Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Strategic Thinking for the Antarctic Environment: The Use of Assessment Tools in Governance

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Antarctic Futures

Abstract

The Antarctic Treaty System has established the strategic vision of Antarctica as a natural reserve, set aside for peace and science in the interest of all of humankind. However, the strategic focus that is implied by the notion of a stable, long-term institutional arrangement is not reflected in the system’s current operating rules and regulatory decisions. A combination of the growing human footprint, avoidance to deal with contentious issues, weaknesses in the implementation of the Environmental Impact Assessment process and lack of strategic thinking in the environmental management of the Antarctic region as a whole contribute to the accumulation of environmental impacts, the degradation of the once-pristine Antarctic environment and the attrition of Antarctica’s unique values. Experiences in the use of strategic thinking and strategic environmental assessment tools in and outside of Antarctica represent exemplars that can be adopted by stakeholders in an Antarctic setting and can be scaled up to the Antarctic region as a whole. A more strategic approach to environmental governance in Antarctica should consist of different components, including strategic thinking (resulting in visions, goals and action plans), planning, decision making (engaging decision makers to commit the necessary resources to implement decisions), implementation and monitoring (observing and reflecting on the effectiveness of actions). In view of growing global interests in Antarctic activities and resources and the loss of Antarctic exceptionalism, a more collective and structural approach to strategic governance is necessary to guarantee the future sustainability of the Antarctic region.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Amelung, B., & Lamers, M. (2006). Scenario development for Antarctic tourism: Exploring the uncertainties. Polarforschung, 2–3, 133–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amelung, B., & Lamers, M. (2007). Estimating the greenhouse gas emissions from Antarctic tourism. Tourism in Marine Environments, 4(2–3), 121–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Antarctic Treaty System (1959). Antarctic Treaty. Washington: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Antarctic Treaty System (1991). Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty. Buenos Aires: Antarctic Treaty Secretariat.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ardron, J. A., Possingham, H. P., & Klein, C. J. (eds.) (2008). Marxan Good Practices Handbook. Vancouver: Pacific Marine Analysis and Research Association. www.pacmara.org.

  • ASOC (Antarctic and Southern Ocean Coalition). (1999). Large Scale Antarctic Tourism. Information Paper 121 presented at the XXIII Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting. Lima.

    Google Scholar 

  • ASOC (Antarctic and Southern Ocean Coalition). (2000). Antarctic Strategic Environmental Assessment: application to the growing Antarctic tourism industry. Information Paper 10 presented at the Antarctic Treaty XII Special Consultative Meeting. The Hague.

    Google Scholar 

  • ASOC (Antarctic and Southern Ocean Coalition). (2001). Strategic needs and decision-making in Antarctica. Information Paper 54 presented at the XXIV Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting. St. Petersburg: Russian Federation.

    Google Scholar 

  • ASOC (Antarctic and Southern Ocean Coalition). (2002). Strategic Environmental Assessment in Antarctica: a ‘stepping stone’ to Madrid Protocol objectives. Information Paper 82 presented at the XXV Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting. Warsaw.

