October 25, 2004

Research regarding the establishment of an international biopreserve

       The objective of creating a "World Scientific Preserve" that is "managed by an international commission and funded by a multilateral trust" will be a difficult task for the reason that no such organization or setting has ever existed before. Hence there is no established protocol for the creation of such an entity, nor does the United Nations have any existing committee to deal with such a goal (United Nation [UN] Charter, 2004). The most effective method of creating such a system will be to base it in part on the existing systems of current existing multinational organizations and situations such as the United Nations, Anatarctica, the Arctic, and international waters.
       Currently there are numerous international NGOs (non-governmental organizations) concerned with the environment (for an incomplete list visit the Ecological Society of America website at www.esa.org). Many of them appear to be funded through international bodies. The United Nations alone contains four such programs: The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), World Meterological Organization (WMO), United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP), and International Council of Scientific Unions (ICSU) (ESA, 2004). However, the majority of these programs do not appear to have physical headquarters, instead, they are simply a web of international members.
       One situation involving international jurisdiction over land is the current status of Antarctica. The land mass is governed through the Anatarctic Treaty System. According to the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research (SCAR), the Antarctic Treaty System "is the whole complex of arrangements made for the purpose of regulating relations among states in the Antarctic". Originally the members consisted of the twelve nations active in the region during the formation of the treaty, today the number of signatories has expanded to 44 nations (SCAR, 2004). While the Antarctic Treaty System maintains a peaceful status quo in the Antarctic region, it does little to resolve problems regarding soverignty of the area. The treaty states that "No acts or activities taking place while the present Treaty is in force shall constitute a basis for asserting, supporting or denying a claim to territorial sovereignty in Antarctica or create any rights of sovereignty in Antarctica. No new claim, or enlargement of an existing claim, to territorial sovereignty in Antarctica shall be asserted while the present Treaty is in force" (For text of the treaty see www.scar.org/treaty/at_text.html).
       A similar organization is the Arctic Council, which serves to provide an "intergovernmental forum for the Arctic States". The Arctic Council is comprised of the "Arctic states", countries "with an outreach above the Arctic Circle", and observers consisting of both nations and international organizations with an interest in the Arctic region. The council depends solely on the commitment of its members and has no obligatory source of funding. One key aspect of the council that makes it unique is its strong emphasis on involvement of international indigenous organizations. One primary role of the council is to provide "a better knowledge base for decision-making". Decisions are often carried out by a member state or an observer organization. In recent years the Arctic Council has come to specialize in "environmental monitoring and assessment" (Stenlund, 2002).
       The Arctic region has similarities with the Galapagos in many aspects. Like the Galapagos, the Arctic region is a source of an important natural resource essential to the livelihood of indigenous peoples. The region contains 20% of the world's fisheries and harvesting is a way of life for many of the native peoples. The Arctic region also faces many of the same socio-economic challenges as the Galapagos Islands. Traditional methods of utilizing the region's renewable resources have "become economically unviable and somtimes in conflict with sustainable use". New sources of economic gain are necessary in order to sustain the growth in population. In addition, a prospective increase in tourism is sought, which would in turn lead to a necessary improvement of frequently used navigation routes and marine transport security (Stenlund, 2002).
       According to Kiss et al., there is a "direct linkage between good environmental management, sustainable economic development and long-term poverty alleviation. Therefore the well-being of the environment of the Galapagos Islands and the economic prospertiy of its indigenous peoples are irrevocably linked. Kiss et al. also see numerous criticisms to relying soley upon ecotourism for economic improvement of a region. They point out that some areas are not conducive to tourism due to "difficult access, insecurity, endemic diseases or other constraints". In addition, to be entirely environmentally friendly, tourism must be on a small scale; this in return limits economic returns. The suggested solution of using "low-volume, high-price" tourism is only a viable option when there is an "exceptional attraction". Finally there is the issue of "leakage" in which the revenues from ecoturism never reach the local communities. Kiss et al.'s finding is that "most funding for biodiversity conservation and rural economic development in and around important natural habitats still comes from multilateral and bilateral donors and international conservation organizations, no self-financing tourism operations" (Kiss, et al., 2002).

References

Ecological Society of America. (2004, September 26). International Environmental Programs, Societies, and Conventions.    
        Retrieved October 8, 2004 from the World Wide Web: http://www.esa.org/international/intl_programs.php
Kiss, A., Castro, G., & Newcombe, K. (2002, June 25). The role of multilateral institutions. Retrieved October 11, 2004 from The
        Royal Society
Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research. (2004, August 24). Antarctic Treaty. Retrieved October 8, 2004 from the World
        Wide Web: http://www.scar.org/treaty/
Stenlund, Peter. (2002). Lessons in regional cooperation from the Arctic. Retrieved October 11, 2004 from Elsevier on-line
        database(Item 000181942300006)
United Nations. (2004). Charter of the United Nations. Retrieved October 8, 2004 from the World Wide Web:
        http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/