Australian and Canadian perspectives and regulations for protecting the polar marine environment

摘要

The report compares Australian and Canadian responses for protecting polar marine environments. Vast areas of the polar seas fall within their potential combined EEZ/continental shelf jurisdiction. The Antarctic Treaty provisions, doubts on the status of the Northwest Passage waters and the capacity to enforce legislative initiatives against foreign vessels have been constraints. Australia's enactment of legislation prohibiting mining within the AAT continental shelf and whaling within the AAT EEZ has tested the Antarctic Treaty. Canada's reaction to the Manhattan and the enactment of the Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention Act is an example of unilateral action. While the countries have made noteworthy initiatives to enhance the protection of their polar marine environments, doubts remain in some instances on their capacity to give effect to the initiatives. However, sovereignty remains at the heart of their response. Failure to address Antarctic marine environmental issues will rebound on the environment and reflect poorly upon Australia's sovereignty claim to the AAT. For Canada it is a sovereignty issue and has directly impact upon its citizens inhabiting the islands and coastal areas of the Canadian Arctic. The Madrid Protocol provides the strongest legal basis for the Antarctic Treaty parties to enact laws and regulations in Antarctica. Conservation measures adopted under the Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources focuses increasingly on environmental concerns. The most significant regional initiative adopted by Arctic states is the AEPS which does not have a legal foundation. It's co-operative programs provide basis for co-operation in dealing with environmental problems. It clearly recognises that only co-operative responses will achieve significant outcomes. The 1990s have posed new challenges for marine environmental protection such as ship-based tourism in Antarctica and the growing pressure to use the Northwest Passage on a more commercial basis while the AEPS and work of AMAP is demonstrating the extent of pollution within the region. It remains to be seen whether Australia and Canada will take the lead and respond through unilateral domestic initiatives, or elect to work within regional and global forums to develop co-operative responses. 92 refs