- Email: [email protected]
Antarctic resources policy: Scientific, legal and political issues
Book reviews
We need facts upon which to base rational resource policies, and although the NAS resport attempts to present such, it is clear that an appropriate level of objectivity has yet to be achieved. Theories still hold centre stage and controversy continues.
by temperature. In reality, however, the direct antitranspirant properties of CO;? are even more significant than possible CO*-induced temperature changes, and when A. R. Aston recently incorporated this effect into a more sophisticated model of watershed runoff, he found that ‘we can expect streamflow to increase from 40 to 90% as a consequence of doubling the atmospheric CO* concentration,’ in direct contradiction to the NAS study.7 In spite of its shortcomings, the NAS report is still a valuable document, for it serves to increase the public’s awareness of this important subject. Hopefully, it will also serve as a stimulus to new research designed to correct the deficiencies noted above.
S. B. ldso Institute for Biospheric Research Tempe, AZ, USA ‘S. B. Idso, Carbon Dioxide: Friend or Foe? An Inauirv into the Climatic and Agricultural donsequences of the Rapidly Rising CO, Content of Earth’s Atmosphere, IBR Press, 631 E. Laguna Drive, Tempe, AZ 85282, 1982. ‘National Research Council (USA), COP/ Climate Review Panel, Carbon Dioxide and Climate: A Second Assessment, National Academy Press, Washington,
Antarctic resources ANTARCTIC RESOURCES POLICY: Scientific, Legal and Political Issues edited by Francisco Orrego Vicuna Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1983, 335 pp, f32.50 It is tempting to offer a singlesentence review. ‘This is an absorbing book which should be on the bookshelves of all who are interested in resources policy, whether in the Antarctic or anywhere else’. But the temptation must be resisted! This book contains the contributions by 21 experts to the first international conference to be held in the Antarctic, organized by the Institute of International Studies of the University of Chile, in October 1982. The experts express their personal views although all but one come from countries whose governments are Consultative Parties within the framework of the Antarctic Treaty. All the main issues are covered: the living and mineral resources; technology; the delicate ecosystem; the regimes that have been or might be established; the development of the Antarctic ‘system’ under the Treaty and its relationship to international law, including the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention (which does not yet have the force of
RESOURCES
POLICY June
1984
law); the role of the Antarctic in international politics; and the history of Antarctic development is admirably summarized by Sir Vivian Fuchs. All these accounts are authoritative as the authors are distinguished scientists, international lawyers and diplomats who have been involved with the continent. It is not unusual in such works for there to be at least one sub-standard contribution, but none is evident here.
Antarctic treaty Many aspects of the Antarctic Treaty and the developments derived from it are unusual. Thus it was the will to proceed with co-operative scientific research, as evidenced specifically in the International Geophysical Year, 1957-58, that provided the climate in a politically sensitive region, at the time of the ‘cold war’, for a Treaty. In the Treaty those states with territorial claims, or the basis for a claim, and those who do not recognize them, notably the USA and the USSR, agreed to co-operate in the area to which it applies, that is south of 6O”S, without prejudice to their respective positions. Co-operation extends beyond research, which in the Antarctic cannot be undertaken without logistic as well as financial support
DC, 1982. 3National Research Council (USA), COP/ Climate Review Panel. Carbon Dioxide and Climate: A Scierkfic Assessment. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 1979. “B. A. Kimball, ‘Carbon dioxide and aqricultural yield: An assemblage and analysis of 770 prior observations’. WCL Reoort 14. US Water Conservation Laboratory, 4331 E. Broadway, Phoenix, AZ 85040, 1983. 5B. A. Kimball and S. B. Idso, ‘increasing atmospheric CO,: Effects on crop yield, water use and climate,’ Agricultural Water Management, Vol 7, 1983, pp 55-72. ‘H. H. Rogers, J. F. Thomas and G. E. Bingham, ‘Response of agronomic and forest species to elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide,’ Science, Vol 220, 1983, pp 428-429. 7A. R. Aston, ‘The effect of doubling atmospheric COP on streamflow: A simulation,’ Journal of Hydrology, Vol 67,-l 984, pp 273-280.
