Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of contributors
- About the editors
- Foreword
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- Introduction: Globalization and fisheries: a necessarily interdisciplinary inquiry
- Part I Impacts of globalization on fisheries and aquatic habitats
- Part II Case studies of globalization and fisheries resources
- Part III Governance and multilevel management systems
- 13 Great Lakes fisheries as a bellwether of global governance
- 14 Ecosystem-based insights on northwest Atlantic fisheries in an age of globalization
- 15 “Fishy” food laws
- Part IV Ethical, economic, and policy implications
- Part V Conclusions and recommendations
- Index
- Plate section
- References
13 - Great Lakes fisheries as a bellwether of global governance
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 August 2009
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of contributors
- About the editors
- Foreword
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- Introduction: Globalization and fisheries: a necessarily interdisciplinary inquiry
- Part I Impacts of globalization on fisheries and aquatic habitats
- Part II Case studies of globalization and fisheries resources
- Part III Governance and multilevel management systems
- 13 Great Lakes fisheries as a bellwether of global governance
- 14 Ecosystem-based insights on northwest Atlantic fisheries in an age of globalization
- 15 “Fishy” food laws
- Part IV Ethical, economic, and policy implications
- Part V Conclusions and recommendations
- Index
- Plate section
- References
Summary
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this chapter is both straightforward and unique: to apply a global governance approach (Brühl and Rittberger 2001) to the study of Great Lakes (and particularly Michigan) fisheries. Case studies in global governance are rare; case studies focused in the United States are even rarer. Although students of international relations have done some work on fisheries (Peterson 1993) and international law scholars much more, little of that is recent enough to apply and contribute to the insights of the global governance literature. Moreover, an inquiry such as this one seems in keeping with Francis' notion of what is needed to garner further insights for “realistic applications of the ‘ecosystem approach’” to the Great Lakes:
More attention needs to be given to the study of these Great Lakes actor systems and to their “dynamics” over time. Such study could provide a common focal point for the diverse disciplines and specialties that comprise the social sciences and the humanities. The subject is well within their domain, in a way that the Great Lakes viewed only as hydrological–biological phenomena never was. (Francis 1987:235)
Thus this paper's purpose is to investigate “the processes and institutions, both formal and informal, that guide and restrain the collectivities of a group” (Keohane and Nye 2002) to begin to answer the question “of how the various institutions and processes of global society can be meshed more effectively in a way that would be regarded as legitimate by attentive publics controlling access to key resources” (Keohane 2002) (of the Great Lakes, in this instance).
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Globalization: Effects on Fisheries Resources , pp. 305 - 330Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2007
References
and 2000. Hard and soft law in international governance. International Organization 54: 421–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1998. The Political Influence of Global NGOs: Case Studies of the Climate and Biodiversity Conventions. Utrecht, Netherlands: International Books.Google Scholar
and 2000. Unilateralism and multilateralism in international fisheries management. Global Governance 6: 339–60.Google Scholar
, , and (eds.) 1996. International Rules: Approaches from International Law and International Relations. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
1993. The International Joint Commission and public participation: past experience, present challenges, future tasks. Natural Resources Journal 33: 235–274.Google Scholar
, , et al. 1993. Making Sense of Subsidiarity: How Much Centralization for Europe? Monitoring European Integration, CEPR Annual Report No. 4. London: Centre for Economic Policy Research.Google Scholar
Born, S. M. and Stairs, G. S. 2002. An Assessment of State Planning for Coldwater Fisheries Management in the United States. Trout Unlimited. Available online at: www.tu.org
Bowman, M. 1996. The nature, development and philosophical foundations of the biodiversity concept in international law. In International Law and the Conservation of Biodiversity, eds. and . London: Kluwer Law International, pp. 5–49.Google Scholar
2001. Finessing King Neptune: fisheries managements and the limits of international law. Harvard Environmental Law Journal 25: 213–258.Google Scholar
Brown, R., Ebner, M., and Gorenflo, T. 1999. Great Lakes commercial fisheries: historical overview and prognosis for the future. In Great Lakes Fisheries Policy and Management: A Binational Perspective, eds. and . East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Press, pp. 361–362.Google Scholar
Brühl, T. and Rittberger, V. 2001. From international to global governance: actors, collective decision-making, and the United Nations in the world of the twenty-first century. In Global Governance and the United Nations System, ed. . Tokyo: United Nations University Press, pp. 1–47.Google Scholar
CDLR (Council of Europe Steering Committee on Local and Regional Authorities). 1994. Definition and Limits of the Principle of Subsidiarity. Strasbourg, France: Council of Europe.
