Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-nmvwc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-27T01:06:01.018Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An international environmental regime for the Antarctic: critical investigations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 October 2009

Cornelis van der Lugt
Cornelis van der Lugt
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, University of Stellenbosch, Stellenbosch 7600, South Africa
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Since the late 1970s, theorists in the field of international relations have increasingly used the concept ‘international regime’ in their attempts to give content to the idea of international governance. The concept was adopted from international lawyers, and this has led to some confusion when analysts apply terminology differently. Analysis of Antarctic politics is no exception. This article seeks to illustrate how the theory of international regimes can be applied to the Antarctic Treaty System (ATS). The focus is on the events of the 1980s, during which international awareness (or perception) of a global environmental crisis severely tested the robustness of ‘the Antarctic regime’ (that is, the ATS). Three approaches to regime formation and change or transformation are considered in an attempt to explain the rejection of the Convention for the Regulation of Antarctic Mineral Resource Activities and the acceptance of the 1991 Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty. The three approaches employed are game theory, functional theories, and cognitive explanations. The evolution of a new epistemic consensus on the value and the future of the Antarctic crystallises, signifying a key role on the part of natural scientists and environmental non-governmental organisations. It is concluded that the ATS as a whole can today be described as an international environmental regime.

Type
Articles
Information
Polar Record , Volume 33 , Issue 186 , July 1997 , pp. 223 - 238
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Andersen, R. T. 1991. Negotiating a new regime: how CRAMRA came into existence. In: Jorgensen-Dahl, A., and Østreng, W. (editors). The Antarctic Treaty System in world politics. London: Macmillan/Fridtjof Nansen Institute: 94–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersen, R.M., and Rudolph, L.. 1989. On solid international ground in Antarctica: a US strategy for regulating environmental impact on the continent. Stanford Journal of International Law 26 (1): 139–157.Google Scholar
Auburn, F.M. 1982. Antarctic law andpolitics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Auburn, F.M. 1984. The Antarctic minerals regime: sovereignty, exploration, institutions and environment. In: Harris, S. (editor). Australia's Antarctic policy options. Canberra: Centre for Resource and Environmental Studies, Australian National University: 271–300.Google Scholar
Axelrod, R.M. 1984. The evolution of cooperation. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Barnes, J.N. 1987. Environmental protection and the future of the Antarctic: new approaches and perspectives are necessary. In: Triggs, G.D. (editor). The Antarctic Treaty regime; law, environment and resources. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 150–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, P.J. 1986a. The international politics of Antarctica. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Beck, P.J. 1986b. Antarctica at the United Nations, 1985: the end of consensus? Polar Record 23 (143): 159–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, P.J. 1992. The future of the Antarctic region: is the great white continent turning green? Unpublished paper prepared for the 33rd annual convention of the International Studies Association, Atlanta, Georgia, April 1992.Google Scholar
Beck, P.J. 1993. ‘A natural reserve, devoted to peace and science’: Antarctica today. Boundary and Security Bulletin 1 (1): 80–87.Google Scholar
Bergin, A. 1991. The politics of Antarctic minerals: the greening of white Australia. Australian Journal of Political Science 26 (2): 216–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blay, S.K.N. 1992. New trends in the protection of the Antarctic environment: the 1991 Madrid Protocol. The American Journal of International Law 86: 377–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blay, S.K.N., and Tsamenyi, B.M.. 1990. Australia and the Convention for the Regulation of Antarctic Mineral Resource Activities (CRAMRA). Polar Record 26(158): 195–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonner, N. 1994. Antarctic conservation and management. Polar Biology 14 (4): 301–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bos, A. 1990. Consultative status under the Antarctic Treaty: redefining the criteria? International Challenges 10(1): 73–77.Google Scholar
Brams, S.J. 1985. Superpower games: applying game theory to superpower conflict. new Haven: Yale University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, N. 1992. Ecology and world security. The World Today 48 (3): 51–54.Google Scholar
Bull, H. 1977. The anarchical society. New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bush, W. 1990. The Antarctic Treaty System: toward a comprehensive environmental regime. In: Herr, R.A., Hall, H.R., and Haward, M.G. (editors). Antarctica's future: continuity or change? Hobart: Australian Institute of International Affairs: 119–179.Google Scholar