from governments, to ensuring that the Antarctic is used only for peaceful purposes and that it remains free of nuclear installations and waste. The parties to the Treaty also agreed that no new claims should be made while the Treaty is in force. A Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (the Canberrra Convention), which entered into force in 1982 and was the outcome of consultations within the Antarctic system, was the first step taken in the realm of resources. This Convention is, however, distinct from the Antarctic Treaty, although both are open for accession by all states. The Canberra Convention applies to a larger area, its limits being the Antarctic Convergence which has a dominant influence on the living resources, for example the distribution of krill. In effect, the Convention applies to the ecosystem. The adoption by lawmakers of a boundary based on scientific fact, as was the case with part of the definition of the ‘legal’ continental shelf in Article 76 of the Law of the Sea Convention, is a noteworthy trend. That provision has first been made for conservation of living resources (the meaning of ‘conservation’ is discussed’) is consistent with the philosophy of those Consultative Parties of the Treaty who are actively engaged in work in the area. This is to be pragmatic, functional, to practise ‘gradualism’, that is to provide regim-
139
Book reviewslMinsearch es and institutions only when a need has been identified clearly, but to exercise foresight so that agreement is reached before an issue becomes highly charged politically. The Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Seals (the London Convention, 1972) is also in accord with this philosophy.
Mineral resources Against this background, increasing attention has been paid to mineral resources, in so far that any deposits qualify under the strict definition of the term. It is recognized that the same idealism that led to what many regard as the flawed part of the Law of the Sea Convention, Part XI dealing with the minerals beyond the limits of national jurisdiction, might impinge adversely on the Antarctic. Sollie (Nansen Foundation) fears that ‘proposals may be put without basis in the knowledge of the practical facts about the region, with little or no understanding of the technical difficulty and the material cost of developing it’ (p 325): Orrego and Fuchs suggest that the inspiration for the idealism may be the same, that is exaggerated ideas about the wealth that might be created (pp 7 and 19). The concept of the ‘common heritage of mankind’ has been introduced for Antarctic resources in the United Nations, as it was for part of the seabed and for outer space. Brennan, who was a leader of the Australian delegation to the Law of the Sea Conference, discusses the requirements of a regime for minerals that will satisfy those who believe that they should be regarded as part of the common heritage and goes so far as to conclude that the International Sea-Bed Authority (ISBA) should have a role in ‘the exploitation of mineral resources in Antarctica’. Short of this, he suggests that the United Nations will establish a rival regime (p 227). Whatever skill is employed ‘to invent a new vocabulary’ to enable concessions to be made by all parties (p 226), agreement to such a role for the ISBA seems unlikely and, indeed, this possibility is ruled out by Infante (p 261). The relationship between the provisions of the Law of the Sea Conven-
140
tion and the minerals on and below the seabed south of 60”s. including polymetallic nodules in deep water and hydrocarbons which remain to be proved on Antarctica’s continental margin, provides ample ground for discussion. The issues include whether there is a boundary between ‘the Area’, that is the ‘sea-bed and ocean floor and subsoil thereof, beyond the limits of national jurisdiction’ of Article 1 of the Convention (which with its resources is declared to be the common heritage of mankind by Article 136). and the seabed adjacent to the Antarctic continent, either the unclaimed sector or where there are national claims, on which claims to the underwater prolongations would be based. Two of the experts discuss whether the ‘sea-bed’ reaches the shore (pp 248 and 257). While it seems clear from the context that ‘sea-bed’ is intended to mean ‘the Area’, an abbreviation with which one can sympathize, in plain language it is somewhat confusing. Curiously, there is no reference to the problem of identifying baselines from which limits might be drawn along coasts with a permanent ice-shelf. Beeby, another contributor with Law of the Sea experience, provides a characteristically lucid summary of the steps taken by the Consultative Parties at a meeting in Wellington in 1982 towards preparing a minerals regime. One issue, also discussed by others, is the internal (that is among the Parties) and external accommodations that must be made, which touches not only on politics but also on the meaning of ‘conservation’ and the distinction between ‘preservation’ and ‘protection’. It is almost inevitable that some subjects will be covered by more than one author in a book based on a conference: such duplication can be irritating but here it is beneficial, providing different, well argued perspectives. The standard of the substantive and technical editing is very high, so that there are refreshingly few imperfections. Nevertheless, mental gymnastics are required to compare maps with the Greenwich meridian variously at three, nine and 12 o’clock; three different distributions of krill are illustrated; one table lacks units; the