    Google Scholar 

  • ASOC (Antarctic and Southern Ocean Coalition). (2009). Key elements of a strategic vision for Antarctic tourism. Information Paper 53 presented at the XXXII Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting. Baltimore.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baring-Gould, I., Robichaud, R. & McLain, K. (2005). Analysis of the use of wind energy to supplement the power needs at McMurdo station and Amundsen-Scott South Pole station, Antarctica. National Renewable Energy Laboratory Technical Report NREL/TP500-37504.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bastmeijer K. (2011). Intergenerational equity and the Antarctic Treaty System: continued efforts to prevent ‘mastery’. Yearbook of Polar Law 3. Leiden/Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bastmeijer, K., & Roura, R. (2004). Regulating Antarctic Tourism and the Precautionary Principle. The American Journal of International Law, 98(4), 763–781.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bauer, T. G. (2001). Tourism in the Antarctic: Opportunities, Constraints, and Future Prospects. New York: The Haworth Hospitality Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumgartner, R. J., & Korhonen, J. (2010). Strategic Thinking for Sustainable Development. Sustainable Development, 18, 71–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berkman, P. A. (2002). Science into Policy: Global Lessons from Antarctica. London: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berkman, P. A., Lang, M. A., Walton, D. W. H., & Young, O. R. (2011). Science diplomacy: Science, Antarctica, and the governance of international spaces. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Scholarly Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bishop, P., Hines, A., & Collins, T. (2007). The current state of scenario development: An overview of techniques. Foresight, 9(1), 5–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryson, J. M. (1988). A Strategic Planning Process for Public and Non-profit Organisations. Long Range Planning, 21(1), 73–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryson, J. M. (2004). Strategic planning for public and non-profit organizations (3rd ed., p. 2004). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, S., Pingali, P., Bennet, E., & Zurek, M. (2005). Ecosystems and human well-being: Scenarios. Washington DC: Islands Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • CCAMLR (Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources) (2007). Workshop on Bioregionalisation of the Southern Ocean. SC-CAMLR-XXVI/11. Brussels, 13–17 August 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, R. N. & Stankey, G. H. (1979). The Recreation Opportunity Spectrum: A Framework for Planning, Management, and Research. General Technical Report PNW-98 Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, U.S. Department of Agriculture and Forest Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole, D. N., & Stankey, G. H. (1998). Historical development of limits of acceptable change: Conceptual clarifications and possible extensions. In S. F. McCool & D. N. Cole (Eds.), Limits of Acceptable Change and related planning processes: Progress and future directions. Ogden: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.

    Google Scholar 

  • COMNAP (Council of Managers of National Antarctic Programs). (2003). ‘Worst Case’ & ‘Less than Worst Case’ Environmental scenarios. Paper presented at the XXVI Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting. Madrid.

