International Challenges in Addressing Marine Environmental Problems

Introduction

Thirty years ago, in 1972, the Stockholm Declaration called on nations to take all possible steps to prevent pollution of the seas by substances that are liable to create hazards to human health, to harm living resources and marine life, to damage amenities or to interfere with other legitimate uses of the sea (Principle 7) and set forth an accompanying action plan. Twenty years later, the Rio Earth Summit elaborated further on the actions needed to promote protection and sustainability of the oceans and their resources in the Rio Declaration and Agenda 21. Heeding the call of Stockholm and Rio, in the last ten years the international community has concluded more than 20 agreements and other instruments addressing the marine environment and its resources. Yet, significant work remains to be accomplished. This essay briefly describes progress since Stockholm and Rio, and then focuses at greater length on the challenges that still face the international community in addressing problems of the marine environment. Discussion of these challenges is particularly timely in view of the upcoming World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD).

The international community’s response to Stockholm and Rio has been multi-faceted. It includes binding agreements as well as non-binding programs and plans of action. It includes global arrangements as well as regional and sub-regional ones. Underlying these arrangements sits a major asset -- the generally accepted international law framework set forth in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. The 1996 entry into force of that Convention ensures a widely agreed jurisdictional regime for the oceans, and a framework for negotiation and implementation of agreements affecting the marine environment. Within that framework, the international community has put into place a number of new agreements and programs.

For example, the 1995 Global Program of Action on the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-based Activities addresses sources of pollution, the significance of which we are only now beginning to appreciate. The International Coral Reef Initiative provides an effective voluntary model for addressing degradation of coral reefs. The Cartagena Convention¹ and its protocols, the Arctic Council, and the South Pacific Regional Environment Program are models of regional cooperation to protect human health, prevent or control pollution, and ensure sound environmental management of oceans and coastal areas.

In the fisheries area, developments over the last decade include negotiation of the 1993 Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) Compliance Agreement,² the 1995 FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, and the 1995 UN Fish Stocks Agreement.³ A moratorium on large-scale driftnet fishing took effect in 1992, pursuant to UN General Assembly Resolution 46/215. The FAO has also adopted four international plans of action to address specific problems in international fisheries.⁴

In addition, several new regional regimes have been negotiated, including the 1992 convention on anadromous stocks in the North Pacific,⁵ the 1994 convention on pollock resources in the Central Bering Sea,⁶ the 2000 convention on highly migratory fish stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean,⁷ and the 2001 convention on fisheries resources in the South East Atlantic.⁸

Despite a decade of progress in establishing instruments and programs related to oceans, we still confront urgent and serious challenges. For example, the Montreal Declaration on the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-based Activities expressed concern that that marine environment is being increasingly degraded by pollution from sewage, persistent organic pollutants, radioactive substances, heavy metals, oils, litter, the physical alteration and destruction of habitats, and the alteration of timing, volume and quality of freshwater inflows with resulting changes to nutrient and sediment budgets and salinity regimes.⁹ For coastal and island States, this degradation of watersheds and marine ecosystems means reduced biodiversity, loss of food security, increased risks to public health, and missed opportunities for sustainable economic development.

Many of the world’s fishery resources are also under stress. Total marine catches reached a peak in 1989, but by 1995, the FAO reported for the first time that catches had begun to decline. By 2000, FAO estimated that, among the major marine fish stocks for which information is available, about 47-50% are fully exploited, while another 15-18% are overexploited. An additional 9 or 10% of such stocks have been depleted or are recovering from depletion.¹⁰ In short, there are relatively few major fisheries that can absorb additional fishing effort. Meanwhile, we see a growing demand for fisheries products and an armada of vessels looking for new places to fish.

Many factors have contributed to this situation. Improvements in fishing technology, coupled with substantial government subsidies to fishermen, have greatly increased harvesting capacity worldwide. At the same time environmental degradation has spoiled some fish habitats. The ability of vessels to operate outside of governmental controls, including by adopting "flags of convenience," has rendered fisheries enforcement less than effective in many circumstances. The use of certain kinds of fishing gear and fishing techniques has also led to serious concerns, particularly with the significant incidental catch of sea turtles, seabirds, marine mammals, and undersized or unwanted species of fish.