Bush, W. 1992. The 1988 Wellington convention: how much environmental protection? In: Verhoeven, J., Sands, P., and Bruce, M. (editors). The Antarctic environment and international law. Dordrecht: Graham & Trotman: 69–83.Google Scholar
Child, J. 1988. Antarctica and South American geopolitics: frozen lebensraum.New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
Clark, M.L 1994. The Antarctic Environmental Protocol: NGOs in the protection of Antarctica. In:Princen, T., and Finger, M. (editors). Environmental NGOs in world politics. London: Routledge: 160–185.Google Scholar
Dalby, S. 1992. Ecopolitical discourse: environmental security and political geography. Progress in Human Geography 16 (4): 503–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, B.W. 1990. Science and politics in Antarctica and Southern Oceans policy: a critical assessment. In: Herr, R.A., Hall, H.R., and Haward, M.G. (editors). Antarctica's future: continuity or change? Hobart: Australian Institute of International Affairs: 39–45.Google ScholarPubMed
Davis, B.W. 1992. Antarctica as a global protected area: perceptions and reality. Australian Geographer 23 (1): 39–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Wit, M.J. 1985. Minerals and mining in Antarctica: science and technology, economics and politics. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Dodds, K.J. 1993. Geopolitics, cartography, and the state in South America. Political Geography 12(4): 361–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elliott, L. M. 1992. The politics of the Antarctic: a case study of the environment in international relations. Unpublished PhD thesis. Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar
Elliott, L.M. 1994. International environmental politics: protecting the Antarctic. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elzinga, A. 1993. Antarctica: the construction of a continent by and for science. In: Crawford, E. (editor). Denationalizing science. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers: 73–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finlayson, J.A., and Zacher, M.. 1986. The GATT and the regulation of trade barriers: regime dynamics and functions. In: Krasner, S.D. (editor). International regimes. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press: 273–314.Google Scholar
Fogg, G.E. 1992. A history of Antarctic science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fox, H. 1987. The relevance of Antarctica to the lawyer. In: Triggs, G.D. (editor). The Antarctic Treaty regime; law, environment and resources. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 77–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Francioni, F. 1992. International responsibility for damage to the Antarctic environment. In: Francioni, F. (editor). International law for Antarctica. Milano: Giuffre Editore: 233–257.Google Scholar
Francioni, F. 1993. The Madrid Protocol on the Protection of the Antarctic Environment. Texas International Law Journal 28: 47–72.Google Scholar
Greenpeace. 1991. Antarctica: the scientists' case for a world park. London: Greenpeace.Google Scholar
Grunberg, I. 1990. Exploring the ‘myth’ of hegemonic stability. International Organization 44 (4): 431–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guyer, R.E. 1983. Antarctica's role in international relations. In: Vicuna, F. Orrego (editor). Antarctic resources policy: scientific, legal and political issues. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 267–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haas, E.B. 1980. Why collaborate? Issue-linkage and international regimes. World Politics 32(3): 357–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haas, E.B. 1990. When knowledge is power: three models of change in international organizations. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Haas, P.M. 1990. Obtaining international environmental protection through epistemic consensus. Millennium 19 (3): 347–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haas, P.M. 1992. Introduction: epistemic communities and international policy coordination. International Organization 46 (1): 1–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haggard, S., and Simmons, B.A.. 1987. Theories of international regimes. International Organization 41 (3): 491–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haron, M. 1990. The ability of the ATS to adapt to external challenges. International Challenges 10 (1): 64–67.Google Scholar
Harris, S. (editor). 1984. Australia's Antarctic policy options. Canberra: Centre for Resource and Environmental Studies, Australian National University.Google Scholar
Headland, R.K. 1990. Chronological list of Antarctic expeditions and related historical events. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Heap, J.A. 1983. Cooperation in the Antarctic: a quarter of a century's experience. In: Vicuña, F. Orrego (editor). 1983. Antarctic resources policy: scientific, legal and political issues. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 103–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heap, J.A. 1987. Current and future problems arising from activities in the Antarctic. In: Triggs, G.D. (editor). The Antarctic Treaty regime; law, environment and resources. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 201–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heap, J. (editor). 1990. Handbook of the Antarctic Treaty System. Seventh edition. Cambridge: Polar Publications, Scott Polar Research Institute.Google Scholar