    Google Scholar 

  • COMNAP (Council of Managers of National Antarctic Programs). (2008). COMNAP Fuel Manual. Version 1.0. Hobart: COMNAP Secretariat.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cook, G. (1990). The Future of Antarctica: Exploitation versus preservation. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cullen, R. (1994). Antarctic minerals and conservation. Ecological Economics, 10, 143–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, P. (1999). Beyond guidelines: A model for Antarctic tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 26(3), 516–533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dalal-Clayton, B., & Sadler B. (2005). Strategic Environmental Assessment, a source book and reference guide to international experience. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Wit, B., & Meyer, R. (2004). Strategy: Process, Content, Context (3rd ed.). London: ITP Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Ridder, W., Turnpenny, J., Nilsson, M., & Von Raggamby, A. (2007). A framework for tool selection and use in integrated assessment for sustainable development. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management, 9(4), 423–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ewing, B., Goldfinger, S., Wackernagel, M., Stechbart, M., Rizk, S. M., Reed, A., et al. (2008). The ecological footprint Atlas 2008. Oakland: Global Footprint Network.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farreny, R., Oliver-Solà, J., Lamers, M., Amelung, B., Gabarrell, X., Rieradevall, J., et al. (2011). Carbon dioxide emissions of Antarctic tourism. Antarctic Science, 23(6), 556–566.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finnveden, G., & Moberg, A. (2005). Environmental systems analysis tools—An overview. Journal of Cleaner Production, 13, 1165–1173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Germany. (2008). Final Report on the Research Project ‘Risk assessment for Fildes Peninsula and Ardley Island and the development of management plans for designation as Antarctic Specially Protected or Managed Areas’. Information Paper 30 presented at the XXXI Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting. Kyiv, Ukraine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hemmings, A.D. and Roura, R. (2003). A square peg in a round hole: fitting impact assessment under the Antarctic Environmental Protocol to Antarctic tourism. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 21, 13–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hemmings, A. D. (2009). From the new geopolitics of resources to nanotechnology: Emerging challenges of globalism in Antarctica. Yearbook of Polar Law, 1, 55–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hemmings, A. D., & Kriwoken, L. K. (2010). High level Antarctic EIA under the Madrid protocol: State practice and the effectiveness of the comprehensive environmental evaluation process. International environmental agreements: Politics, law and economics, 10(3), 187–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horne, R., Grant, T., & Verghese, K. (2009). Life cycle assessment: Principles, practice and prospects. Melbourne: CSIRO Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huber, J. (2011). The antarctic treaty: Toward a new partnership. In P. A. Berkman, M. A. Lang, D. W. H. Walton, & O. R. Young (Eds.), Science diplomacy: Antarctica, Science and the Governance of International Spaces (pp. 89–95). Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, K. A. (2010). How committed are we to monitoring human impacts in Antarctica? Environmental Research Letters, 5(4), 3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, K. A., Fretwell, P., Rae, J., Holmes, K., & Fleming, A. (2011). Untouched Antarctica: Mapping a finite and diminishing environmental resource. Antarctic Science, 23(6), 537–548.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IAATO (International Association of Antarctica Tour Operations). (2010). Developing a Risk Assessment Framework for IAATO Passenger Vessels. Information Paper 60 presented at the XXXIII Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting. Punta del Este.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jabour, J. (2013). Strategic management and ` Antarctic tourism. In T. Tin, D. Liggett, P. T. Maher & M. Lamers (Eds.) Antarctic futures: human engagement with the Antarctic environment. Dordrecht: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, A.A., Hoffman, L., Moller, B. & Schidt, A. (1997). Life cycle assessment (LCA): A guide to approaches, experiences and information sources. Environmental Issues Series no. 6. Copenhagen: European Environment Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joyner, C. C. (1998). Governing the frozen commons: The Antarctic regime and environmental protection. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kemp, K., Loorbach, D., & Rotmans, J. (2007). Transition management as a model for managing processes of co-evolution towards sustainable development. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 14(1), 78–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kershaw, A. (1998). Destination Last Wilderness. In: G. Tetley (Ed.). Antarctica 2010: A Notebook. Proceedings of the Antarctic Futures Workshop 28–30 April 1998. Christchurch: Antarctica New Zealand.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kerry, K. R., & Riddle, M. (2009). Health of Antarctic wildlife: a challenge for science and policy. Berlin-Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Klein, A. G., Kennicutt, M. C., Wolff, G. A., Sweet, S. T., Bloxom, T., Gielstra, D. A., et al. (2008). The historical development of McMurdo station, Antarctica, an environmental perspective. Polar Geography, 31(3–4), 119–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lacate, D. S. (1996). Wildland inventory and mapping. The Forestry Chronicle, 42, 184–194.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamers, M., Haase, D., & Amelung, B. (2008). Facing the elements: Analysing trends in Antarctic tourism. Tourism Review, 63(1), 15–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lamers, M., Amelung, B., & Stel, J. (2010). Business as (Un)Usual: Integrated scenario analysis for tourism in Antarctica. In C. M. Hall & J. Saarinen (Eds.), Tourism and change in polar regions: Climate, environment and experiences (pp. 247–262). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamers, M., Haase, D., & Amelung, B. (2012). Strategic challenges of tourism development and governance in Antarctica: Taking stock and moving forward. Polar Research, 31, 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Landau, D. (2000). Tourism scenarios. Proceedings of the Antarctic tourism workshop. Christchurch: Antarctica New Zealand.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landres, P., Boutcher, S., Merigliano, L., Barns, C., Davis, D., Hall, T., Henry, S., Hunter, B., Janiga, P., Laker, M., McPherson, A., Powell, D.S., Rowan M., Sater, S. (2005). Monitoring selected conditions related to wilderness character: A national framework. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-151. Fort Collins, CO: USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, A. L. (1999). A strategic planning primer for higher education. Retrieved from http://www.sonoma.edu/aa/planning/Strategic_Planning_Primer.pdf.