As noted above, the international community has made considerable progress since 1992. However, because we have not yet stemmed the tide of ocean degradation or natural resource overexploitation, a number of challenges lie before us.

First, if we are to exercise the stewardship of the world’s oceans and marine resources necessary for sustainable development, protection of human health, alleviation of poverty, and enhancement of food security, we must ensure the implementation of the instruments and programs to which we have agreed. These agreements and programs cannot remain mere words on paper. Although the implementation phase is perhaps less glamorous and more difficult than negotiating new instruments and establishing new programs, we must accomplish it if we are to fulfill the promise and expectations of Stockholm and Rio.

Promoting implementation will include a number of parallel and complementary efforts:

• We must assure implementation of the agreements and programs we have already negotiated. This will include bringing agreements into force with adherence by the maximum number of parties, as well as promoting implementation of agreements and other instruments to which the international community has agreed;

• We must strengthen national and local capacity to implement the binding agreements and non-binding plans of action and programs we have negotiated, and to engage in sound coastal and fisheries management. This includes strengthening legal systems and institutional structures and promoting transparency and the involvement of stakeholders in decision-making and implementation. It also includes strengthening global and regional governance capacity by increasing collaboration among oceans and fisheries organizations through mechanisms such as joint meetings, collaborative programs and observer status;

• We must strengthen national and regional institutional capacity to use advances in science and technology and other tools in support of coastal management and sustainable fisheries, including facilitation of the transparent availability and harmonization of scientific data within and among governments and scientific bodies, so that decision-making can more readily be based on scientific information.

Capacity-building to ensure implementation of the arrangements we have established, and to promote sound coastal, fisheries and oceans management, will rest on several factors. One is good governance. A the cornerstone of sustainable development is the establishment of the domestic institutional, legal, and regulatory infrastructures needed to manage natural resources effectively and sustainably. The institutions and regulatory frameworks necessary to achieve a sustainable future will be for naught if they are undermined by corruption, criminal activity, or other failures of governance. Thus, as a backdrop to development of the national institutional and regulatory structures needed for sound coastal, fisheries, and oceans stewardship, it will be important that corruption be rooted out, that human rights be upheld, and that adherence to the rule of law be assured. Second, financing through public-private partnerships should form a basis for such capacity-building. In an appropriate enabling environment, partnerships involving the private sector can provide the types of capital needed for sustained development over time. In fact, governance and finance will be important themes for the discussion of sustainable development at the upcoming World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg.

Capacity-building for implementation of agreements and good coastal management should also take advantage of regional institutions and a regional focus where appropriate. The unique features and problems of regional ecosystems, and the shared nature of their resources, call for regional, cross-sectoral approaches to finding solutions. In fact, many of the global instruments and environmental programs that have come into force since Rio apply to regions with vastly different attributes and problems. Recognizing that States, international organizations, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have limited resources to address regional management challenges, a key objective should be the development of a framework for regional management programs that promotes efficient use of programmatic resources and addresses the entire scope of watershed and marine ecosystem management in an ecosystem context.

As part of its preparations for the WSSD, the United States is working on programs to promote crosscutting watershed and marine ecosystem management in regional ecosystems. Initially, our focus will be close to home, in the Wider Caribbean. The Caribbean region shares a common ecosystem, including its living marine resources, and common problems of pollution, public health concerns, habitat degradation, and declining fisheries. The United States is hoping to develop a broad partnership in support of better coordination and collaboration in integrated watershed, coastal, and marine ecosystem management in the Caribbean region -- a pilot program that we hope can also be tailored to the needs of other regions, such as the South Pacific and Africa. Partners would include countries in the region, developed countries outside the region, NGOs, and private sector entities.

Such efforts can advance the implementation of global and regional fisheries agreements and instruments like the Global Program of Action on for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-Based Activities (GPA). Through regional implementation, we can overcome many of the obstacles that now prevent us from realizing the benefits of the international agreements we have reached.

The fact that nearly 70% of the area of the oceans falls outside of coastal state jurisdiction, that the natural resources of the oceans do not respect jurisdictional boundaries in any case, and that jurisdiction over vessels on the high seas generally rests with flag States creates unique challenges in protecting and managing ocean resources. For example, despite the many existing regional agreements and organizations that manage international fisheries, illegal, unregulated and unreported (IUU) fishing is a serious concern. IUU fishing occurs when vessels fish in areas regulated by regional fisheries management organizations either in contravention of the rules (by vessels of member States) or in ways that undermine the management regimes (by vessels of non-member States -- often vessels flying "flags of convenience").