Hempel, G. (editor). 1994. Antarctic science: global concerns. Berlin: Springer Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hendry, J.D. 1992. How much environmental protection in the 1988 Wellington convention? In: Verhoeven, J., Sands, P., and Bruce, M. (editors). The Antarctic environment and international law. Dordrecht: Graham & Trotman: 63–67.Google Scholar
Homer-Dixon, T.F. 1991. On the threshold: environmental changes as causes of acute conflict. International Security 4: 76–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horsler, A. 1984. Comments on: The natural option. In: Harris, S. (editor). Australia's Antarctic policy options. Canberra: Centre for Resource and Environmental Studies, Australian National University: 327–338.Google Scholar
Jørgensen-Dahl, A. 1991. The legitimacy of the ATS. In: Jørgensen-Dahl, A., and Østreng, W. (editors). The Antarctic Treaty System in world politics. London: Macmillan/Fridtjof Nansen Institute: 287–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joyner, C.C. 1988. The Antarctic legal regime: an introduction. In: Joyner, C.C, and Chopra, S.K. (editors). The Antarctic legal regime. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers: 1–8.Google Scholar
Joyner, C.C, and Ewing, B.G.. 1991. Antarctica and the Latin American states: the interplay of law, geopolitics and environmental priorities. Georgetown International Environmental Law Review 4 (1): 1–46.Google Scholar
Kämmerer, J.A. 1993. Die Antarktis in der Raum- und Umweltschutzordnung des Völkerrechts. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelly, P., and Child, J. (editors). 1988. Geopolitics of the Southern Cone and Antarctica. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers.Google Scholar
Keohane, R.O. 1984. After hegemony: cooperation and discord in the world political economy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Keohane, R.O. (editor). 1989. International institutions and state power: essays in international relations theory. London: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Kimball, L. 1988. The role of non-governmental oganizations in Antarctic affairs. In: Joyner, C.C., and Chopra, S.K. (editors). The Antarctic legal regime. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers: 33–63.Google Scholar
Kindleberger, C.P. 1973. The world in depression, 1929–1939. Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Kindleberger, C.P. 1981. Dominance and leadership in the international economy. International Studies Quarterly 25 (2): 242–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krasner, S.D. 1985. Structural conflict: the Third World against global liberalism. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Krasner, S.D. 1986. Structural causes and regime consequences: regimes as intervening variables. In: Krasner, S.D. (editor). International regimes. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press: 1–22.Google Scholar
Krasner, S.D. 1991. Global communications and national power: life on the Pareto frontier. World Politics 43 (3): 336–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kratochwil, F., and Ruggie, J.G.. 1986. International organization: a state of the art on an art of the state. International Organization 40 (4): 753–775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laws, R.M. 1987a. Scientific opportunities in the Antarctic. In: Triggs, G.D. (editor). The Antarctic Treaty regime; law, environment and resources. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 28–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laws, R.M. 1987b. Cooperation or confrontation? Science, the Treaty and the future. In: Walton, D.W.H. (editor). 1987. Antarctic science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 250–265.Google Scholar
Laws, R.M. 1991. Unacceptable threats to Antarctic science. New Scientist 30 03 1991.Google Scholar
Levy, M.A., Young, O.R., and Zum, M.. 1994. The study of international regimes. Luxembourg: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (NASA Working Paper 94–113).Google Scholar
Lewis, D. 1982. The citizen, research and conservation issues in Antarctic policy. In: Herr, R.A., Hall, R., and Davis, B.W. (editors). Issues in Australia's marine and Antarctic policies. Hobart: Department of Political Science, University of Tasmania: 151–162.Google Scholar
Mathews, J. 1989. Redefining security. Foreign Affairs 68(2): 162–177.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
May, J. 1989. The Greenpeace book of Antarctica: a new view of the seventh continent. London: Dorling Kindersley.Google Scholar
MacNeill, J., Winsemius, P., and Yakushiji, T.. 1991. Beyond interdependence: the meshing of the world's economy and the Earth's ecology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Messer, K. 1990. Towards firmer institutionalization of the ATS? Future role of the Consultative Meeting, and the issue of a permanent secretariat. International Challenges 10 (1): 85–90.Google Scholar
Messer, K., and Breth, R. 1991. Towards firmer institutionalization of the ATS? Future role of the Consultative Meeting and the issue of a permanent secretariat. In: Jørgensen-Dahl, A., and Østreng, W. (editors). The Antarctic Treaty System in world politics. London: Macmillan/Fridtjof Nansen Institute: 379–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, B. 1983. Frozen stakes: the future of Antarctic minerals. London: International Institute for Environment and Development.Google Scholar
