Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources

Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources
source
Name	Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources
Type	Multilateral environmental agreement
Location signed	Canberra
Date signed	1980
Effective	1982
Parties	26 original; now many Consultative Parties and Non-Consultative Parties
Languages	English, French

Contents

Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources is a multilateral treaty established under the aegis of the Antarctic Treaty System to conserve marine living resources in the Southern Ocean. Adopted in 1980 at Canberra and entering into force in 1982, the Convention created a management regime linking fisheries science with international decision-making through the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources and its Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research-related advisory processes. The instrument sits alongside the Antarctic Treaty and the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty within a suite of instruments governing Antarctica and southern ocean resources.

Background and Negotiation

Negotiations took place amid tensions between United States and Soviet Union fishing interests, the expansion of flag states such as Japan, Norway, and Spain, and conservation advocacy by organisations including World Wide Fund for Nature and Greenpeace. The diplomatic process drew on precedents from the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea negotiations, the International Whaling Commission, and regional instruments like the Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Seals. Delegations from Australia, New Zealand, United Kingdom, Chile, Argentina, and other Consultative Parties shaped text that balanced sovereign claims asserted by United Kingdom, Argentina, and Chile with the principles established at the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting. Scientific inputs were provided by institutions such as the British Antarctic Survey, Australian Antarctic Division, National Science Foundation (United States), and the Scripps Institution of Oceanography.

The Convention's objectives reflect conservation principles found in the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling and the Convention on Biological Diversity, aiming to maintain Antarctic marine ecosystem integrity while allowing rational use of marine living resources. The legal framework establishes the Convention as part of the Antarctic Treaty System and defines the Convention area surrounding Antarctic convergence waters. It incorporates scientific standards from the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research and relies on obligations similar to those in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. The instrument recognizes the role of Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources decisions, integrates precautionary approaches, and interfaces with national laws of Parties such as domestic fisheries statutes in Norway, Japan, Russia, and United States.

The Convention established the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources as the primary decision-making body and created the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research-aligned Scientific Committee for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources to provide scientific advice. Parties appoint Commissioners and Scientific Delegates drawn from national agencies like the Ministry of Fisheries (New Zealand), Russian Federal Agency for Fishery, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The Commission adopts conservation measures, including catch limits and area protections, often after deliberation at meetings attended by delegations from Australia, France, South Africa, Uruguay, China, and others. Decision-making typically aims for consensus; where consensus fails, voting procedures and uplift mechanisms mirror practices in International Whaling Commission and Food and Agriculture Organization forums.

Management tools under the Convention include catch limits, total allowable catch, scientific observer programs, site-based protections equivalent to marine protected areas proposed by Parties, and bycatch mitigation measures informed by research from Australian Antarctic Division and Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems Cooperative Research Centre. Target species addressed include Antarctic krill (Euphausia superba), Patagonian toothfish, and other demersal species exploited by fleets from Japan, South Korea, China, Spain, and United Kingdom. The Commission has adopted Conservation Measure instruments, spatial management frameworks such as CCAMLR marine protected areas proposals, and ecosystem-based management approaches inspired by work at Convention on Biological Diversity meetings and the World Conservation Congress.

Compliance relies on national implementation measures, port inspections by Parties, and observer coverage similar to mechanisms under the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers and Port State Control practices. Enforcement actions have involved coordination between flag states such as Norway and Panama and coastal states with vessels operating in the Convention area. Dispute settlement references general rules from the Antarctic Treaty and draws upon procedures under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea adjudicative and conciliation institutions like the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and the International Court of Justice for unresolved controversies.

The Convention has been credited with establishing an ecosystem-based management precedent influencing Convention on Biological Diversity deliberations and regional fisheries organisations including the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission. Critics from conservation NGOs like BirdLife International and Greenpeace have pointed to slow establishment of marine protected areas, compliance gaps involving illicit toothfish fishing prosecuted by authorities in Spain and Australia, and challenges in addressing climate change impacts highlighted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Future challenges include addressing warming-driven shifts in Antarctic krill distribution, reconciling competing interests of fishing industry actors from China and Russia with conservation priorities, and strengthening enforcement through mechanisms akin to those used by the International Maritime Organization and Interpol.

Category:Antarctic Treaty System Category:Environmental treaties Category:Fisheries treaties