurisdiction. Whereas
Ribeiro’s analysis suggests that the role of the
She argues that the
More broadly, Riberio envisions the
The Role of the
ilbi in the Southern Ocean
The Antarctic Treaty System (
Johnson discusses the unique characteristics of the Southern Ocean surrounding the Antarctic continent and the uncertain legal status of these waters. Even taking into account the territorial and offshore zones claimed by some Antarctic treaty partners, substantial marine areas beyond national jurisdiction are clearly within the geographic scope of the Antarctic Treaty and
In line with its ecosystem-based approach,
Johnson notes that by contrast to the designation of
This special issue focuses on biodiversity conservation initiatives taken by southern hemisphere institutions and the degree to which connections have been forged between the relevant institutions with responsibilities for biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction in the most oceanic of the two hemispheres. The above overview of selected instruments, institutions and arrangements in the southern hemisphere and the articles in this special issue reveal that governance frameworks for conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity in the southern hemisphere vary widely in their biodiversity conservation activities and coherence across sectors and regions.
The articles also examine the potential relationship of the
United Nations General Assembly, Development of an International Legally Binding Instrument under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction, resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 19 June 2015,
Preparatory Committee established by General Assembly resolution 69/292: Development of an international legally binding instrument under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction, Chair’s indicative suggestions of clusters of issues and questions to assist further discussions in the informal working groups at the second session of the Preparatory Committee, http://www.un.org/Depts/los/biodiversity/prepcom_files/IWGs_Indictive_Issues_and_Questions.pdf (accessed 31 May 2017).
S Rintoul, W Cai, H Cleugh and G Tan, ‘New Research Centre Focuses on the “Ocean Hemisphere’ (22 May 2017)
ER Selig, WR Turner, S Troeng, B P Wallace, BS Halpern, K Kaschner, BG Lascelles, KE Carpenter and RA Mittermeier, ‘Global Priorities for Marine Biodiversity Conservation’ (2014) PLoS ONE 9(1): e82898, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0082898.
F Ramirez, I Afan, L S Davis and A Chiaradia, ‘Climate Impacts on Global Hot Spots of Marine Biodiversity’ (2017) 3(2) Science Advances, e1601198,
DC Dunn, J Ardron, N Bax, P Bernal, J Cleary, I Cresswell, B Donnelly, P Dunstan, K Gjerde, D Johnson, K Kaschner, B Lascelles, J Rice, H von Nordheim, L Wood and PN Halpin, ‘The Convention on Biological Diversity’s ecologically or biologically significant areas: origins, development and current status’ (2014) 49 Marine Policy 137–145.
N J Bax, J Cleary, B Donnelly, D C Dunn, P K Dunstan, M Fuller and P N Halpin, ‘Results of efforts by the Convention on Biological Diversity to describe ecologically or biologically significant marine areas’ (2016) 30(3) Conservation Biology 571–581.
Ibid., at 580.
United Nations Agreement for the Implementation of the Provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 Relating to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks (New York, 8 September 1995, in force 11 December 2001) 2167
R Warner, K M Gjerde and D Freestone, ‘Regional Governance for Fisheries and Biodiversity’ in S M Garcia, J Rice and A Charles (eds), Governance of Marine Fisheries and Biodiversity Conservation (Wiley Blackwell, Chichester, 2014) 211–224.
International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (London, 1 June 1978, Annex I in force 2 October 1983, Annex ii in force 6 April 1987, Annex iii in force 1 July 1992, Annex iv in force 27 September 2003, Annex v in force 31 December 1988, Annex vi in force 19 May 2005) (1978) 17
International Seabed Authority, ‘Developing a Regulatory Framework for Mineral Exploitation in the Area. A Discussion Paper on the Development and Drafting of Regulations on Exploitation for Mineral Resources in the Area (Environmental Matters)’(25 January 2017), https://www.isa.org.jm/files/documents/EN/Regs/DraftExpl/DP-EnvRegsDraft25117.pdf (accessed 31 May 2017).
Convention for the Protection of the Natural Resources and Environment of the South Pacific Region (Nouméa, 24 November 1986, in force 22 August 1990) (1987) 26
Ibid., at Article 2(a)(ii).
R Herr, ‘Environmental Protection in the South Pacific: the Effectiveness of
T I Tutangata and M Power, ‘The Regional Scale of Ocean Governance: Regional Cooperation in the Pacific Islands’ (2002) 45(11) Ocean and Coastal Management 873–884.
Herr (n 18) at 43.
Herr (n 18) at 43.
R Mahon, L Fanning, KM Gjerde, O Young, M Reid and S Douglas, ‘Transboundary Waters Assessment Programme(
Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (Honolulu, 5 September 2000, in force 19 June 2004) (2001) 40
Nouméa Convention, Article 5(1).
Convention on Biological Diversity (Nairobi, 22 May 1992, in force 29 December 1993) (1992) 31
Tutangata and Power (n 19) at 879.
Ibid. at Article 5(a) and (b).
Ibid. at Articles 5(c) and 6.
Ibid. at Article 5(f) and (d).
