Abstract
Climate change is exerting a profound impact on the biodiversity and the ecosystems of the Arctic region. Economic activity in the area is increasing and new threats have emerged that put the Arctic’s ecosystems at risk. The application of an ecosystem approach takes on special relevance in areas like the Arctic, in which the relationships between habitats, biodiversity and human activity are particularly complex. An ecosystem approach, in its many forms, aims to offer a holistic and integrated view of the interactions between natural and human systems. However, from an international legal perspective the concept suffers from significant shortcomings. In this context, this chapter aims to outline how an ecosystem approach is embedded in the marine ecosystem and biodiversity management strategies led by the Arctic Council, and to assess the extent to which other applicable international legal tools might strengthen its implementation in a region in which the jurisdictional regime is so compartmentalized. Section 9.1 presents a brief description of the Arctic ecosystems and highlights the characteristics that render them particularly vulnerable. Section 9.2 focuses on reviewing the work carried out by the Arctic Council mainly through the Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment (PAME) and the Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna (CAFF) working groups, with the aim of ascertaining to what extent further development of the Arctic Council’s instruments is necessary. Section 9.3 presents an overview of the application of an ecosystem approach by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and by few other conventions of marine environmental nature implemented by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and the OSPAR Commission, both of them sharing the Permanent Observer status in the Arctic Council, and discusses how they might help to promote the application of an ecosystem approach in this polar area. Section 9.4 concludes the chapter with some final considerations.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
While there is a considerable amount of academic literature on this approach from an international law perspective (see, for all, Trouwborst 2009), little attention has been paid to its implementation, and especially to its practical implications for the development of sustainability policies in the Arctic (McDonough et al. 2017; Malinauskaite et al. 2019). The use of multiple terms to refer to ecosystem approaches is common, and leads to a certain “Babylonian confusion” (Trouwborst 2009, p. 28, Kirk 2015). However, while each of them has its own key implications, for the purposes of this chapter the concept is used in its generic sense, regardless of how the different legal frameworks discussed refer to it.
- 2.
For example, the Arctic Biodiversity Data Service (ABDS) facilitates long-term data for modelling terrestrial, freshwater and marine Arctic ecosystem-based management: http://geo.abds.is/geonetwork/srv/cat/catalog.search#/home.
- 3.
The first reference to the ecosystem approach is found in the 1980 Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (1982, 19 ILM 841). Article I.3 includes the concept of “Antarctic marine ecosystem” and Article II.3.c requires that all conservation activities be carried out with respect to the “marine ecosystem as a whole”, in order to allow the sustained conservation of Antarctic marine living resources.
- 4.
See Chap. 11.
- 5.
- 6.
See Chap. 3.
- 7.
See Chap. 2.
References
Allen, C. (2018). Arctic Law & Policy Year in Review: 2017. Washington Journal of Environmental Law & Policy, 8(1), 106–263.
Arctic Council. (1996). Declaration of the Establishment of the Arctic Council, Ottawa. Retrieved September 26, 2020, from https://oaarchive.arctic-council.org/handle/11374/85
Arctic Council. (2004a). Reykjavik Ministerial Meeting, PAME: Arctic Marine Strategic Plan. Retrieved September 26, 2020, from https://oaarchive.arctic-council.org/handle/11374/71
Arctic Council. (2004b). Declaration of the Reykjavik Ministerial Meeting. Retrieved September 26, 2020, from https://oaarchive.arctic-council.org/handle/11374/89
Arctic Council. (2005). CAFF Management Board Meeting Minutes, 1–3 February 2005. Retrieved December 18, 2020, from http://arcticportal.org/uploads/t-/9F/t-9FpbaWsOdX3RSz_UyIFw/CAFF-Board-Meeting-Helsinki-Finland-February-1-3-2005.pdf
