...
首页> 外文期刊>Frontiers in Marine Science >Do Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) and Track Two Processes Support Transboundary Marine Conservation? Lessons From Six Case Studies of Maritime Disputes
【24h】

Do Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) and Track Two Processes Support Transboundary Marine Conservation? Lessons From Six Case Studies of Maritime Disputes

机译:替代争议解决(ADR)并跟踪两项过程支持跨界海洋保护?六个案例研究的海事纠纷研究

获取原文
           

摘要

By definition, marine protected areas (MPAs) and other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs) address spatial aspects of the ecological processes and marine features. Such a requirement is especially challenging in areas where there is no clearly defined jurisdiction. However, in these areas, assigning sovereignty and rights can be achieved through bilateral or multilateral agreements, or with the use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) tools such as mediation and arbitration. In some cases, states may engage in transboundary marine conservation initiatives to provide an entry point to enable wider collaboration. These processes can also evolve into a form of ‘environmental peacebuilding’ while ideally maintaining ecosystem functioning and resilience as a core goal. Conversely, MPAs and OECMs can also be used to assert maritime sovereignty rights over disputed waters, under the pretext of conserving marine habitats. This paper identifies emerging issues of conflict resolution and their interaction with transboundary marine conservation. While ADR focuses on negotiations and facilitated processes between state representatives (“track one diplomacy”), we also discuss other forms and levels of marine environmental peacebuilding and dispute resolution, particularly those between civil society organizations (“track two diplomacy”). The six case studies presented highlight areas of recent maritime conflict or border disputes in the Mediterranean Sea, the Red Sea, the West Indian Ocean, the Korean West Sea and the South China Sea. In all cases, high ecological value, vulnerable ecosystems, and the need to conserve ecosystem services provide a shared interest for cooperation despite on-going diplomatic difficulties. The strategies used in these cases are analyzed to determine what lessons might be learned from cross-border collaborative marine initiatives in situations of territorial disputes. The use of ADR tools and their ability to support joint marine initiatives are examined, as well as how such initiatives contribute to formal border negotiations. Other forms of inter-state dialogue and cooperation between local or civil organizations, circumventing formal treaties and negotiations between state leaders (‘track two’) are also investigated. Finally, other influencing factors, including third-party involvement, stakeholder interests, power dynamics, economic context, and socio-cultural aspects, are considered.
机译:根据定义,海洋保护区(MPA)和其他有效的基于面积的保护措施(OECMS)地址生态过程和海洋特征的空间方面。在没有明确定义的管辖权的地区,这种要求尤其具有挑战性。但是,在这些领域,可以通过双边或多边协议来实现分配主权和权利,或者使用替代争议解决(ADR)工具,如调解和仲裁。在某些情况下,各国可能会从事跨界海洋保护举措,以提供能够更广泛合作的入口点。这些过程也可以进化为“环境建设和平”的形式,同时理想地维持生态系统的功能和弹性作为核心目标。相反,在保护海洋栖息地的借口,MPAS和OECMS也可用于向争议的水域争取对有争议的水域的海事主权。本文确定了冲突解决问题及其与跨界海洋保护互动的新出现问题。虽然ADR侧重于国家代表之间的谈判和促进进程(“轨道一个外交”),但我们还讨论了海洋环境建设和平和争议解决的其他形式和水平,特别是民间社会组织(“追踪两个外交”)。六个案例研究介绍了最近地中海,红海,西印度洋,韩国西海和南海的地中海海外冲突或边界纠纷的亮点区域。在所有情况下,尽管发生往往的外交困难,但高生态价值,脆弱的生态系统和保护生态系统服务的需求为合作提供了共同的合作利益。分析了这些案件中使用的策略,以确定可能在领土纠纷情况下从跨境协作海洋倡议中了解到的课程。审查了使用ADR工具及其支持联合海事举措的能力,以及这些举措如何为正式的边境谈判有助于。还调查了其他形式的州间对话和地方或民间组织之间的合作,规避正式条约和国家领导人之间的谈判(“轨道二”)。最后,其他影响因素,包括第三方参与,利益攸关方利益,权力动力学,经济背景和社会文化方面。

著录项

获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号