Dufek Massif with its minerals is omitted from the map of Antarctic outcrops; it is not clear whether the ‘less than 3%’ of the continent that is ice-free of one expert is the ‘barely I%’ of another. At the conference it could be assumed that all were familiar with the Antarctic Treaty, but readers of the book might be upset by references to Articles that are not quoted, or by having to wait for a footnote on page 261 to learn the names of the present Consultative Parties. Mercifully, the book is almost free of jargon, but ‘biogeophysical environment’, ‘geo-political unity’, ‘special geo-physical entity’ (the Antarctic) and ‘geophysical conditions’ (used twice, but at neither time having anything to do with geophysics) were spotted. But these are relatively trivial complaints about a book that makes it clear why it is concluded that the Consultative Parties ‘will have to act decisively to define and establish the authority required to regulate and control potential resource development’ if they wish to maintain the Antarctic Treaty system and continue to play a leading role in the future development of the Antarctic. It goes a long way towards the objective of making the ‘international community . aware of the facts’ (p 326). The book is strongly recommended, to read and to keep on the bookshelf for reference (although for that purpose the absence of an index is a handicap). A.A. Archer
Chigwell, Essex ‘For example, Holdgate quotes the World Conservation Strategy definition: ‘the management of renewable natural resources for optimum sustainable yield’.
Minsearch The note on Minsearch, the IGS computerized database for the minerals industry, which appeared in the December 1983 issue of Resources Policy was taken from an article featured in Minline, February 1983, published by Metals and Minerals Publications Ltd.
RESOURCES
POLICY June 1984
We need facts upon which to base rational resource policies, and although the NAS resport attempts to present such, it is clear that an appropriate level of objectivity has yet to be achieved. Theories still hold centre stage and controversy continues.
by temperature. In reality, however, the direct antitranspirant properties of CO;? are even more significant than possible CO*-induced temperature changes, and when A. R. Aston recently incorporated this effect into a more sophisticated model of watershed runoff, he found that ‘we can expect streamflow to increase from 40 to 90% as a consequence of doubling the atmospheric CO* concentration,’ in direct contradiction to the NAS study.7 In spite of its shortcomings, the NAS report is still a valuable document, for it serves to increase the public’s awareness of this important subject. Hopefully, it will also serve as a stimulus to new research designed to correct the deficiencies noted above.
S. B. ldso Institute for Biospheric Research Tempe, AZ, USA ‘S. B. Idso, Carbon Dioxide: Friend or Foe? An Inauirv into the Climatic and Agricultural donsequences of the Rapidly Rising CO, Content of Earth’s Atmosphere, IBR Press, 631 E. Laguna Drive, Tempe, AZ 85282, 1982. ‘National Research Council (USA), COP/ Climate Review Panel, Carbon Dioxide and Climate: A Second Assessment, National Academy Press, Washington,
Antarctic resources ANTARCTIC RESOURCES POLICY: Scientific, Legal and Political Issues edited by Francisco Orrego Vicuna Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1983, 335 pp, f32.50 It is tempting to offer a singlesentence review. ‘This is an absorbing book which should be on the bookshelves of all who are interested in resources policy, whether in the Antarctic or anywhere else’. But the temptation must be resisted! This book contains the contributions by 21 experts to the first international conference to be held in the Antarctic, organized by the Institute of International Studies of the University of Chile, in October 1982. The experts express their personal views although all but one come from countries whose governments are Consultative Parties within the framework of the Antarctic Treaty. All the main issues are covered: the living and mineral resources; technology; the delicate ecosystem; the regimes that have been or might be established; the development of the Antarctic ‘system’ under the Treaty and its relationship to international law, including the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention (which does not yet have the force of
RESOURCES
POLICY June
1984
law); the role of the Antarctic in international politics; and the history of Antarctic development is admirably summarized by Sir Vivian Fuchs. All these accounts are authoritative as the authors are distinguished scientists, international lawyers and diplomats who have been involved with the continent. It is not unusual in such works for there to be at least one sub-standard contribution, but none is evident here.