Arctic Council. (2009). PAME: Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment. Retrieved September 26, 2020, from https://pame.is/projects/arctic-marine-shipping/amsa
Arctic Council. (2011). AMAP: Snow, Water, Ice and Permafrost in the Arctic (SWIPA). Retrieved September 26, 2020, from https://www.amap.no/documents/doc/snow-water-ice-and-permafrost-in-the-arctic-swipa-climate-change-and-the-cryosphere/743
Arctic Council. (2013a). CAFF: Arctic Biodiversity Assessment. Retrieved September 26, 2020, from https://www.arcticbiodiversity.is/index.php/the-report/chapters
Arctic Council. (2013b). PAME: The Arctic Ocean Review Project, Final Report, (Phase II 2011–2013). Retrieved August 28, 2020, from https://oaarchive.arctic-council.org/handle/11374/1219
Arctic Council. (2013c). PAME: Large Marine Ecosystems (LMEs) of the Arctic area, Revision of the Arctic LME map. Retrieved September 26, 2020, from https://oaarchive.arctic-council.org/handle/11374/61
Arctic Council. (2013d). AMAP/CAFF/SDWG: Identification of Arctic marine areas of heightened ecological and cultural significance, Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment. Retrieved September 26, 2020, from http://www.amap.no/documents/doc/identification-of-arctic-marine-areas-of-heightened
Arctic Council. (2013e). Agreement on Cooperation on Aeronautical and Maritime Search and Rescue in the Arctic. Retrieved September 26, 2020, from https://oaarchive.arctic-council.org/handle/11374/531
Arctic Council. (2015a). Declaration of the Iqaluit Ministerial Meeting. Retrieved September 26, 2020, from https://oaarchive.arctic-council.org/handle/11374/662
Arctic Council. (2015b). PAME: Arctic Marine Strategic Plan: Protecting Marine and Coastal Ecosystems in a Changing Arctic. Retrieved September 26, 2020, from https://oaarchive.arctic-council.org/handle/11374/413
Arctic Council. (2015c). PAME: Framework for a Pan-Arctic Network of Marine Protected Areas. Retrieved September 26, 2020, from https://oaarchive.arctic-council.org/handle/11374/417
Arctic Council. (2016). CAFF: Arctic biodiversity principles and their application in mainstreaming biodiversity. Phase 1: Background and options paper. Retrieved September 20, 2020, from https://www.caff.is/strategies-series/433-arctic-biodiversity-principles-and-their-application-in-mainstreaming-biodiversi
Arctic Council. (2017). Declaration of the Fairbanks Ministerial Meeting. Retrieved September 26, 2020, from https://oaarchive.arctic-council.org/handle/11374/1910
Arctic Council. (2019). Joint PAME, CAFF, AMAP, SDWG Ecosystem Approach Expert Group. Guidelines for Implementing an Ecosystem Approach to Management of Arctic Marine Ecosystems. Retrieved September 19, 2020, from https://oaarchive.arctic-council.org/handle/11374/2390
Arctic Council. (2020). PAME, The increase in Arctic Shipping 2013–2019. Arctic Sipping Status Report (ASSR), March 31, 2020. Retrieved December 18, 2020, from https://www.pame.is/document-library/shipping-documents/arctic-ship-traffic-data-documents/reports/752-arctic-shipping-report-1-the-increase-in-arctic-shipping-2013-2019-pdf-version-1/file
Arctic Ocean Conference. (2008). Ilulissat Declaration, 28 May 2008. Retrieved September 22, 2020, from https://cil.nus.edu.sg/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/2008-Ilulissat-Declaration.pdf
Barry, T., Daviðsdóttir, B., Einarsson, N., & Young, O. (2020a). The Arctic Council: An agent of change? Global Environmental Change, 63, 1–10.
Barry, T., Daviðsdóttir, B., Einarsson, N., & Young, O. (2020b). How does the Arctic Council support conservation of Arctic Biodiversity? Sustainability, 12, 1–18.
Bartenstein, K. (2011). The Arctic exception in the Law of the Sea Convention: A contribution to safer navigation in the Northwest Passage? Ocean Development & International Law, 42, 22–52.
Bird, K. J., Charpentier, R. R., Gautier, D. L., Houseknecht, D. W., Klett, T. R., Pitman, J. K., et al. (2008). Circum-Arctic Resource Appraisal: Estimates of Undiscovered Oil and Gas North of the Arctic Circle, U.S. Geological Survey. Retrieved September 17, 2020, from https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2008/3049/
Carson, M., (Dir.). (2016). Arctic Resilence Report ARR, Stockholm Environment Institute and the Stockholm Resilience Centre.