Moncur, R. 1992–1993. To the year 2000 – the future of Australia's Antarctic Program. ANARE News 71/72: 17–18.Google Scholar
Morris, M.A. (editor). 1990. Great power relations in Argentina, Chile and Antarctica. Basingstoke: Macmillan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mosley, G. 1984. The natural option: the case for an Antarctic world park. In: Harris, S. (editor). Australia's Antarctic policy options. Canberra: Centre for Resource and Environmental Studies, Australian National University: 327–338.Google Scholar
Nadelmann, E.A. 1990. Global prohibition regimes: the evolution of norms in international society. International Organisation 44 (4): 479–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olson, M. Jr 1965. The logic of collective action: public goods and the theory of groups. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oye, K.A. 1985. Explaining cooperation under anarchy: hypothesis and strategies. World Politics 38: 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oye, K.A. (editor). 1986. Cooperation under anarchy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orrego Vicuña, F. 1990. The implementation of CCAMLR: is the decision-making machinery conducive to good management? International Challenges 10 (1): 9–12.Google Scholar
Pannatier, S. 1994. Acquisition of consultative status under the Antarctic Treaty. Polar Record 30 (173): 123–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parsons, A. 1987. Antarctica: the next decade. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peterson, M.J. 1988. Managing the frozen south: the creation and evolution of the Antarctic Treaty System. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pittman, H.T. 1988. Harmony or discord: the impact of democratization on geopolitics and conflict in the Southern Cone. In: Kelly, P., and Child, J. (editors). Geopolitics of the Southern Cone and Antarctica. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers: 30–51.Google Scholar
Purver, R. 1984. Security and arms control at the poles. International Journal 39(4): 88–910.Google Scholar
Putnam, R.D. 1988. Diplomacy and domestic politics: thelogic of two-level games. International Organization 42: 427–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quigg, P.W. 1983. A pole apart: the emerging issue of Antarctica. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Redgwell, C. 1992. Antarctica–wilderness park or Eldorado postponed? Environmental Politics 1 (1): 137–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rinaldi, C. 1991. SCAR in the ATS: conflict or harmony? In:Jørgensen-Dahl, A., and Østreng, W. (editors). The Antarctic Treaty System in world politics. London: Macmillan/Fridtjof Nansen Institute: 153–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rittberger, V. (editor). 1990. International regimes in eastwest politics. London: Pinter Publishers.Google Scholar
Rittberger, V. (editor). 1993. Regime theory and international relations. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rittberger, V., and Zürn, M.. 1990. Towards regulated anarchy in east–west relations: causes and consequences of east–west regimes. In: Rittberger, V. (editor). International regimes in east-west politics. London: Pinter Publishers: 9–63.Google Scholar
Rittberger, V., Hasenclever, A., and Mayer, P.. 1995. Justice, equality, and the robustness of international regimes: a research design. Unpublished paper prepared for the 36th Annual International Studies Association (ISA) Convention, Chicago, 02 1995.Google Scholar
Rood, J.Q.T. 1989. The functioning of regimes in an interdependent world. In: Rosenau, J.N., and Tromp, H. (editors). Interdependence and conflict in world politics. Aldershot: Avebury: 61–82.Google Scholar
Rosenau, J.N. 1986. Before cooperation: hegemons, regimes, and habit-driven actors in world politics. International Organization 40: 849–894.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rowland, J.R. 1987. Whither Antarctica? Alternative strategies. In: Triggs, G.D. (editor). The Antarctic Treaty regime; law, environment and resources. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 218–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sands, P. 1992. The Antarctic Treaty regime: a model for international environmental law? In: Verhoeven, J., Sands, P., and Bruce, M. (editors). The Antarctic environment and international law. Dordrecht: Graham &Trotman: 53–61.Google Scholar
Shapley, D. 1985. The seventh continent: Antarctica in a resource age. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.Google Scholar
Snidal, D. 1985a. The limits of hegemonic stability theory. International Organization 39 (4): 579–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snidal, D. 1985b. Coordination versus prisoner's dilemma:implications for international cooperation and regimes. American Political Science Review 79: 923–942.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snidal, D. 1985c. The game theory of international politics. World Politics 38: 25–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorensen, T. 1990. Rethinking national security. Foreign Affairs 69 (3): 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Splettstoesser, J., and Dreschhoff, G. (editors). 1990. Mineral resources potential of Antarctica. Washington, DC: American Geophysical Union (Antarctic Research Series 51).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stairs, K., and Taylor, P.. 1992. Non-governmental organizations and the legal protection of the oceans: a case study. In: Hurrell, A., and Kingsbury, B. (editors). The international politics of the environment: actors, interests, and institutions. Oxford: Clarendon Press: 110–141.Google Scholar
