From this view, Coral Triangle appears to suffer from “Treaty Congestion” that can take a toll on the (already) limited capacity of the CT6 countries to participate in negotiations, meeting of parties and associated activities and enforcement.The complexity of the governance landscape in the Coral Triangle is compound by the participation of non-state actors (e.g., the Big International NGOs).
The CTI should foster building interplay by identifying and collaborating with the existing related agreements, otherwise it risk being just another dot/node in the diagram.
Navigating Multilateral Governance in the Coral Triangle
Navigating Multilateral Governance in the Coral TrianglePedro Fidelman1, Julia Ekstrom2, Dominque Thiriet3 & Yolly Bosiger41 ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies, James Cook University 2 University of California, Berkeley 3 School of Law, James Cook University 4 School of Marine & Tropical Biology, James Cook University Paper presented at the Resilience 2011 Conference, 15 March 2011, Tempe, USA.
Outline1. Introduction Coral Triangle Initiative Research problem2. Navigating Multilateral Governance Methods Preliminary findings3. Next steps
Global Coral Reef Crisis Coral Triangle World Resources Institute Reefs at Risk Revised (2011)75% of coral reefs in danger from overfishing,pollution and climate change.
Coral Triangle Initiative: to address threatsto the marine, coastal, and small islandecosystems within the Coral Triangleregion... (May 15, 2009)
Goals of CTIRegional Plan1. Priority Seascapes designated and effectively managed2. Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries Management (EAFM) and other marine resources fully applied3. Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) established and effectively managed4. Climate Change Adaptation measures achieved5. Threatened Species status improving
Recognition of other agreementsLeaders’ Declaration: “6. To emphasise that cooperation of theCTI-CFF [Coral Triangle Initiative on Coral Reefs, Fisheries andFood Security] shall… [take] into consideration the relevantmultilateral, regional and bilateral environmental agreements;”(2009: 2)CTI Regional Plan of Action: “Principle #5: CTI should be alignedwith international and regional commitments. Goals andactivities should be supportive of international and regionalcommitments already made under relevant legal instrumentsand multilateral processes…” (2009: 8)
Research ProblemGovernance is complex & dispersed acrossmany agreements1. What is the extant governance for the CTIregion?2. Which multilateral arrangements relate tothe priorities of the CTI, and to what extent?
Method: Multidimensional exploration Methodology developed in Ekstrom et al. 2009: Text analysis using MINOE 1.1 (Ekstrom et al., 2010) Network diagrams NetDraw 2.091 (Borgatti, 2006) (Downloadable program at: http://minoe.stanford.edu)
Dataset• What: International and multilateral arrangements (conventions, treaties, agreements , plans etc)• Issue scope: management of marine resources, CTI goals• Source: ECOLEX database on environmental law (FAO/IUCN/UNEP)• Size: ~200 documents (190 analysed), ~70-80 regimes
Topics covered in documents%of documents per topic 69% n=190 23% 15% 14% 9% 9% 7%
Multilateral Arrangements Malaysia Philippines Solomon Islands CTI Regional Plan Indonesia Timor Leste PNG Non- binding: 49% Scope Regional: 72%Status Binding: 51% Global: 28%
Multilateral Arrangements Malaysia Philippines Solomon Islands Indonesia Timor Leste PNG Non- binding: 49% Scope Regional: 72%Status Binding: 51% Global: 28%
FisheriesResolutions ofthe IndianOcean Tuna Malaysia Philippines Solomon IslandsCommission UN Indonesia Timor Leste PNG Agreement on straddling and highly migratory fish stocks Hits No. docs % of docs FAO Code of Conduct 5,856 131 69% for Responsible Fisheries
Food Security UN Agenda 21 Malaysia Philippines Solomon Islands 3rd ACP-EEC Convention Indonesia Timor Leste PNG Hits No. docs % of docs Non- binding Regional 161 29 15% Binding Global
Ecosystem ApproachResolutions of Malaysia Philippines Solomon Islandsthe IndianOcean TunaCommission SPREP Indonesia Timor Leste PNG Strategic Programme Hits No. docs % of docs RAMSAR Strategic Non- binding 55 18 9% Plan Binding
Climate Change Adaptation Convention on Migratory Species Malaysia Philippines Solomon Islands Indonesia Timor Leste PNG Pacific Islands Framework for Action on Hits No. docs % of docs Regional Climate Change 102 17 9% Global
Preliminary observations Fisheries vs. other concepts All mostly regional Fisheries: 55% binding Other: non-binding Potential for “treaty congestion” Highly complex governance landscape, but more so with the non-state actors (e.g. BINGOs)
Next StepsCoordination opportunities Which agreements does the CTI Plan refer to? Regime profiles of a selection of agreements that refer to one or more CTI goals How do objectives overlap functionally and spatially?Lessons learned How is/will CTI differ from other agreements? (e.g. SDS- SEA) What can we learn from past? Review regime effectiveness studies on target agreements
Conclusion Demonstrated the complexity of governance (just the environmental multilateral agreements!) Useful for sketching out/grasping the system as a whole Critical to recognize these existing efforts Use these as coordination opportunities Apply lessons learned from the past (+ and -)
Acknowledgement Contact informationPedro Fidelman: email@example.com Julia Ekstrom: firstname.lastname@example.org