CBD. (1992). UNTS, vol, 1760, p. 79. Retrieved September 20, 2020, from https://www.cbd.int/convention/text/
CBD. (1998). Report of the Workshop on the Ecosystem Approach. Submission by the Governments of the Netherlands and Malawi. UNEP/CBD/COP/4/Inf.9. Retrieved September 20, 2020, from https://www.cbd.int/doc/meetings/cop/cop-04/information/cop-04-inf-09-en.pdf
CBD. (2000). Decision V/6: Ecosystem approach. Retrieved September 20, 2020, from https://www.cbd.int/decisions/cop/5/6
CBD. (2003). Report of the Ad Hoc Technical Expert Group on Marine and Coastal Protected Areas, UNEP/CBD/SBTTA/8/INF/7, 13 February 2003. Retrieved September 20, 2020, from https://www.cbd.int/kb/record/meetingDocument/4748?RecordType=meetingDocument&Event=SBSTTA-08
CBD. (2004a). Decision VII/5: Marine and coastal. Marine and coastal biological diversity. Retrieved September 20, 2020, from https://www.cbd.int/doc/decisions/cop-07/cop-07-dec-05-en.pdf
CBD. (2004b). Decision VII/11: Ecosystem approach. Retrieved September 20, 2020, from https://www.cbd.int/doc/decisions/cop-07/cop-07-dec-11-en.doc
CBD. (2004c). Secretariat: The ecosystem approach. Retrieved September 20, 2020, from https://www.cbd.int/doc/publications/ea-text-en.pdf
CBD. (2006). The Ecosystem Approach: Advanced user’s guide. Retrieved September 20, 2020, from https://www.cbd.int/doc/programmes/cro-cut/eco/eco-guide-ad-en.pdf
CBD. (2010). Decision X/13: New and emerging issues. Retrieved September 20, 2020, from https://www.cbd.int/decision/cop/?id=12279
CBD. (2011). SBSTTA: Recommendation: XV/7. Arctic biodiversity. Retrieved September 20, 2020, from https://www.cbd.int/recommendation/sbstta/?id=12974
CBD. (2014). Report of the Arctic Regional Workshop to Facilitate the Description of Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Areas, UNEP/CBD/EBSA/WS/2014/1/5. Retrieved September 20, 2020, from https://www.cbd.int/doc/meetings/mar/ebsaws-2014-01/official/ebsaws-2014-01-05-en.pdf
CBD. (2015). Secretariat: EBSAS Regions Considered by the CBD Conference of the Parties. Retrieved September 20, 2020, from https://www.cbd.int/ebsa/ebsas?tab=considered
CBD. (2020). Preparation of the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework. Draft recommendation submitted by the Co-Chairs, CBD/WG2020/2/L.2, 28 February 2020
Christiansen, J., Mecklenbirg, C., & Karamushko, O. (2014). Arctic marine fishes and their fisheries in light of global change. Global Change Biology, 20(2), 352–359. Retrieved August 27, 2020, from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4255237/
Comer, B., Osipova, L., Georgeff, E., & Mao, X. (2020). The International Maritime Organization’s Proposed Arctic Heavy Fuel Oil Ban: Likely impacts and opportunities for improvement. The International Council on Clean Transportation, Washington, DC. Retrieved September 12, 2020, from https://theicct.org/publications/analysis-HFO-ban-IMO-2020
De Lucia, V. (2015). Competing narratives and complex genealogies: The ecosystem approach in international environmental law. Journal of Environmental Law, 27(1), 91–117.
De Lucia, V. (2017). The Arctic environment and the BBNJ negotiations. Special rules for special circumstances. Marine Policy, 86, 234–240.
De Lucia, V. (2019). The Ecosystem Approach and the negotiations towards a new Agreement on Marine Biodiversity in Areas beyond National Jurisdiction. Nordic Environmental Law Journal, 2, 7–25.
De Santo, E. M. (2018). Implementation challenges of area-based management tools (ABMTs) for biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ). Marine Policy, 97, 34–43.
Enright, S. R., & Boteler, B. (2020). The ecosystem approach in international marine law and governance. In T. O. O’Higgins, M. Lago, & T. H. DeWitt (Eds.), Ecosystem-based management, Ecosystem services and aquatic biodiversity (pp. 333–352). Switzerland: Springer Open.