Stokke, O.S. 1991. The relevance of the Antarctic Treaty System as a model for international cooperation. In: Jørgensen-Dahl, A., and Østreng, W. (editors). The Antarctic Treaty System in world politics. London: Macmillan/Fridtjof Nansen Institute: 357–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strange, S. 1986. Cave! hie dragones: a critique of regime analysis. In: Krasner, S.D. (editor). International regimes. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press: 337–354.Google Scholar
Susskind, L., and Ozawa, C. 1992. Negotiating more effective international environmental agreements. In: Hurrell, A., and Kingsbury, B. (editors). The international politics of the environment: actors, interests, and institutions. Oxford: Clarendon Press: 142–165.Google Scholar
Suter, K. 1991. Antarctica: private property or public heritage? Leichhardt: Pluto Press Australia.Google Scholar
Sutherland, I.J.M. 1963. Letter to the American Department in the British Foreign Office. Cambridge: British Antarctic Survey archives.Google Scholar
Taylor, M. 1987. The possibility of cooperation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Thomas, L. 1984. Games, theory and application. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Triggs, G.D. 1987a. The Antarctic Treaty System: some jurisdictional problems. In: Triggs, G.D. (editor). The Antarctic Treaty regime; law, environment and resources. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 88–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Triggs, G.D. 1987b. Negotiation of a minerals regime. In: Triggs, G.D. (editor). The Antarctic Treaty regime; law, environment and resources. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 182–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Triggs, G.D. (editor). 1987c. The Antarctic Treaty regime; law, environment and resources. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Triggs, G.D. 1990. A comprehensive environmental regime for Antarctica: a new way forward. In: Herr, R.A., Hall, H.R., and Haward, M.G. (editors). Antarctica's future: continuity or change? Hobart: Australian Institute of International Affairs: 103–118.Google Scholar
Tucker Scully, R. 1990a. Resource management and the changing profile of science in Antarctica: a growing pressure for relevance? International Challenges 10 (1): 38–42.Google Scholar
Tucker Scully, R. 1990b. The Antarctic Treaty System as a system. In: Herr, R.A., Hall, H.R., and Haward, M.G. (editors). Antarctica's future: continuity or change? Hobart: Australian Institute of International Affairs: 95–102.Google Scholar
Ullman, R. 1983. Redefining security. International Security 8: 129–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Bennekom, S. 1992. A new regime to protect the Antarctic environment. Leiden Journal of International Law 5(1): 33–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van der Lugt, C.T. 1992. Internasionale regimes en Antarktika: 'n Teoretiese en gevallestudie. Unpublished Masters thesis. Stellenbosch: University of Stellenbosch.Google Scholar
Verhoeven, J., Sands, P., and Bruce, M. (editors). 1992. The Antarctic environment and international law. Dordrecht: Graham & Trotman.Google Scholar
Vogler, J. 1995. The global commons: a regime analysis. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Walton, D.W.H. 1987. Geography, politics and science. In: Walton, D.W.H. (editor). Antarctic science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 6–67.Google Scholar
Walton, D.W.H. 1994. Providing expert scientific advice on the Antarctic environment. Antarctic Science 6(1): 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilder, M. 1992. Antarctica: an economic history of the last continent. Sydney: University of Sydney.Google Scholar
Wolf, K.D. 1989. Das antarktische Regime für die Nutzung mineralischer Rohstoffe. In: Kohler-Koch, B. (editor). Regime in den internationalen Beziehungen. Baden Baden: Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft: 151–178.Google Scholar
Wolf, K.D. 1991. Internationale Regime zur Verteilung globaler Ressourcen. Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft.Google Scholar
Young, O.R. 1986. Regime dynamics: the rise and fall of international regimes. In: Krasner, S.D. (editor). International regimes. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press: 93–114.Google Scholar
Young, O.R. 1989. International cooperation: building regimes for natural resources and the environment. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, O.R. 1990. Political leadership and regime formation: the emergence of international institutions in international society. Unpublished paper prepared for the Annual Conference of the International Studies Association, Washington, DC, 04 1990.Google Scholar
Young, O.R. 1992. The effectiveness of international institutions. In:Rosenau, J. N., and Czempiel, E. (editors). Governance without government. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 160–194.Google Scholar
Zacher, M.W. 1990. Toward a theory of international regimes. Journal of International Affairs 44 (1): 139–157.Google Scholar