Our challenge in addressing this problem is several-fold. First, we need to ensure that the major international fisheries are regulated -- and regulated in a way that will encourage non-members to join. Within the last two years, for example, the international community has concluded two new regional fisheries management agreements -- one to regulate highly migratory species in large areas of the Pacific,¹¹ and one to regulate stocks in the Southeast Atlantic.¹² Both agreements provide for new participants. We also need to ensure that already existing regional fisheries management organizations provide appropriate incentives for non-member participation.

Second, we need to develop new tools to assist the regional fisheries management organizations in dealing with IUU fishing. In fact, some of the organizations have already instituted creative uses of port State and market-based mechanisms for this purpose. For example, the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) requires its members to prohibit importation of certain fish from nations whose vessels repeatedly undermine agreed fishery rules. That requirement has been successful in putting pressure on some "flag of convenience" States to join the organization and take responsibility for their vessels. Other organizations, such as the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization (NAFO) have prohibited their members from allowing vessels of non-members to off-load or transship fish in their ports if the non-member vessel was sighted fishing in the convention area (unless the vessel can prove that the fish were caught elsewhere or that the vessels did not otherwise undermine the organization’s rules). Still others (the Commission on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources -- CCAMLR) have adopted trade documentation schemes to deter trade in illegally harvested fish.

Third, structural changes in the industry are needed. To reduce pressure from overfishing, governments have made commitments to reduce fishing capacity worldwide. One way to accomplish capacity reduction is through reduction of governmental subsidies that contribute to the problem. Conservative estimates of current subsidies to the fisheries sector worldwide are as high as $20 billion annually -- a figure that represents up to one quarter of the value of total catch. The U.S. is encouraged that the declaration that emerged from the WTO meeting in Doha called for improving WTO disciplines related to fisheries subsidies, and the U.S. intends to work in that forum and in others, such as the FAO and OECD, to make progress on overcapacity.

Fourth, new enforcement tools must be employed. A recent Monitoring, Control and Surveillance network initiated by Chile, the U.S., and others, enables fisheries enforcement officials from various governments to coordinate their activities in real-time as never before. Independent observers and satellite-based vessel monitoring systems (VMS) are also increasingly being required. Many governments are strengthening their procedures governing the registration and permitting of fishing vessels in accordance with applicable international agreements, helping in the attempt to address the "flag of convenience" problem.

Finally, a growing number of agreements also allow States other than the flag State to take certain enforcement actions, such as boarding and inspection, against vessels on the high seas. Under the LOS Convention, the flag State, i.e., the State in whose territory the vessel is registered, has exclusive jurisdiction over the vessel, and generally speaking, only the flag State may enforce fisheries rules against that vessel on the high seas. The flag State may, however, consent to enforcement action by another State, either through an international agreement or on an ad hoc basis. As a way to combat illegal or unregulated fishing by vessels whose flag States are unwilling or unable to control their operations, the international community also appears to be reconsidering the notion of exclusive flag-State jurisdiction over fishing vessels on the high seas.¹³ If the responsible fishing and coastal States are unable to get a handle on IUU fishing on the high seas, through bilateral, regional, or international arrangements, we will be forced to focus more attention on the LOS Convention’s conditions on the traditional right of all nations for their nationals and vessels to fish on the high seas.¹⁴

As an international community, we also face challenges in the area of marine scientific research and operations. Advancements in monitoring systems, application of ecosystem approaches to the study and management of the oceans and their resources, and collection of data through such programs as the Global Oceans Observing System and the Census of Marine Life give us many of the tools we need for the science-based decision-making that makes sustainable resource management possible. In fact, since Rio our capabilities in physical, chemical, and biological oceanography have greatly expanded. Innovations in technology, from satellites to submarines, let us see more, measure more, and learn more about the oceans than ever before. Not only have we made great strides in advancing our understanding of the world’s atmosphere and oceanography, but also in applying this knowledge to practical on-the-ground problems, such as our ability to forecast El Nino/La Nina phenomena. Yet, approximately 95% of the oceans still remain unexplored.

