Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Foreword
- Preface
- List of abbreviations
- PART I Foundations of international wildlife law
- PART II Species regulation
- PART III Regional wildlife regulation
- 8 The Convention on Nature Protection and Wildlife Preservation in the Western Hemisphere
- 9 The African Convention on the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources
- 10 The Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats
- 11 Polar regions
- 12 Other regional and subregional arrangements
- PART IV Global wildlife regulation
- PART V Biological diversity: a new perspective on wildlife regulation
- PART VI Cross-sectoral issues in wildlife regulation
- PART VII Conclusion
- Index
- References
11 - Polar regions
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 July 2011
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Foreword
- Preface
- List of abbreviations
- PART I Foundations of international wildlife law
- PART II Species regulation
- PART III Regional wildlife regulation
- 8 The Convention on Nature Protection and Wildlife Preservation in the Western Hemisphere
- 9 The African Convention on the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources
- 10 The Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats
- 11 Polar regions
- 12 Other regional and subregional arrangements
- PART IV Global wildlife regulation
- PART V Biological diversity: a new perspective on wildlife regulation
- PART VI Cross-sectoral issues in wildlife regulation
- PART VII Conclusion
- Index
- References
Summary
Introduction
Both the Arctic and Antarctic polar regions are subject to regional rules for, inter alia, the protection of species and of habitat. While special rules exist for other regions, as for example explored in the other chapters in Part III of this book, the polar regions are different by virtue of ‘their size compared to other regions, the unique problems they face, the interest of the whole international community in their management and resource potential, and the means that have been adopted to deal with management problems’. Additionally, while other areas may be more severely affected by climate change, its impact on polar bear habitat, and the consequences for sea-level rise of the melting of ‘permanent’ Antarctic ice shelves, have had catalytic effect upon perceptions of this global problem. The polar regions are considered key to our general understanding of climate change. In 2009, the first ever (largely symbolic) Joint Ministerial Meeting of the Antarctic Treaty/Arctic Council took place in Washington on 6 April 2009 on the occasion of the conclusion of the fourth International Polar Year (2007–8) and the fiftieth anniversary of the Antarctic Treaty.
Yet there are also significant differences between them. Geographically, the Arctic comprises an ocean surrounded by continental land masses, while the Antarctic is a continent surrounded by ocean. Arctic peoples have inhabited the northern polar region for thousands of years, while Antarctica has no permanent population save for scientists.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Lyster's International Wildlife Law , pp. 346 - 375Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2010
References
, ‘The Protection of the Antarctic Environment and the Ecosystem Approach’, in and (eds.), International Law and the Conservation of Biological Diversity (Kluwer, 1995)Google Scholar
, ‘Protection of Ecosystems under International Law: Lessons from Antarctica’, in and (eds.), International Law and Sustainable Development: Past Achievements and Future Challenges (Oxford University Press, 1999)Google Scholar
, The Polar Regions and the Development of International Law (Cambridge University Press, 1996)Google Scholar
, ‘The Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy and International Environmental Co-operation in the Far North’ (1995) 6 YBIEL65Google Scholar
, ‘International Law and the Protection of the Arctic Environment’ (1995) 44 International and Comparative Law Quarterly280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
et al., ‘Polar Regions (Arctic and Antarctic)’, in et al. (eds.), Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Cambridge University Press, 2000)Google Scholar
, ‘Physical/Geographic Characteristics of the Arctic’, in AMAP Assessment Report: Arctic Pollution Issues (Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme, 1998)Google Scholar
Global Outlook for Ice & Snow 9 (United Nations Environment Programme, 2007)
, Principles of International Environmental Law (Cambridge University Press, 2nd ed., 2003), pp. 561–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘The Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy and International Environmental Co-operation in the Far North’ (1995) 6 YBIEL65Google Scholar
, ‘An Arctic Treaty: A Solution to the International Dispute over the Polar Region’ (2008–9) 14 Ocean and Coastal Law Journal307Google Scholar
, ‘Fishing and the Southern Ocean: The Development of Fisheries and the Role of CCAMLR in their Management’ (1997) 16(2) University of Tasmania Law Review160, p. 168Google Scholar
and , ‘The Functioning of the Antarctic Marine Ecosystem: A Fragile Equilibrium’, in , and (eds.), The Antarctic Environment and International Law (Martinus Nijhoff, 1992), p. 49Google Scholar
, International Law and the Antarctic Treaty System (Grotius Publications, 1992), p. 24Google Scholar
, ‘Has CCAMLR Worked? Management Policies and Ecological Needs’, in and (eds.), The Antarctic Treaty System in World Politics (Macmillan, 1991), p. 46Google Scholar
, ‘Environmental Protection in Antarctica: Past, Present and Future’ (1990) 28 CYIL227, p. 238Google Scholar
, ‘Tug-of-War for the Antarctic Krill’ (1980) 8 Ocean Development and International Law171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘The Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources’ (1983–4) 13 Ocean Development and International Law316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘The Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources: A Five-Year Review’ (1989) 38 International and Comparative Law Quarterly104, p. 111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘Environmental Protection in Antarctica: Drawing Lessons from the CCAMLR for the Implementation of the Madrid Protocol’ (1998) 29 Ocean Development and International Law125, p. 126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Report of the CCAMLR Performance Review Panel (1980 Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources, 2008), p. 32
, ‘Protection of the Antarctic Marine Fauna and Flora: The Canberra Convention of 20 May 1980 and the Commission Set up by It’, in and (eds.), International Law for Antarctica (Giuffre, 2nd ed., 1996), p. 162Google Scholar
, ‘Environmental Protection in Antarctica: A Comment on the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources’ (1981) 19 CYIL303, pp. 316–17Google Scholar
and , ‘Australia's Antarctic Maritime Claims and Boundaries’ (1995) 26(3) Ocean Development and International Law195, pp. 208–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, Shipping Interdiction and the Law of the Sea (Cambridge University Press, 2009), pp. 141–2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and , International Law and the Environment (Oxford University Press, 3rd ed., 2009), p. 592Google Scholar
(ed.), Understanding CCAMLR's Approach to Management (1980 Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources, 2000)
and , Regional Fisheries Management Organizations: Progress in Adopting the Precautionary Approach and Ecosystem-Based Management, Recommended Best Practices for Regional Fisheries Management Organizations Technical Study No. 1 (Chatham House, 2007), p. xiiiGoogle Scholar
, ‘Fishing and Conservation in Southern Waters’ (1994) 30(172) Polar Record3, p. 15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, Aspects of Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing in the Southern Ocean (Springer, 2006)Google Scholar
, ‘Recent Developments in Compliance and Enforcement for International Fisheries’ (1997) 24(4) Ecology Law Quarterly857–60Google Scholar
, ‘Are Twentieth-Century Marine Conservation Conventions Adaptable to Twenty-First Century Goals and Principles? Part II’ (1997) 12(4) International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law488, pp. 510–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘Environmental Protection in Antarctica: The 1991 Protocol’ (1994) 43 International and Comparative Law Quarterly599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘The Madrid Protocol on the Protection of the Antarctic Environment’ (1993) 28(1) Texas JIL47, p. 55Google Scholar
and (eds.), The Antarctic Legal Regime (Giuffre, 1988), pp. 245–9
, ‘Protecting Antarctica: Progress in Chile’ (1991) 26(1) Antarctica J. of the U.S. 4, p. 8Google Scholar
- 1
- Cited by