Ukrainian Antarctic journal

No 2 (2021): Ukrainian Antarctic Journal
Articles

Global environmental initiatives of the EU in Antarctica: Ukraine’s position harmonization and prospect (preceding Ukraine’s chairmanship in the CCAMLR, 2023–2024)

A. Fedchuk
State Institution National Antarctic Scientific Center, Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine, Kyiv, 01601, Ukraine
S. Zherebchuk
State Institution National Antarctic Scientific Center, Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine, Kyiv, 01601, Ukraine
D. Cheberkus
State Institution National Antarctic Scientific Center, Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine, Kyiv, 01601, Ukraine
Published December 31, 2021
Keywords
  • Akademik Vernadsky station,
  • Antarctica,
  • Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources,
  • Marine Protected Area,
  • research vessel Noosfera

Abstract

With the strengthening of the global environmental movement, the Southern Ocean has become an effective international testing ground for the development of spatial planning in marine environments beyond national jurisdiction. This note aims to review the European Union (EU) role in the progress on designation of environmentally representative network of marine protected areas (MPAs) in Antarctica, and the effect of this process on the shaping of Ukraine’s strategy in this region. Following Ukraine’s external vector to European integration, in 2021 the country began formally aligning as a co-proponent with the EU-initiated two MPA proposals — in East Antarctica and the Weddell Sea. This alignment of positions is utterly important, taking into account the approaching of Ukraine's first chairmanship of the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources in 2023–2024, which would be an exceptional opportunity for our country to make a significant progress in designation the largest MPAs ever implemented in Antarctica given national interests, including the creation of an international consortium with the involvement of Ukrainian scientific infrastructure in Antarctica, such as Ukrainian Antarctic Akademik Vernadsky station and the research vessel Noosfera, to implement internationally significant scientific and monitoring programs to evaluate MPAs efficiency with Ukraine as a co-initiator.

References

  1. Brooks, C. M. (2013). Competing values on the Antarctic high seas: CCAMLR and the challenge of marine-protected areas. The Polar Journal, 3(2), 277–300. https://doi.org/10.1080/2154896X.2013.854597
  2. Brooks, C. M. (2019). Geopolitical complexity at the bottom of the world: CCAMLR’s ongoing challenge of adopting marine protected areas. In L. Nengye, C. M. Brooks, T. Qin (Eds.), Governing Marine Living Resources in the Polar Regions (pp. 43–65). Edward Elgar Publishing.
  3. Brooks, C. M., Crowder, L. B., Österblom, H., & Strong, A. L. (2019). Reaching consensus for conserving the global commons: The case of the Ross Sea, Antarctica. Conservation Letters, 13(1), e12676. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12676
  4. Burns, C., Eckersley, P., & Tobin, P. (2020). EU environmental policy in times of crisis. Journal of European Public Policy, 27, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2018.1561741
  5. CCAMLR. (2021). Report of the Fortieth meeting of the Commission (Virtual meeting, 18 to 29 October 2021). https://www.ccamlr.org/en/system/files/e-cc-40-rep-prelim-v2.pdf
  6. Commission of the European Communities. (1979). Recommendation for a Council Decision authorizing the Commission to negotiate on behalf of the Community for the establishment of a convention on the conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (COM (79) 20 final). http://aei-dev.library.pitt.edu/53347/
  7. Delreux, T. (2012). The EU as an actor in global environmental politics. In A. Jordan & C. Adelle (Eds.), Environmental Policy in the EU: Actors, Institutions and Processes (pp. 287–305). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203109823
  8. Dodgshun, J., Strosser, P., Alexander, B., Heymans, Sh., Neumann, B., Boteler, B., & Unger, S. (2021). EU International Ocean Governance Forum 2021 – Setting the Course for A Sustainable Blue Planet: Recommendations for Enchasing EU Action. https://www.marineboard.eu/publication-eu-international-ocean-governance-iog-forum-recommendations
  9. European Commission. (2019). Joint Report to the European Parliament and the Council Improving International Ocean Governance – Two years of progress (JOIN/2019/4 final). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52019JC0004&qid=1638135219492
  10. European Commission. (2021a). Overview of EU actions in the Arctic and their impact (Final Report, June 2021). https://eprd.pl/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/EU-Policy-ArcticImpact-Overview-Final-Report.pdf
  11. European Commission. (2021b). Summary of the results of the public consultation on the EU Arctic policy (Catalogue number:KL-04-21-013-EN-N). Publications Office. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2771/623044
  12. European Commission. (2021c). High-level meeting on the designation of Marine Protected Areas in the Southern Ocean on 28 April 2021, Ministerial Joint Declaration. https://ec.europa.eu/oceans-and-fisheries/document/download/011463ad-922b-43a6-99b2-cb2c440e88ac_en
  13. European Parliament. (2016). Joint communication to the European Parliament, the council, the European economic and social committee and the committee of the regions. International ocean governance: an agenda for the future of our oceans (JOIN/2016/049 final). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=JOIN:2016:49:FIN
  14. European Parliament. (2020). A balanced Arctic policy for the EU: in-depth analysis. Publications Office. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2861/42779
  15. European Parliament. (2021). Resolution of 8 July 2021 on the establishment of Antarctic Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) and the conservation of Southern Ocean biodiversity, Strasbourg (2021/2757(RSP)). https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2021-0361_EN.html
  16. Fedchuk, A. (2016). Antarctic environmental management: Achievements and challenges (on the 25th anniversary of the Madrid Protocol). Ukrainian Antarctic Journal, 15, 228–242. https://doi.org/10.33275/1727-7485.15.2016.114
  17. Fedchuk, A., Sinna, O., Milinevsky, G., & Utevsky, A. (2020). The harmonization of small-scale marine spatial protection in the Argentine Islands area (Antarctic Peninsula) under the Antarctic Treaty System. Ukrainian Antarctic Journal, 1(20), 111–119. https://doi:10.33275/1727-7485.1.2020.384
  18. Langlet, D. (2018). Planning from the Margin — The European Union’s potential role in spatial planning for managing activities in the Marine Arctic. The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, 33, 361–379. https://doi.org/10.1163/15718085-13320007
  19. Oberthür, S., & Groen, L. (2017). The European Union and the Paris Agreement: leader, mediator, or bystander?WIREs Climate Change, 8(1), e445. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.445
  20. Raspotnik, A., & Østhagen, A. (2020). The EU in Antarctica: An Emerging Area of Interest, or Playing to the (Environmental) Gallery? European Foreign Affairs Review, 25(2), 239–260.
  21. Sylvester, Z. T., & Brooks, C. M. (2020). Protecting Antarctica through Co-production of actionable science: Lessons from the CCAMLR marine protected area process. Marine Policy, 111, 103720. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2019.103720
  22. Teschke, K., Pehlke, H., Siegel, V., Bornemann, H., Knust, R., & Brey, T. (2019). An integrated data compilation for the development of a marine protected area in the Weddell Sea. Earth System Science Data Discussions, 1–31. https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2019-86