The Agreement on Cooperation on Marine Oil Pollution Preparedness and Response in the Arctic

摘要

This is a case study of the establishment of an oil spill response regime in the Arctic region.The context is the work of the Arctic Council and the development of the Agreement onCooperation on Marine Oil Pollution Preparedness and Response in the Arctic. Threeresearch topics are studied; regime, response system and the role of politics and professions.The Arctic oil spill response agreement is outlined first, and the principles, norms, rules anddecision making procedures that it establishes for the oil spill response regime are analyzed.It is found that the Agreement mostly consists of principles and rules for procedures since it isa legal document; the Agreement is however creating a framework for the establishment of aregime. The second part is concerned about the response system. The bilateral andmultilateral oil spill response agreements in the region are the fundament for the oil spillresponse in the Arctic (AC, 2013a: 11). For the regime to be successful it is important forthese to be compatible (Tuler, Seager & Kay, 2007: 34). The agreements are analyzed withthe use of elements from the command and control model and the problem solving model toevaluate to what extent they are compatible (Dynes, 1994). The problem solving model, fromthe chapter on response system, salutes cooperation between agencies and the personalcontact which this type of cooperation encourage. So this might be seen as a positive featureof the Arctic Council’s institutional framework. The agreements are to a relatively largeextent compatible. The most important deviations were the sign of centralization in theCanadian-Danish cooperation, and the emphasis on cooperation within research. The thirdpart addresses the noteworthy presence of professionals in the development of the Agreementon Cooperation on Marine Oil Pollution Preparedness and Response in the Arctic. Interviewdata and meeting reports form the empirical material for the analysis of the role of politics andprofessions in the regime formation. The regime is studied in three stages of regimeformation; agenda formation, negotiation and operationalization (Young, 1998). While thepolitical level found it necessary to develop an oil spill response regime after the DeepwaterHorizon accident, the negotiation stage of the regime formation were a close cooperationbetween representatives from national ministries and of oil spill response experts. Further, itis the professional’s responsibility to prepare, recommend and maintain the development ofthe oil spill response agreements, operational guidelines, and contingency plans, and they arethereby to a large extent responsible for the operationalization of the regime.