French, N. (2017). Can the Ecosystem Approach (EA) work in Arctic science and governance?. The Polar Connection. Retrieved September 23, 2020, from http://polarconnection.org/ecosystem-approach/#:~:text=The%20EA%20in%20the%20Arctic,in%20order%20to%20reduce%20environmental
Gautier, D. L., Bird, K. J., Charpentier, R. R., Grantz, A., Houseknecht, D. W., Klett, T. R., et al. (2009). Assessment of undiscovered oil and gas in the Arctic. Science, 324, 1175–1179.
Gavrilov, V., Dremliuga, R., & Nurimbetov, R. (2019). Article 234 of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the law of the sea and reduction of ice cover in the Arctic Ocean. Marine Policy, 106, 1–6.
Hoel, A. A. (2010). Integrated oceans management in the Arctic: Norway and beyond. Arctic Review on Law and Politics, 1(2), 186–206.
Hossain, K., & Morris, K. (2017). Protecting Arctic Ocean Marine Biodiversity in the area beyond national jurisdiction. Plausible legal frameworks for protecting high Arctic waters. In G. Andreone (Ed.), The future of the Law of the Sea. Bridging gaps between national, individual and common interests (pp. 110–111). Springer Open.
ICES. (2018). Report of the Arctic Fisheries Working Group (AFWG), ICES CM 2018/ACOM:06. Retrieved September 26, 2020, from http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Expert%20Group%20Report/acom/2018/AFWG/00-AFWG%202018%20Report.pdf
ICJ. (1996). Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion, 1. C.J. Reports 1996, p. 226. Retrieved December 18, 2020, from https://www.icj-cij.org/public/files/case-related/95/095-19960708-ADV-01-00-EN.pdf
ICJ. (2010). Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v. Uruguay), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2010, p. 14, par. 184. Retrieved December 18, 2020, from https://www.icj-cij.org/en/case/135/judgments
IMO. (2010). Resolution MEPC.189(60). Amendments to the Annex of the Protocol of 1978 Relating to the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution From Ships, 1973 (Addition of a new chapter 9 to MARPOL Annex I). Retrieved September 26, 2020, from http://www.imo.org/en/KnowledgeCentre/IndexofIMOResolutions/Marine-Environment-Protection-Committee-(MEPC)/Pages/MEPC-2010-11.aspx
IMO. (2015a). Resolution MEPC.264(68): International Code for Ships Operating in Polar Waters (Polar Code) and Resolution MEPC.265(68). Retrieved September 26, 2020, from http://www.imo.org/en/KnowledgeCentre/IndexofIMOResolutions/Marine-Environment-Protection-Committee-(MEPC)/Pages/MEPC-2014-15.aspx
IMO. (2015b). Polar Code, Part II-A, “Pollution Prevention Measures”, MEPC 68/21/Add.1, Report of the Marine Environment Protection Committee on its sixty-eighth session, annex 10. Retrieved September 26, 2020, from https://www.register-iri.com/wp-content/uploads/MEPC_Resolution_26468.pdf
IMO. (2015c). MEPC: Impact on the Arctic of emissions of Black Carbon from international shipping, MEPC 68/21, 29 May 2015. Retrieved September 10, 2020, from http://www.imla.co/sites/default/files/mepc_68-21_-_report_of_the_marine_environment_protection_committee_on_its_sixty-eighth_session_secretariat.pdf
IMO. (2017a). MEPC: Protecting the Arctic from heavy fuel oil – work to begin at MEPC 72. Retrieved September 10, 2020, from http://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/MeetingSummaries/MEPC/Pages/MEPC-71.aspx
IMO. (2017b). Guide on Response to Oil Spills in Snow and Ice Conditions (Edition 2017)
IMO. (2018). List of Special Areas, Emission Control Areas and Particularly Sensitive Sea Areas, MEPC.1/Circ.778/Rev.3. Retrieved September 10, 2020, from http://www.gard.no/Content/26411326/IMO%20MEPC1-Circ778-Rev3_Special%20Areas%2C%20ECAs%20and%20PSSAs%20under%20MARPOL.pdf
