Ocean Science Diplomacy can Be a Game Changer to Promote the Access to Marine Technology in Latin America and the Caribbean (original) (raw)
Related papers
Frontiers in Marine Science, 2021
This paper reviews current discussions on ocean science diplomacy, i.e., the intersection of science with international ocean affairs. Ocean science is intrinsically connected with diplomacy in supporting negotiations toward a more sustainable future. Diplomacy supports essential aspects of scientific work such as capacity building, technology and information/knowledge exchange, and access and sharing of research platforms. Ocean science diplomacy underlies the work of many intergovernmental organizations that provide scientific guidance, such as the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC), the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), and the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES), and United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). To illustrate how critical science diplomacy is to global ocean affairs, this paper examines examples of the influence of ocean science diplomacy in UNCLOS. Furthermore, this paper discusses the utility of ocean science diplomacy in support of the UN 2030 agenda, and the UN Decade of Ocean Science.
GCFI, 2020
Making science relevant: The Role of Science in the Effective Governance of the Caribbean Sea, North Brazilian shelf, and the Gulf of Mexico Prepared by Robin Mahon CERMES, UWI The principle that decisions regarding conservation and management of living marine resources should be based on the 'best available scientific evidence' (BASE) is enshrined in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) (United Nations 1982) for both EEZs and the High Seas 1. Countries and their regional organizations are legally obligated to operationalize this principle. Consequently, it has become well established in national, regional, and global management policies and agreements. Nonetheless, there is considerable room for interpretation of the meaning of 'best' and 'available' (Wolters et al. 2016). Even with the best intentions, managers have found many challenges to developing, obtaining, and using the best available scientific evidence. These challenges range from low capacity to produce or access relevant scientific evidence, through poor communication of science to decision makers, to governance processes that are poorly structured or inadequately structured for the uptake of scientific advice. The problem is that governance processes resort to making decisions without the BASE, or delaying them based on a lack of such information. The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Foresight Process on Emerging Environmental Issues for the twenty-first century concluded that the cross-cutting issue "Broken Bridges: Reconnecting Science and Policy" was a pressing problem globally hampering efforts to achieve sustainable development (UNEP 2012). The problem of linking science and policy has been extensively discussed in the literature for decades (e.g., Rice, 2005; Chilvers and Evans, 2009) and more recently, the adoption of ecosystem based approaches to management has resulted in renewed attention to this issue (Borja et al. 2017). Developing countries and regions, particularly those with Small Islands Developing States (SIDS) are especially affected by the challenges outlined above. The Wider Caribbean Region (WCR) is one such region, as has been noted by the GEF Transboundary Diagnostic Analyses (TDAs) (Heileman 2011; Phillips 2011; Mahon et al. 2011; CLME 2011). McConney et al. (2016) explored the challenges that the WCR faces in moving towards the use of BASE in governance of coastal and marine resources. Consequently, the Caribbean Large Marine Ecosystem Strategic Action Programme (CLME+ SAP) has identified the development and implementation of a strategy to promote the uptake of science in management as an important component of sustainable use of living marine resources in the region (Debels et al. 2017). This chapter examines the challenges to the use of BASE for LMR management in the region and recommends ways of improving its uptake for decision making. 1 UNCLOS Article 61(2) "The coastal State, taking into account the best scientific evidence available to it, shall ensure through proper conservation and management measures that the maintenance of the living resources in the exclusive economic zone is not endangered by over-exploitation." UNCLOS Article 119 (1) "In determining the allowable catch and establishing other conservation measures for the living resources in the high seas, States shall: (a) take measures which are designed, on the best scientific evidence available to the States concerned […]." SCIENCE AND RESEARCH SERVING EFFECTIVE OCEAN GOVERNANCE IN THE WIDER CARIBBEAN REGION perspective. Ocean governance issues aggregate topically and geographically from the smallest boxes to the largest overarching PCM box (after Mahon et al. 2014)
A First Look at the Science-Policy Interface for Ocean Governance in the Wider Caribbean Region
Frontiers in Marine Science, 2016
Weak governance is a root cause of the problems constraining the sustainable management of shared living marine resources within the Wider Caribbean Region (WCR). Integral to any fully functioning policy cycle in governance is the communication of marine science data and information, through the stages of the policy cycle, ultimately for use in decision-making. The networks of ties between science and policy constitute science-policy interfaces. Connecting science to policy is a major issue confronting the world today in efforts to achieve sustainable development. In order to develop a regional science-policy interface for ocean governance in the WCR we must first understand what currently exists. In this paper we describe the process and product of an interview investigation of the marine science-policy interface in the WCR. Policy discussions that used marine science extensively were infrequent. Constraints on use of science included low capacity, science not being provided in policy-relevant format, not having easy access to databases, and low policy demand for science. There is little transboundary marine science information sharing except through informal social networks. The absence of a culture of evidence-based policy-making in the region must be addressed before there will be any significant change in use of properly packaged marine science. External influences, political context, science and evidence, links, and networks are used to systematize the key learning.
The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law
Fitness for purpose of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC) in the twenty-first century has been at the core of legal and political discussions. Such an inquiry is pertinent for small island developing States (SIDS), which have experienced first-hand the consequences of anthropogenic disturbances on the ocean. This study examines whether the provisions governing marine scientific research (MSR) in the LOSC provide mechanisms to strengthen SIDS scientific and technological capacities. It is suggested that the framework governing MSR seeks to promote fair and equitable benefit sharing and has rules enabling the time element therein. Accordingly, the consent regimes for MSR, rules on international cooperation, and the framework for the transfer of marine technology could serve the end of enhancing SIDS capacities. This interpretation shifts the avenues of inquiry from a descriptive to an empirical perspective.