At the national level, capacity-building will be required to make scientific information widely available to technical experts, policymakers, and other stakeholders, particularly in developing countries. The information must not only be more accessible, but also more understandable to policymakers who may lack technical expertise.

Internationally, the scientific community must cooperate more effectively in ensuring that appropriate scientific research and operations can be carried out worldwide, and in ensuring that new developments emanating from marine research and ocean observing systems are disseminated. It would be useful, for example, for the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) to refocus its efforts towards integrating marine assessments, with results available and accessible to policymakers. In addition, the IOC should use its system of regional centers to provide training and access to expertise, perhaps through regional workshops on data and other resources.

In the fisheries arena, governments have agreed to devote more effort to the conduct of marine scientific research and to follow scientific advice more consistently. The UN Fish Stocks Agreement outlines a "precautionary approach" to fisheries management that is starting to be implemented in some regions. Governments are attempting to move towards "ecosystem-based management," as opposed to relying solely on species-by-species management. Progress is being made in developing and requiring new technologies to make fishing gear more selective in order to minimize incidental catch and reduce adverse effects on habitat. Finally, as noted above, the international fisheries community is increasingly recognizing the benefits of using new VMS technology to meet monitoring and enforcement needs.

Advancements in marine science will lead us to exploration of areas of the oceans that are now largely unknown. We want to know more about mid-ocean ridges, the abyssal plain, deep ocean trenches, and the organisms that in inhabit these ecosystems. We will need to consider who will undertake these explorations, and whether any sort of coordination or other regime would be appropriate, given the LOS Convention’s recognition of the right to conduct marine scientific research on the high seas and in the Area.¹⁵

Another challenge we face is in addressing the need to protect biodiversity and valuable ecosystems in areas beyond national jurisdiction. If the source of the threats is extractive activity such as fishing, drilling for oil, or mining on the deep seabed, there are institutional frameworks available to invoke protective measures such as the creation of marine protected areas or the denial or conditioning of licenses. The fisheries frameworks, of course, are subject to the problems I have already identified by the shorthand term, "flags of convenience." The commercial harvest of genetic resources ("bioprospecting"), however, is a new activity that does not appear to be covered by existing international provisions.

In addressing oceans issues, we must not ignore the urgent need for increased coordination among all ocean-related agencies. First, as mentioned previously, coordination at the regional level is critical. This includes not only coordination among organizations within a region, but also across regions, and between regional and global bodies. The recent 5-year review of the Global Program of Action emphasized the critical importance of such cooperation in ensuring the capacity of national governments to develop and implement national plans of action on oceans issues.

At the global level, the United Nations is an obvious place to bring together national governments, regional management organizations, and UN agencies and international financial institutions with oceans interests. The United States believes the UN Informal Consultative Process has provided an excellent forum for nations to move forward on oceans-related matters that require improved coordination, and the U.S. will support its continuation and strengthening during the review of the Process next fall by the General Assembly.

In addition, we support a new mechanism for linking UN agencies with one another and with international financial institutions -- a mechanism to replace the abolished Subcommittee on Oceans and Coastal Areas. While we are flexible about the form of the mechanism, any new arrangement should harmonize the agencies’ activities, eliminating duplication and overlap; synchronize the timing of agency budget cycles and governing body reviews to allow for the undertaking of jointly funded activities, which could be carried out by task forces; and operate in a transparent manner, with opportunities for input by governments, NGOs, and the private sector.

In conclusion, we continue to heed and implement the call of the Stockholm Declaration, and its subsequent elaboration at the Rio Earth Summit. Although we have made considerable progress in the last decade since Rio, much remains to be done. Our challenges are:

• To build the capacity of coastal States to implement the agreements and programs we have developed and to engage in sound coastal and fisheries management;

• To find new mechanisms, such as market-based mechanisms, to help deter illegal, unregulated, and destructive activities in the oceans;

• To pursue and use advances in science and technology for the benefit of the international community and, in particular, coastal States; and

• To ensure that oceans institutions cooperate and coordinate at both the global and regional levels to maximize their effectiveness.

The upcoming World Summit for Sustainable Development gives us the opportunity to press forward for progress to meet some of these challenges. The United States hopes to work with other governments, environmental organizations, the private sector, and financial institutions to help make that happen as we look toward the next 30 years.

_________________
End Notes