Antarctic treaty Many aspects of the Antarctic Treaty and the developments derived from it are unusual. Thus it was the will to proceed with co-operative scientific research, as evidenced specifically in the International Geophysical Year, 1957-58, that provided the climate in a politically sensitive region, at the time of the ‘cold war’, for a Treaty. In the Treaty those states with territorial claims, or the basis for a claim, and those who do not recognize them, notably the USA and the USSR, agreed to co-operate in the area to which it applies, that is south of 6O”S, without prejudice to their respective positions. Co-operation extends beyond research, which in the Antarctic cannot be undertaken without logistic as well as financial support
DC, 1982. 3National Research Council (USA), COP/ Climate Review Panel. Carbon Dioxide and Climate: A Scierkfic Assessment. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 1979. “B. A. Kimball, ‘Carbon dioxide and aqricultural yield: An assemblage and analysis of 770 prior observations’. WCL Reoort 14. US Water Conservation Laboratory, 4331 E. Broadway, Phoenix, AZ 85040, 1983. 5B. A. Kimball and S. B. Idso, ‘increasing atmospheric CO,: Effects on crop yield, water use and climate,’ Agricultural Water Management, Vol 7, 1983, pp 55-72. ‘H. H. Rogers, J. F. Thomas and G. E. Bingham, ‘Response of agronomic and forest species to elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide,’ Science, Vol 220, 1983, pp 428-429. 7A. R. Aston, ‘The effect of doubling atmospheric COP on streamflow: A simulation,’ Journal of Hydrology, Vol 67,-l 984, pp 273-280.
from governments, to ensuring that the Antarctic is used only for peaceful purposes and that it remains free of nuclear installations and waste. The parties to the Treaty also agreed that no new claims should be made while the Treaty is in force. A Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (the Canberrra Convention), which entered into force in 1982 and was the outcome of consultations within the Antarctic system, was the first step taken in the realm of resources. This Convention is, however, distinct from the Antarctic Treaty, although both are open for accession by all states. The Canberra Convention applies to a larger area, its limits being the Antarctic Convergence which has a dominant influence on the living resources, for example the distribution of krill. In effect, the Convention applies to the ecosystem. The adoption by lawmakers of a boundary based on scientific fact, as was the case with part of the definition of the ‘legal’ continental shelf in Article 76 of the Law of the Sea Convention, is a noteworthy trend. That provision has first been made for conservation of living resources (the meaning of ‘conservation’ is discussed’) is consistent with the philosophy of those Consultative Parties of the Treaty who are actively engaged in work in the area. This is to be pragmatic, functional, to practise ‘gradualism’, that is to provide regim-
139
Book reviewslMinsearch es and institutions only when a need has been identified clearly, but to exercise foresight so that agreement is reached before an issue becomes highly charged politically. The Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Seals (the London Convention, 1972) is also in accord with this philosophy.