and 2003. Fish for All: An Oral History of Multiple Claims and Divided Sentiment on Lake Michigan. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Press.Google Scholar
1959. The Influence of Non-Governmental Groups on Foreign Policy Making. Boston, MA: World Peace Foundation.Google Scholar
Conca, K. 1996. Greening the UN: environmental organisations and the UN system. In NGOs, the UN and Global Governance, eds. and . Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, pp. 103–119.Google Scholar
Cram, L. 2001. Integration theory and the study of the European policy process: toward a synthesis of approaches. In European Union: Power and Policy-Making, 2nd edn, ed. . New York: Routledge, pp. 51–73.Google Scholar
, , and 2002. Governing human interactions with migratory animals, with a focus on humans interacting with fish in Lake Erie: then, now and in the future. Canada–United States Law Journal 28: 389–446.Google Scholar
Dochoda, M. R. 1999. Authorities, responsibilities, and arrangements for managing fish and fisheries in the Great Lakes ecosystem. In Great Lakes Fisheries Policy and Management: A Binational Perspective, eds. and . East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Press, pp. 93–110.Google Scholar
1999. Closing the gap: the role of “soft” international instruments to control fishing. Australian Year Book of International Law 20: 83–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferreri, C. P., Taylor, W. W., and Robertson, J. M. 1999. Great Lakes fisheries futures: balancing the demands of a multijurisdictional resource. In Great Lakes Fisheries Policy and Management: A Binational Perspective, eds. and . East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Press, pp. 539–548.Google Scholar
1987. Editorial: Toward understanding Great Lakes organizational ecosystems. Journal of Great Lakes Research 31: 233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Francis, G. 1990. Flexible governance. In An Ecosystem Approach to the Integrity of the Great Lakes in Turbulent Times, eds. and . Ann Arbor, MI: Great Lakes Fishery Commission, pp. 195–207.Google Scholar
Frank, A. 1998. GLU and Trout Unlimited plan regional fish conferences. Available online at www.glu.org/english/information/newsletters/12_4-fall-1998/GLU-conferences.html
Galtung, F. 2000. A global network to curb corruption: the experience of transparency international. In The Third Force: The Rise of Transnational Civil Society, ed. . Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, pp. 17–47.Google Scholar
GLFC (Great Lakes Fishery Commission). 2000. The Great Lakes Fishery Commission Established by Treaty to Protect Our Fishery, Fact Sheet 1. Ann Arbor, MI: Great Lakes Fishery Commission.
GLFC. 2001. Strategic Vision of the Great Lakes Fishery Commission for the First Decade of the New Millennium. Ann Arbor, MI: Great Lakes Fishery Commission.
GLFC. n.d. A Joint Strategic Plan for Management of Great Lakes Fisheries, Fact Sheet 10. Ann Arbor, MI: Great Lakes Fishery Commission. Available online at www.glfc.org
GLU (Great Lakes United). 2003. Green Book. Available online at www.glu.org/home.html
Great Lakes Conservation Task Force. 2002. An Action Plan to Protect the Great Lakes. Final Report, The Citizens' Agenda, Presented to Senate Majority Leader Dan L. DeGrow. Lansing, MI: Michigan State Senate and the Citizens of Michigan.
