An international conference dedicated to protecting Antarctica’s fragile marine ecosystem has stalled again.
For the sixth year in a row, members of the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) – part of the Antarctic Treaty System – have failed to agree on any new marine protected areas in the fragile Southern Ocean.
This is despite the support of most of CCAMLR’s member parties. This year only two countries, China and Russia, have refused to support new marine protected areas, or MPAs. Both members have also blocked similar proposals in recent years.
It is the latest example of an impasse in the Antarctic Treaty system being fomented by just one or two member states. This may be part of a worrying trend. Some countries, most commonly China or Russia, are increasingly using “pseudoscience” and other malicious arguments to justify blocking protections supported by most other members, experts say.
Motives are not always clear. But they may involve growing interest in expanding fisheries and other economic opportunities throughout the Southern Ocean.
“It’s a weird politicization of science,” said Tony Price, an adjunct professor at the University of Tasmania’s Institute of Marine and Antarctic Studies, former head of the Australian Antarctic Division and former CCAMLR commissioner in Australia.
At the recent CCAMLR meeting, which concluded on November 4, some member states expressed concern that political manipulation was hindering the committee’s goals.
“The cooperation and open collaboration required by CCAMLR has always been its strength,” the US delegation said in its opening statement. “But frankly, it’s now holding back progress. Countries prioritizing their individual needs undermine our ability to achieve the shared conservation goals that this institution was built upon.”
In recent years, such standoffs have included disagreements over fishing limits for some fisheries around Antarctica and new protections for species such as emperor penguins.
The impasse over new marine protected areas is a long-running example.
CCAMLR was established in 1982 under the Antarctic Treaty System to protect Antarctica’s marine life and sustainably manage its fisheries. Its responsibilities include the authority to designate marine protected areas in the Southern Ocean.
In 2002, the commission committed to creating a network of marine protected areas around Antarctica. Yet 20 years later, it has only managed to implement two MPAs – one off the South Orkney Islands in 2009 and another in the Ross Sea in 2016.
This year’s meeting proposed three new marine protected areas — one around the Antarctic Peninsula, one in the Weddell Sea and a third off the coast of East Antarctica.Multiple versions of these proposals have been on the table for years, with nearly all CCAMLR members supporting them and agreeing that they are based on the best science available, according to a official report lawsuit this year.
But the Antarctic Treaty process operates on a consensus system, meaning decisions can only be made when all parties agree. And China and Russia failed to provide the necessary support for any of the three proposals.
Both countries raised some objections. In part, they expressed concern that MPAs would not be able to address all the threats climate change poses to Antarctica’s marine ecosystems.
However, Ricardo Roura, senior adviser to the Antarctic and Southern Ocean Alliance, a group with official observer status and able to participate in Antarctic Safeguard organization for meetings within the treaty system.
Marine protected areas provide special sanctuaries for marine life, reducing threats from overfishing, pollution and other disturbances. In the process, they could help support species threatened by climate change—or at least help protect them from further decline triggered by other factors.
“The marine protected areas in Antarctica, what they do is create resilience,” Roura said.
China also expressed concern that the East Antarctic MPA proposal was based on eight years of scientific evidence, suggesting that the committee should consider newer data. But other member states have pointed out that it has taken so long because China and Russia have blocked proposals for marine protected areas year after year.
It’s an argument that “would be interesting if it wasn’t so depressing,” Roura said.
‘A very dangerous precedent’
It’s not just marine protected areas that are causing controversy.
Russia has also repeatedly blocked efforts to set catch limits for Patagonian toothfish, also known as Chilean sea bass, off South Georgia Island, objecting to some of the methods used to develop the proposal. Most other members supported the proposed limits and agreed they were based on the best available science.
At the recent CCAMLR meeting, some members issued statements expressing their frustration with this issue.
The U.S. delegation said: “We cannot see any reason why Russia continues to ignore new data and analysis that refute its assumptions, and simply concludes that Russia’s practices are designed to sow discontent and crush the very foundations many of us share in CCAMLR. Conclusions in a spirit of collaboration,” according to the official CCAMLR meeting report, in a statement.
Members of the CCAMLR scientific committee also said Russia had said “no amount of science could change its position,” the report noted.
This problem has had some knock-on effects.Earlier this year, Britain quietly issued its own fishing licenses for the area without the CCAMLR-approved fishing limits, the Associated Press said. first reported. In turn, the U.S. has said it may ban the import of bass caught off the South Georgia Islands.
Price, a former CCAMLR commissioner in Australia, said the issue highlighted the danger of a “ripple effect” of disputes within the committee.
“Russia’s lack of engagement, its lack of ability to come to a consensus on this based on really bogus arguments, sets a very dangerous precedent,” he said.
It’s not just CCAMLR that faces this type of science-related controversy. They are now infiltrating other Antarctic Treaty meetings.
At the annual Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting, which concluded in early June, dozens of countries backed a proposal to grant emperor penguins special protection status under the Antarctic Treaty’s Protocol on Environmental Protection.
Emperor penguin populations will decline as the planet continues to warm, research suggests. Scientists say the new conservation measures could help protect the species from other disturbances, such as tourism and pollution, that could lead to faster losses.
This move was blocked by one country – China (Climate LineJune 17).
China says the science linking emperor penguins to climate change may be uncertain. Its arguments are based in large part on two articles by self-proclaimed zoologist and blogger Susan Crockford, who has published multiple articles through the Global Warming Policy Foundation, a conservative known for challenging climate science. Think tanks change.
It’s unclear what inspired this contrarianism, Press said. But he said both China and Russia may be interested in avoiding “any marine environment legislation that would abandon their future options”.
Currently, most of these potential options involve Antarctic fisheries.
Mining in Antarctica has been banned since 1998 under an environmental protocol of the Antarctic Treaty. The protocol is immutable until 2048, when Antarctic Treaty members may request a review. In theory, member parties could then decide to overturn the mining ban.
The likelihood of such an outcome is debatable—for his part, Press has Suggest This can be difficult to accomplish. Nonetheless, he added that future mining opportunities are unlikely, which may be a factor in today’s discussion.
Another lingering question: how to resolve these disputes.
“No one is talking about changing the consensus approach,” ASOS consultant Roura said. “But there has to be a way to facilitate the consensus process and ensure consensus.”
Press noted that countries could use certain international dispute clauses in cases of serious disagreement. In 2010, Australia filed a complaint with the International Court of Justice over Japan’s Antarctic whaling activities. The court ruled against Japan in 2014.
Otherwise, he said, “coordinated high-level diplomacy” might be the best strategy.
Avoiding future disputes over Antarctic conservation and protecting its valuable resources is critical, Press added.
“Climate change is the biggest threat facing Antarctica. On a global scale, Antarctica will be extremely important for future global food security,” he said. “So addressing this issue of politicization of science and the use of fake science to prevent consensus is a major issue that needs to be addressed.”
forward from Appliance News Licensed by POLITICO, LLC. Copyright 2022. E&E News provides important news for energy and environmental professionals.