Mineral resources Against this background, increasing attention has been paid to mineral resources, in so far that any deposits qualify under the strict definition of the term. It is recognized that the same idealism that led to what many regard as the flawed part of the Law of the Sea Convention, Part XI dealing with the minerals beyond the limits of national jurisdiction, might impinge adversely on the Antarctic. Sollie (Nansen Foundation) fears that ‘proposals may be put without basis in the knowledge of the practical facts about the region, with little or no understanding of the technical difficulty and the material cost of developing it’ (p 325): Orrego and Fuchs suggest that the inspiration for the idealism may be the same, that is exaggerated ideas about the wealth that might be created (pp 7 and 19). The concept of the ‘common heritage of mankind’ has been introduced for Antarctic resources in the United Nations, as it was for part of the seabed and for outer space. Brennan, who was a leader of the Australian delegation to the Law of the Sea Conference, discusses the requirements of a regime for minerals that will satisfy those who believe that they should be regarded as part of the common heritage and goes so far as to conclude that the International Sea-Bed Authority (ISBA) should have a role in ‘the exploitation of mineral resources in Antarctica’. Short of this, he suggests that the United Nations will establish a rival regime (p 227). Whatever skill is employed ‘to invent a new vocabulary’ to enable concessions to be made by all parties (p 226), agreement to such a role for the ISBA seems unlikely and, indeed, this possibility is ruled out by Infante (p 261). The relationship between the provisions of the Law of the Sea Conven-
140
tion and the minerals on and below the seabed south of 60”s. including polymetallic nodules in deep water and hydrocarbons which remain to be proved on Antarctica’s continental margin, provides ample ground for discussion. The issues include whether there is a boundary between ‘the Area’, that is the ‘sea-bed and ocean floor and subsoil thereof, beyond the limits of national jurisdiction’ of Article 1 of the Convention (which with its resources is declared to be the common heritage of mankind by Article 136). and the seabed adjacent to the Antarctic continent, either the unclaimed sector or where there are national claims, on which claims to the underwater prolongations would be based. Two of the experts discuss whether the ‘sea-bed’ reaches the shore (pp 248 and 257). While it seems clear from the context that ‘sea-bed’ is intended to mean ‘the Area’, an abbreviation with which one can sympathize, in plain language it is somewhat confusing. Curiously, there is no reference to the problem of identifying baselines from which limits might be drawn along coasts with a permanent ice-shelf. Beeby, another contributor with Law of the Sea experience, provides a characteristically lucid summary of the steps taken by the Consultative Parties at a meeting in Wellington in 1982 towards preparing a minerals regime. One issue, also discussed by others, is the internal (that is among the Parties) and external accommodations that must be made, which touches not only on politics but also on the meaning of ‘conservation’ and the distinction between ‘preservation’ and ‘protection’. It is almost inevitable that some subjects will be covered by more than one author in a book based on a conference: such duplication can be irritating but here it is beneficial, providing different, well argued perspectives. The standard of the substantive and technical editing is very high, so that there are refreshingly few imperfections. Nevertheless, mental gymnastics are required to compare maps with the Greenwich meridian variously at three, nine and 12 o’clock; three different distributions of krill are illustrated; one table lacks units; the
Dufek Massif with its minerals is omitted from the map of Antarctic outcrops; it is not clear whether the ‘less than 3%’ of the continent that is ice-free of one expert is the ‘barely I%’ of another. At the conference it could be assumed that all were familiar with the Antarctic Treaty, but readers of the book might be upset by references to Articles that are not quoted, or by having to wait for a footnote on page 261 to learn the names of the present Consultative Parties. Mercifully, the book is almost free of jargon, but ‘biogeophysical environment’, ‘geo-political unity’, ‘special geo-physical entity’ (the Antarctic) and ‘geophysical conditions’ (used twice, but at neither time having anything to do with geophysics) were spotted. But these are relatively trivial complaints about a book that makes it clear why it is concluded that the Consultative Parties ‘will have to act decisively to define and establish the authority required to regulate and control potential resource development’ if they wish to maintain the Antarctic Treaty system and continue to play a leading role in the future development of the Antarctic. It goes a long way towards the objective of making the ‘international community . aware of the facts’ (p 326). The book is strongly recommended, to read and to keep on the bookshelf for reference (although for that purpose the absence of an index is a handicap). A.A. Archer
Chigwell, Essex ‘For example, Holdgate quotes the World Conservation Strategy definition: ‘the management of renewable natural resources for optimum sustainable yield’.
Minsearch The note on Minsearch, the IGS computerized database for the minerals industry, which appeared in the December 1983 issue of Resources Policy was taken from an article featured in Minline, February 1983, published by Metals and Minerals Publications Ltd.
RESOURCES
POLICY June 1984