  • Lesslie, R., Taylor, D., & Maslen, M. (1995). National Wilderness Inventory’s Handbook of Procedures, Content and Usage, Second Edition. Australia: Australian Government Publishing Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindblom, C. E. (1959). The Science of ‘Muddling Through’ Public Administration Review, 19, 79–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loorbach, D. (2007). Transition management. New mode of governance for sustainable development. Dutch research institute for transitions (DRIFT). Utrecht: International Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lynch, H. J., Crosbie, K., Fagan, W. F., & Naveen, R. (2010). Spatial patterns of tour ship traffic in the Antarctic Peninsula region. Antarctic Science, 22, 123–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marsden, S. (2011). Introducing strategic environmental assessment to the Madrid Protocol: Lessons from international experience. Polar Journal, 1(1), 36–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Margules, C. R., & Pressey, R. L. (2000). Systematic conservation planning. Nature, 405, 243–253.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D. G. M. (2013). Antarctic marine living resources—‘the future is not what it used to be’. In T. Tin, D. Liggett, P. T. Maher, & M. Lamers (Eds.) Antarctic futures: human engagement with the Antarctic environment. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg, H. (1994). The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning: Reconceiving the Roles for Planning, Plans, Planners. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Molenaar, E. J. (2005). Sea-Borne tourism in Antarctica: Avenues for further intergovernmental regulation. International Journal for Marine and Coastal Law, 20(2), 247–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • New Zealand (2009). IP 36 A framework for analysing and managing non-native species risks in Antarctica. Baltimore: Information Paper presented at the XXXII Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nooteboom, S. (2000). Environmental assessments of strategic decisions and project decisions: Interactions and benefits. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 182(1), 151–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, E. (2005). Understanding institutional diversity. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • OTA (1989). Polar prospects: A minerals treaty for Antarctica. Darby: Diane Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pertierra, L. R., Tejedo, P. & Benayas, J. (2013). Looking into the future of Deception Island: Current status, drivers of change and policy alternatives. In T. Tin, D. Liggett, P. T. Maher, & M. Lamers (Eds.), Antarctic futures: Human engagement with the Antarctic environment. Dordrecht: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poister, T., & Streib, G. (1999). Strategic management in the public sector: Concepts, models, and processes. Public Productivity and Management Review, 22(3), 308–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poister, T., & Streib, G. (2005). Elements of strategic planning and management in municipal government: Status after two decades. Public Administration Review, Jan/Feb, 2005, 45–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ringland, G. (1998). Scenario planning. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, K. S. (1998). Antarctica. New York: Bantam Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rohde, H. F. (1990). Engineering: An essential means for conserving Antarctica and achieving cost-effective built infrastructure. Proceedings of the First Pacific/Asia Offshore Mechanics Symposium, Seoul: The International Society of Offshore and Polar Engineers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose, G., & Milligan, B. (2010). Law for the management of Antarctic marine living resources: From normative conflicts towards integrated governance? Yearbook of International Environmental Law, 20(1), 41–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rotmans, J. (1998). Methods for IA: The challenges and opportunities ahead. Environmental Modelling and Assessment, 3(3), 155–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roura, R. M., & Hemmings, A. D. (2011). Realising strategic environmental assessment in Antarctica. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management, 13(3), 483–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roura, R. M., & Tin, T. (2013). Strategic thinking and the Antarctic wilderness: Contrasting alternative futures. In T. Tin, D. Liggett, P. T. Maher and M. Lamers (Eds.) Antarctic futures: human engagement with the Antarctic environment. Dordrecht: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Runhaar, H. A. C., & Driessen, P. P. J. (2007). What makes strategic environmental assessment successful environmental assessment? Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 25(1), 2–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadler B. & Verheem R. (1996). Strategic environmental assessment: status, challenges and future directions. Report 53. The Hague: Ministry of Spatial Planning and the Environment.

    Google Scholar 

  • SALEGOS (Subglacial Antarctic Lake Exploration Group of Specialists) (2001). Report of the subglacial Antarctic lake exploration group of specialists (SALEGOS) Meeting, Bologna, Italy, 29-30 November 2001. Retrieved from http://salegos-scar.montana.edu.