IMO. (2019). Report of the Marine Environment Protection Committee on its seventy-fourth session: Impact on the Arctic of emissions of Black Carbon from international shipping, MEPC 74/18, 9 June 2019. Retrieved September 10, 2020, from https://www.iadc.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/MEPC-74-18-Report-Of-The-Marine-Environment-Protection-CommitteeOn-Its-Seventy-Fourth-Session-Secretariat.pdf
IMO. (2020a). Status of Conventions. Retrieved September 26, 2020, from http://www.imo.org/en/About/Conventions/StatusOfConventions/Pages/Default.aspxo
IMO. (2020b). Sub-Committee on Pollution Prevention and Response (PPR 7): Prohibiting the use and carriage for use as fuel of heavy fuel oil by ships in the Arctic waters- draft MARPOL amendments agreed. Retrieved September 26, 2020, from http://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/MeetingSummaries/PPR/Pages/PPR-7th-Session.aspx
IPCC. (2018). Global Warming of 1.5 ¯C. Retrieved April 29, 2021, from https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/up-load/sites/2/2019/06/SR15_Full_Report_High_Res.pdf
IPCC. (2019). IPCC Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate. Retrieved April 29, 2021, from https://www.ipcc.ch/srocc/download
ITLOS. (2015). Request for Advisory Opinion submitted by the Sub-Regional Fisheries Commission, Advisory Opinion, 2 April 2015, ITLOS Reports 2015, p. 4. Retrieved December 18, 2020, from https://www.itlos.org/fileadmin/itlos/documents/cases/case_no.21/advisory_opinion_published/2015_21-advop-E.pdf
Jakobsen, I. U. (2013). The adequacy of the law of the sea and international environmental law to the marine Arctic: Integrated ocean management and shipping. Michigan State International Law Review, 22, 291–320.
Jakobsen, I. U. (2016). Marine protected areas in international law. An Arctic perspective. Leiden, Boston: Brill Nijhoff.
Jentoft, S., & Bjorkan, M. (2007). Marine protected areas: A governance system analysis. Human Ecology, 35, 611–622.
Kirk, E. A. (2015). The ecosystem approach and the search for an objective and content for the concept of holistic ocean governance. Ocean Development & International Law, 46, 33–49.
Koester, V. (2018). Environmental principles and concepts in biodiversity treaties. In L. Krämer & E. Orlando (Eds.), Principles of environmental law (pp. 538–554). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Koivurova, T. (2009). Governance of protected areas in the Arctic. Utrecht Law Review, 5(1), 44–60.
Koivurova, T., Molenaar, E., & VanderZwaag, D. (2009). Canada, the European Union, and Arctic Ocean Governance: A tangled and shifting seascape and future directions. In T. Koivurova, A. Chircop, E. Franck, E. J. Molenaar, & D. VanderZwaag (Eds.), Understanding and strengthening European Union-Canada relations in law of the sea and ocean governance (Vol. 35, pp. 107–146). Juridica Lapponica.
Lalonde, S. (2013). Marine protected areas in the Arctic. In E. Molenaar, A. G. Oude Elferink, & D. Rothwell (Eds.), The law of the sea and the Polar Regions. Interactions between global and regional regimes (pp. 85–111). Leiden-Boston: Martinus Nijhoff.
Langlet, D., & Rayfuse, R. (2019). The ecosystem approach in ocean planning and governance: Perspectives from Europe and Beyond. Leiden; Boston: Brill Nijhoff.
Larose, C., Dommerque, A., & Vogel, T. (2013). The dynamic Arctic snow pack: An unexplored environment for microbial diversity and activity. Biology, 2(1), 317–330.
Malinauskaite, L., Cook, D., Brynhildur, D., Ögmundardóttir, H., & Roman, J. (2019). Ecosystem services in the Arctic: A thematic review. Ecosystem Services, 36, 1–14.
MARPOL Convention. (1973/1978). UNTS, vol. 1340, p. 61. Retrieved September 6, 2020, from https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%201340/volume-1340-A-22484-English.pdf
McDonough, K., Hutchinson, S., Moore, T., & Hutchinson, J. M. S. (2017). Analysis of publication trends in ecosystem services research. Ecosystem Services, 25, 82–88.