1992. Epistemic communities and international policy coordination. International Organization 46: 367–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and 1998. An ecosystem approach to Great Lakes management: practical steps. Journal of Great Lakes Research 24: 739–750.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1999. A fresh look at soft law. European Journal of International Law 10: 499–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 1995. The troubled renewal of the Canada–Ontario agreement respecting Great Lakes water quality. Publius: The Journal of Federalism. 25: 51–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(ed.) 2002. Power and Governance in a Partially Globalized World. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keohane, R. O. and Nye, J. S., Jr. 2002. Governance in a globalizing world. In Power and Governance in a Partially Globalized World, ed. . London: Routledge, pp. 193–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2001. International Ocean Governance: Using International Law and Organizations to Manage Marine Resources Sustainably. Gland, Switzerland: World Conservation Union.Google Scholar
2000. A Changing United Nations: Multilateral Evolution and the Quest for Global Governance. New York: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1996. Integrated Resource Planning and Management: The Ecosystem Approach in the Great Lakes Basin. Washington DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
Manno, J. P. 1994. Advocacy and diplomacy: NGOs and the Great Lakes Quality Agreement in environmental NGOs. In World Politics: Linking the Local and the Global, eds. and . New York: Routledge, pp. 69–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MUCC (Michigan United Conservation Clubs). 2002. Inside MUCC. Available online at www.mucc.org/inside_mucc/about.htm
, , , et al. 2003. Lake Ontario: food web dynamics in a changing ecosystem (1970–2000). Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 60: 471–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Munton, D. 1980. Great Lakes water quality: a study in environmental politics and diplomacy. In Resources and the Environment: Policy Perspectives for Canada, ed. . Toronto, Ontario: McClelland & Stewart, pp. 153–178.Google Scholar
1995. The World Bank and Non-Governmental Organizations: The Limits of Apolitical Development. New York: St. Martin's Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , and 2000. Contesting Global Governance: Multilateral Economic Institutions and Global Social Movements. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Gorman, R. and Stewart, T. J. 1999. Ascent, dominance, and the decline of the alewife in the Great Lakes. In Great Lakes Fisheries Policy and Management: A Binational Perspective, eds. and . East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Press, pp. 489–507.Google Scholar
Peterson, M. J. 1993. International fisheries management. In Institutions for the Earth: Sources of Effective International Environmental Protection, eds. , , and . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rittberger, V. (ed.) 2001. Forward in Global Governance and the United Nations System. New York: United Nations University Press.
Ryder, R. A. and Orendorff, J. A. 1999. Embracing biodiversity in the Great Lakes ecosystem. In Great Lakes Fisheries Policy and Management: A Binational Perspective, eds. and . East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Press, pp. 113–143.Google Scholar
Schechter, M. G. 2001. Making meaningful UN-sponsored world conferences of the 1990s: NGOs to the rescue. In United Nations-Sponsored World Conferences: Focus on Impact and Follow-Up, ed. . Tokyo: United Nations University Press, pp. 189–217.Google Scholar
Scholte, J. A. and Schnabel, A. 2002. Introduction. In Civil Society and Global Finance, eds. and . London: Routledge, pp. 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and 1998. International law and international relations theory: a new generation of interdisciplinary scholarship. American Journal of International Law 92: 367–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2000. Subsidiarity and self interest: federalism at the European court of justice. Harvard International Law Journal 41: 1–128.Google Scholar
Tanner, H. A. and Tody, W. H. 2002. History of Great Lakes salmon fishery: a Michigan perspective. In Sustaining North American Salmon: Perspectives across Regions and Disciplines, eds. , , and . Bethesda, MD: American Fisheries Society, pp. 145–158.Google Scholar
Trout Unlimited. 2002a. Trout Unlimited Today. Available online at www.tu.org/about_tu/tu_mission.html
Trout Unlimited. 2002b. Trout 101. Available online at www.tu.org/campaigns/trout101.html
United Nations, 1992. United Nations Framework Convention on Biological Diversity, Document DPI/130/7. Reprinted in 31 International Legal Materials 818.
, , and (eds.) 1998. The Implementation and Effectiveness of International Environmental Commitments: Theory and Practice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Wapner, P. 1998. Reorienting state sovereignty: rights and responsibilities in the environmental age. In The Greening of Sovereignty in World Politics, ed. . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 275–297.Google Scholar
Willetts, P. 1996. Consultative status for NGOs at the United Nations. In The Conscience of the World: The Influence of Non-Governmental Organisations in the U.N. System, ed. . Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, pp. 31–62.Google Scholar
2001. Transparency in 21st century fishery management: options for public participation to enhance conservation and management of international fish stocks. Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy 4: 95–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Folland interview with Brandon Schroeder, former fisheries policy official for MUCC, February 21, 2003, East Lansing, MI.
Folland interview with William W. Taylor, chairperson, Michigan State University Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, February 6, 2003, East Lansing, MI.