Suchergebnisse

Considerable fishing operations occur in the European part of the Arctic Ocean, especially in waters under Norwegian and Russian jurisdiction, and regional states have recently made important advances in combating illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing.1 During the 2000s, illegal harvesting of Northeast Arctic cod reached levels that jeopardized stock sustainability and coastal-state quota restraint, shifted wealth from legal fishers to cheaters, and promoted corrupt practices in production and distribution chains. A strengthening of various port-state measures appears promising for combating illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing in the region. Such measures have evolved from unilateral refusal to allow landing of fish taken outside international quota arrangements to a multilateral Scheme of Control and Enforcement under the North-East Atlantic Fisheries Commission (NEAFC).Keywords: Barents Sea, IUU fishing, fisheries management, codCitation: Arctic Review on Law and Politics, vol. 1, 2/2010 p. 207-224. ISSN 1891-6252

Considerable fishing operations occur in the European part of the Arctic Ocean, especially in waters under Norwegian and Russian jurisdiction, and regional states have recently made important advances in combating illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing.1 During the 2000s, illegal harvesting of Northeast Arctic cod reached levels that jeopardized stock sustainability and coastal-state quota restraint, shifted wealth from legal fishers to cheaters, and promoted corrupt practices in production and distribution chains. A strengthening of various port-state measures appears promising for combating illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing in the region. Such measures have evolved from unilateral refusal to allow landing of fish taken outside international quota arrangements to a multilateral Scheme of Control and Enforcement under the North-East Atlantic Fisheries Commission (NEAFC).Keywords: Barents Sea, IUU fishing, fisheries management, codCitation: Arctic Review on Law and Politics, vol. 1, 2/2010 p. 207-224. ISSN 1891-6252

This article examines the potential of trade measures to induce more climate-friendly policies, focusing on the relationship between global trade rules & the Kyoto climate regime. At the core of this interplay is the normative consistency of trade-related rules in the two regimes & any hierarchical relationship between them. The stronger clout of the WTO & its compulsory dispute settlement system suggest that issues involving competing claims would be referred to WTO bodies. Such bodies have so far been restrictive regarding the exceptions in WTO agreements to the general ban on embargoes & discrimination. The normative compatibility of the two regimes will also depend on their participatory interplay, specifically how they differentiate groups of actors as to rights & obligations. Non-members of WTO receive the least protection, & their vulnerability to climate-related trade measures is largely determined by their interdependence with states that consider employment of such measures. Among WTO members, the findings of a dispute settlement body would presumably differ depending on the status of the target under the Kyoto Protocol. A non-complier with Kyoto commitments would be more shielded than a non-party, because by joining the Kyoto regime a non-complier has exposed itself to regime-internal & less trade intrusive measures that should be exhausted first. A third dimension of interplay is linkage, or efforts to influence the regime interplay. To date there has only been moderate cross-agency coordination, but considerable attention is paid within each regime, including in the Millennium Round of trade negotiations, to the desirability of avoiding conflict between them. 1 Table, 33 References. Adapted from the source document.