McRae, D. M., & Goundrey, D. J. (1982). Environmental jurisdiction in Arctic waters: The extent of Article 234. University of British Columbia Law Review, 126, 211–228.
Molenaar, E. (2009). Arctic marine shipping: Overview of the international legal framework, gaps, and options. Journal of Transnational Law and Policy, 18, 288–325.
Molenaar, E., & Oude Elferink, A. (2009). Marine protected areas in areas beyond national jurisdiction-the pioneering efforts under the OSPAR Convention. Utrecht Law Review, 1, 5–20.
Osofsky, H., Shadian, J., & Fechtelkotter, S. (2016). Arctic Energy Cooperation. U.C. Davis Law Review, 49, 1431–1510.
OSPAR. (2003). OSPAR Commission: Towards an Ecosystem Approach to the Management of Human Activities. Retrieved September 26, 2020, from https://www.ospar.org/site/assets/files/1232/jmm_annex05_ecosystem_approach_statement.pdf
OSPAR. (2010a). Recommendation 2003/3, amended by Recommendation 2010/2, Annex 7. Retrieved September 26, 2020, from https://www.ospar.org/search?q=Recommendation+2010%2F2#results
OSPAR. (2010b). The North-East Atlantic Environment Strategy Strategy of the OSPAR Commission 2010–2020 (OSPAR Agreement 2010-3). Retrieved September 26, 2020, from https://www.ospar.org/site/assets/files/1200/ospar_strategy.pdf
OSPAR Convention. (1992). UNTS, vol. 2354, p. 67. Retrieved September 26, 2020, from https://www.ospar.org/convention/text
OSPAR MPA database: Map Tool. Retrieved September 10, 2020., from http://carto.mpa.ospar.org/1/ospar.map
PCA. (2016). Permanent Court of Arbitration, Case 2013-19, In the Matter of the South China Arbitration (The Republic of Philippines v. The People’s Republic of China), 12 July 2016. Retrieved December 12, 2020, from https://pca-cpa.org/en/cases/7/
Polakowski, H. (2017). Freezing the issues: Why Arctic coastal states need to implement marine protected areas in the arctic seas. Tulane Environmental Law Journal, 30(2), 347–368.
Rayfuse, R. (2014). Coastal state jurisdiction and the Polar Code: A test for Arctic Oceans governance? In T. Stephens & D. L. VanderZwaag (Eds.), Polar ocean governance in an era of environmental change (pp. 235–252). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Rotten, S. V. (2020). The Arctic Council. Between environmental protection and geopolitics. Springer.
Sebek, V. (1990). The North Sea and the concept of special areas. International Journal of Estuarine and Coastal Law, 5, 157–166.
Smith, D., & Jabour, J. (2018). MPAs in ABNJ: Lessons from two high seas regimes. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 75(1), 417–425.
Trouwborst, A. (2009). The precautionary principle and the ecosystem approach in international law: Differences, similarities and linkages. Review of European, Comparative & International Environmental Law, 18(1), 26–37.
UNCLOS. (1982). UNTS vols. 1833-1834-1835. Retrieved February 8, 2020, from https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%201833/volume-1833-A-31363-English.pdf
UNGA. (2015). Res. A/69/292: Development of an international legally binding instrument 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. Retrieved April 10, 2020, from https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?page=view&type=111&nr=7897&menu=35
Van Dyke, J., & Broder, S. (2012). Particularly sensitive sea areas. Protecting the marine environment in the territorial seas and exclusive economic zones. Denver Journal of International Law & Policy, 40, 472–481.
Waylen, K., Blackstock, K., & Holstead, K. (2013). Exploring experiences of the Ecosystem Approach, November 2013. The James Hurron Institute.
Waylen, K., Hastings, E., Banks, E., Holstead, K., Irvine, R., & Blackstock, K. (2014). The need to distangle key concepts from ecosystem-approach jargon. Conservation Biology, 28(5), 1215–1224.
Young, O. (2016). Governing the Arctic Ocean. Marine Policy, 72, 271–277.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Campins Eritja, M. (2021). The Arctic Ocean: Ecosystem Approach in a Context of Extreme Vulnerability. In: Campins Eritja, M., Fajardo del Castillo, T. (eds) Biological Diversity and International Law. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72961-5_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72961-5_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-72960-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-72961-5
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)