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2021
, from the One Ocean Hub, as well as the editors of this volume. 2 As opposed to more open-ended obligations or hortatory treaty language on cooperation: see, for instance, the proposed obligation to "promote" international cooperation in marine scientific research and in the development and transfer of marine technology under draft Art. 6 of the Revised draft text of an agreement under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction (2020) UN Doc A/CONF.232/2020/3, Annex. See also the objective to "[promote the generation of knowledge and technological innovations, including by promoting and facilitating the development and conduct of marine scientific research in areas beyond national jurisdiction, in accordance with the Convention;]" in draft art. 1.c (ibid). 3 Transformation is "a fundamental, system-wide change that includes consideration of technological, economic and social factors, including in terms of paradigms, goals or values" and to "[o]bstacles to achieving transformative change, including unequal power relations, lack of transparency, vested interests, unequal distribution of the costs and benefits of actions, tendencies for short-term decision-making, the psychology of losses and gains, the logic of market-driven processes, the lack of policy coherence and inertia": see IPBES, Initial scoping report for Deliverable 1 (c): A thematic assessment of the underlying causes of biodiversity loss and the determinants of transformative change and options for achieving
Scoping Science-Policy Arenas for Regional Ocean Governance in the Wider Caribbean Region
Frontiers in Marine Science, 2021
This paper explores the diversity of relationships that exist between science and policy and which underpin the uptake of science in oceans policy-making in the Wider Caribbean Region (WCR). We refer to these complex relationships, influenced by organizational culture and environments, as science-policy arenas. The paper examines the types of decisions that require science input, where the decision-making responsibility lies, who the science providers are, and how science gets translated into advice for a suite of 20 regional Intergovernmental Organizations (IGOs). The picture that emerges is one of a diverse suite of well-structured and active science-policy processes, albeit with several deficiencies. These processes appear to be somewhat separated from a broad diversity of potential science inputs. The gap appears largely due to lack of accessibility and interest in both directions (providers <-> consumers), with IGOs apparently preferring to use a relatively small subset of available expertise. At the same time, there is a small number of boundary-spanners, many of which are newly emerging, that carry out a diversity of functions in seeking to address the gap. Based on our scoping assessment, there is an urgent need for actors to understand the networks of interactions and actively develop them for science-policy interfaces to be effective and efficient. This presents a major challenge for the region where most countries are small and have little if any science capacity. Innovative mechanisms that focus more on processes for accessing science than on assembling inventories of available information are needed. A managed information hub that can be used to build teams of scientists and advisors to address policy questions may be effective for the WCR given its institutional complexity. More broadly, recognition of the potential value of boundary spanning activities in getting science into policy is needed. Capacity for these should be built and boundary spanning organizations encouraged, formalized and mainstreamed.
Marine Technology Transfer under a BBNJ Treaty: A Case for Transnational Network Cooperation
Our ability to protect and sustainably use the high seas is ultimately subject to our ability to understand this vast and remote environment. The success of an international legally binding instrument (ILBI) for the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ) will depend, in part, on utilizing technology to access ocean life, to analyze it, and to implement measures for its conservation and sustainable use. Indeed, technology, broadly defined, is integral to meeting the ILBI's objectives: not just the mandate to address " capacity-building and the transfer of marine technology, " but also the sustainable use and conservation of marine genetic resources, the implementation of environmental impact assessments, and biodiversity conservation measures such as area-based management tools. 1 To maximize marine technology deployment to protect marine biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction, transferring technology to developing countries will be critical. 2 Provisions for the transfer of technology, generally from developed to developing countries, are included in many international environmental agreements and declarations, 3 but these provisions have often proven difficult to implement. Part of the difficulty is that the relevant technology is dispersed among states; universities , research institutes and other nonstate actors; and private industry. The particular challenge in crafting an ILBI is, as the European Union has identified, to avoid repeating existing provisions and instead to " focus on added value. " 4 One opportunity for an ILBI to add value on technology transfer is to further develop a network model to facilitate marine technology transfer. This essay examines how an ILBI could contribute to marine technology transfer, a challenge that cuts across many international environmental agreements. It provides an overview of technology transfer provisions in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and their incomplete implementation to date, before considering the possibilities for technology transfer under the ILBI as an implementing agreement for UNCLOS. Next, the essay considers opportunities to learn from the experience of technology transfer under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Convention on Biological Diversity.
Frontiers in Marine Science
Marine technology transfer and capacity building are key elements in the development of a historic new agreement for the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ agreement) under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). This vast, deep ocean area remains largely unexplored and poorly understood. Scientific knowledge gaps impede informed decision-making, and most countries lack the capacity to participate in ocean science activities in ABNJ or to benefit from discoveries of new ocean life, habitats, and processes. Consequently, science must play a central role in capacity building aspirations, however, the link between technology transfer and marine scientific research has yet to be examined in depth. Here, we examine the UNCLOS framework for marine technology transfer and highlight linkages with marine scientific research, identifying four capacity building themes: access to data, information and knowledge; equipment; training; and collaboration. We provide examples to illustrate current practices and identify gaps in implementation. We show that marine technology transfer and marine scientific research link in principle and in practice. We propose ways that the BBNJ agreement could strengthen the international framework for the transfer of marine technology in order to boost marine scientific research collaboration, fill knowledge gaps, and strengthen capacity through inclusive international participation.