Nauru Agreement Concerning Cooperation in the Management of Fisheries of Common Interest (Nauru, 11 February 1982, in force 4 December 1982), latest version available at http://www.pnatuna.com/sites/default/files/Latest%20Nauru%20Agreement_0.pdf (‘Nauru Agreement’).
Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat, Pacific Islands Regional Oceans Policy, http://www.forumsec.org/resources/uploads/attachments/documents/PIROP.pdf (accessed 31 May 2017).
Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat, Framework for a Pacific Oceanscape, http://www.forumsec.org/resources/uploads/embeds/file/Oceanscape.pdf (accessed 31 May 2017).
Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat, Office of the Pacific Ocean Commissioner, http://www.forumsec.org/pages.cfm/strategic-partnerships-coordination/pacific-oceanscape/pacific-ocean-commissioner.html?printerfriendly=true.
Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat, Pacific Ocean Alliance, http://www.forumsec.org/resources/uploads/embeds/file/Pacific_Ocean_Alliance_Charter.pdf.
United Nations Environment Programme (
Convention on the Conservation and Management of High Seas Fishery Resources in the South Pacific Ocean (Auckland, 14 November 2009, in force 24 August 2012)
Ibid. at 86.
Convention for the Strengthening of the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission established by the 1949 Convention between the United States of America and the Republic of Costa Rica (Washington,
Antigua Convention, Article vii (1)(f).
Ibid. at 83.
Convention on the Protection of the Marine Environment and Coastal Area of the South East Pacific (Lima, 12 November 1981, in force 19 May 1986) 33 International Digest of Health Legislation (1982) 96 (‘Lima Convention’).
Ibid. at 79–80.
Ibid. at 80.
Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (Canberra, 20 May 1980, in force 7 April 1981) (1980) 19
Ibid. at Article ii(3).
G Wright, J Ardron, K Gjerde, D Currie and J Rochette, ‘Advancing marine biodiversity protection through regional fisheries management: A review of bottom fisheries closures in areas beyond national jurisdiction’ (2015) 61 Marine Policy 134–148, 142–144.
Ibid. at 142.
Department of the Environment and Energy, Australian Antarctic Division, ‘A proposal for a representative system of Marine Protected Areas in the East Antarctic planning domain’, http://www.antarctica.gov.au/law-and-treaty/ccamlr/marine-protected-areas (accessed 1 June 2017).
Convention on Migratory Species (Bonn, 23 June 1979, in force 1 November 1983) (1979) 19
Agreement on Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (Canberra, 19 June 2001, in force 1 February 2004) (2004)
D Obura, ‘The Diversity and Biogeography of Western Indian Ocean Reef-Building Corals’ (2012) PLoS ONE 7(9): e45013. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.004501.
Convention for the Protection, Management and Development of the Marine and Coastal Environment of the Eastern African Region (Nairobi, 21 June 1985, in force 29 May 1996) Official Journal of the European Community 1986, C253/10 (’Nairobi Convention’).
Ibid.; Wright et al. (n 65) at 144.
Wright et al. (n 65) at 144.
Ibid. at 60–61.
Ibid. at 70–71.
United Nations, Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea (
Ibid. at 2–3.
Ibid. at 5.
See also Wright et al. (n 65) at 140.
Convention on the Conservation and Management of the Fisheries Resources in the South East Atlantic Ocean (Windhoek, 20 April 2001, in force 13 April 2003) (2002) 41
Ibid. at Articles 1(l) and 2.
Ibid. at Article 3.
Ibid. at Articles 16 and 23(1)(d).
Ibid. at Article 15.
Wright et al. (n 65) at 139.
Ibid. at 140.
Convention on Biological Diversity (
Global Ocean Biodiversity Initiative (
R Mahon, L Fanning, K M Gjerde, O Young, M Reid, S Douglas, Transboundary Waters Assessment Programme (
See (nn 36 and 37).
See also Nippon Foundation, Nereus Policy Briefs - T Thiele and H Harden-Davies (2016) ‘Technology Transfer’, http://www.nereusprogram.org/policy-brief-bbnj-technology-transfer/. Global Ocean Trust; N Bax, H Harden-Davies, T Thiele, P Halpin and D Dunn (2016) ‘Open Data: enabling conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction’, http://www.nereusprogram.org/policy-brief-bbnj-open-data/ (accessed 9 June 2017).
Ibid. at 91.
See (n 82).
Mahon et al. (n 105) at 37–38.
Convention for the Protection and Development of the Marine Environment of the Wider Caribbean Region (Cartagena de Indias, 24 March 1983, in force 11 October 1986) (1983) 22
Convention for Co-operation in the Protection and Development of the Marine and Coastal Environment of the West and Central African Region (Abidjan, 23 March 1981, in force 5 August 1984), http://abidjanconvention.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=100&Itemid=200&lang=en (accessed 9 June 2017).
Antarctic Treaty (Washington
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Montego Bay, 10 December 1982, in force 16 November 1994) 1833
Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty (Madrid, 4 October 1991, in force 14 January 1998) (1991) 30
See (nn 67 and 68).