  • Sánchez, R. A. & Njaastad, B. (2013). Future challenges in environmental management of National Antarctic Programs. In T. Tin, D. Liggett, P.T. Maher, and M. Lamers (Eds.) Antarctic futures: human engagement with the Antarctic environment. Dordrecht: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • SCAR (Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research). (2010). Biodiversity-based evaluation of the Environmental Domains Analysis. Working Paper 3. XXXIII Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting, 3-14 May, 2010, Punta del Este.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoemaker, P. J. H. (1995). Scenario planning: A tool for strategic thinking (pp. 25–40). Winter: Sloan Management Review.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scully, T. (2008). Chairman’s report from the Miami meeting (March 17-19, 2008) on Antarctic tourism. Information Paper 19. XXXI Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting. 2-13 June, Kiev.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheat, W. R., & Partidárioc, M. R. (2010). Strategic approaches and assessment techniques—Potential for knowledge brokerage towards sustainability. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 30(4), 278–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shirsat, S. V., & Graf, H. F. (2009). An emission inventory of sulfur from anthropogenic sources in Antarctica. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 9, 3397–3408.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Snyder, J. (1997). Alternative future for tourism to Antarctica: And a preliminary assessment of their resource management implications. Littleton: Strategic Studies, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steiner, G. (1979). Strategic planning. What every manager should know. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stokke, O. S., & Vidas, D. (Eds.). (1996). Governing the Antarctic. The effectiveness and legitimacy of the Antarctic Treaty System. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Summerson, R. & Tin, T. (2011). Protection of the wilderness and aesthetic values of Antarctica: Geographical Information Systems (GIS) as a tool. In: A. Watson, J. Murrieta-Saldivar, & B. McBride (Eds.) Science and stewardship to protect and sustain wilderness values: Ninth World Wilderness Congress symposium; November 6-13, 2009; Meridá, Yucatán, Mexico. Proceedings RMRS-P-64. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.

    Google Scholar 

  • Terauds, A., Chown, S. L., Morgan, F., Peat, H. J., Watts, D. J., Keys, H., et al. (2012). Conservation biogeography of the Antarctic. Diversity and Distributions, 18(7), 726–741.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tetley, G. (1998). Antarctica 2010: A Notebook. Christchurch: Antarctica New Zealand.

    Google Scholar 

  • Therivel, R. (2010). Strategic environmental assessment in action (1st ed.). London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tin, T., Lamers, M., Liggett, D., Maher, P. T., & Hughes, K. A. (2013) Setting the scene: Human activities, environmental impacts and governance arrangements in Antarctica. In T. Tin, D. Liggett, P. T. Maher & M. Lamers (Eds.), Antarctic futures: Human engagement with the Antarctic environment. Dordrecht: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • UK. (United Kingdom). (2009). Pilot study on identifying important marine areas for conservation around the South Orkney Islands. Information Paper 11, XXXII Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting, 6-17, April, 2009. Baltimore.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNEP (2007). Global Environmental Outlook 4. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNFCCC. (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Secretariat). (2011). National greenhouse gas inventory data for the period 1990–2009. FCCC/SBI/2011/9. Bonn: UNFCCC Secretariat.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Notten, P., Rotmans, J., Van Asselt, M., & Rothman, D. (2003). An updated scenario typology. Futures, 35, 423–443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weaver, P., & Rotmans, J. (2006). Integrated sustainability assessment: What is it, why do it and how? International Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development, 1(4), 284–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Social Sciences, Wageningen University, Hollandseweg 1, 6706, KN, Wageningen, The Netherlands

    Machiel Lamers

  2. Gateway Antarctica, University of Canterbury, Private Bag 4800, 8140, Christchurch, New Zealand

    Daniela Liggett

  3. Independent Environmental Consultant, 85 Rue du St Michel, 73190, Challes-les-Eaux, France

    Tina Tin

Authors
  1. Machiel Lamers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Daniela Liggett
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tina Tin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Machiel Lamers .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Challes-les-Eaux, Savoie, France

    Tina Tin

  2. Gateway Antarctica University of Canterbury, Christchurch, Canterbury, New Zealand

    Daniela Liggett

  3. University of Northern British Columbia Outdoor Recreation & Tourism Management, Prince George, British Columbia, Canada

    Patrick T Maher

  4. Environmental Policy Group, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands

    Machiel Lamers

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Lamers, M., Liggett, D., Tin, T. (2014). Strategic Thinking for the Antarctic Environment: The Use of Assessment Tools in Governance. In: Tin, T., Liggett, D., Maher, P., Lamers, M. (eds) Antarctic Futures. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6582-5_14

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation