Topic I: Global cooperation to protect the marine environmentIntroduction to the problemThe marine environment can be described or characterized at a number of different scales, ranging from ocean-level processes through to those that occur at species and genetic level (Connor et al. 2002). The scales of relevance here are marine landscapes, habitats and species; their inter-relationship can be expressed as follows: Species provide the globally accepted original classification of biological diversity, with well-established rules of taxonomy to distinguish between different types. Their classification is arranged in a hierarchy of genera, families, orders, classes and phyla. Habitats comprise suites of species (communities or assemblages) that consistently occur together, but which are derived from different parts of the taxonomic hierarchy (e.g. kelps, molluscs and fish in a kelp forest habitat). Their classification can also be structured in a hierarchy (biotopes, biotope complexes, broad habitats), reflecting degrees of similarityMarine Landscapes comprise suites of habitats that consistently occur together, but which are often derived from different parts ofthe habitat classification hierarchy (e.g. salt-marsh intertidal mudflats, rocky shores and sub- tidal mussel beds in an estuary). Different types of pollutionPollution from shipsShips can pollute waterways and oceans in many ways. Oil spills can have devastating effects. While being toxic to marine life, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHS) found in crude oil, are very difficult to clean up, and last for years in the sediment and marine environment. Discharge of cargo residues from bulk carriers can pollute ports, waterways and oceans. In many instances vessels intentionally discharge illegal wastes despite foreign and domestic regulation prohibiting such actions. It has been estimatedthat container ships lose over 10,000containers at sea each year (usually during storms).Ships also create noise pollution that disturbs natural wildlife, and water from ballast tanks can spread harmful algae and other invasive species.Atmosphere pollutionGraph linking atmospheric dust to various coral deaths across the Caribbean Sea and FloridaAnother pathway of pollutionoccurs through the atmosphere. Wind blown dust and debris, including plastic bags, are blown seaward from landfills and other areas. Dust from the Sahara moving around the southern periphery of the subtropical ridge moves into the Caribbean and Florida during the warm season as the ridge builds and moves northward through the subtropical Atlantic.Dust can also be attributed to a global transport from the Gobi and Taklamakan deserts across Korea, Japan, and the Northern Pacificto the Hawaiian Islands. Since 1970, dust outbreaks have worsened due to periods of drought in Africa. There is a large variability in dust transport to the Caribbean and Florida from year to year; however, the flux is greater during positive phases of the North Atlantic Oscillation. The USGS links dust events to a decline in the health of coral reefs across the Caribbean and Florida, primarily since the 1970s.AcidificationIsland with fringing reef in the Maldives . Coral reefs are dying around the world.The oceans are normally a natural carbon sink, absorbing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Because the levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide are increasing, the oceans are becoming more acidic. The potential consequences of ocean acidification are not fully understood, but there are concerns that structures made of calcium carbonate may become vulnerable to dissolution, affecting corals and the ability of shellfish to form shells.Oceans and coastal ecosystems play an important role in the global carbon cycle and have removed about 25% of the carbon dioxide emitted by human activities between 2000 and 2007 and about half the anthropogenic CO2 released since the start of the industrial revolution. Rising ocean temperatures and ocean acidification means that the capacity of the ocean carbon sink will gradually get weaker, giving rise to global concerns expressed in the Monaco and Manado Declarations.Plastic debrisMarine debris is mainly discarded human rubbish which floats on, or is suspended in the ocean. Eighty percent of marine debris is plastic - a component that has been rapidly accumulating since the end of World War II. The mass of plastic in the oceans may be as high as one hundred million metric tons.Discarded plastic bags, six pack rings and other forms of plastic waste which finish up in the ocean present dangers to wildlife and fisheries .Aquatic life can be threatened through entanglement, suffocation, and ingestion. Fishing nets, usually made of plastic, can be left or lost in the ocean by fishermen. Known as ghost nets, these entangle fish, dolphins,seaturtles, sharks, dugongs, crocodiles, seabirds, crabs, and other creatures, restricting movement, causing starvation, laceration and infection, and, in those that need to return to the surface to breathe, suffocation.Remains of an albatrosscontaining ingested flotsamMany animals that live on or in the sea consume flotsam by mistake, as it often looks similar to their natural prey. Plastic debris, when bulky or tangled, is difficult to pass, and may become permanently lodged in the digestive tracts of these animals, blocking the passage of food and causing death through starvation or infection.Plastics accumulate because they don't biodegrade in the way many other substances do. They will photodegrade on exposure to the sun, but they do so properly only under dry conditions, and waterinhibits this process.[50] In marine environments, photo degraded plastic disintegrates into ever smaller pieces while remaining polymers, even down to the molecular level. When floating plastic particles photo degrade down to zooplankton sizes, jellyfish attempt to consume them, and in this way the plastic enters the ocean food chain. Many of these long-lasting pieces end up in the stomachs of marine birds and animals, including sea turtles, and black-footed albatross.Historical PerspectiveThe oceans had long been subject to the freedom of-the-seas doctrine - a principle put forth in the seventeenth century essentially limiting national rights and jurisdiction over the oceans to a narrow belt of sea surrounding a nation's coastline. The remainder of the seas was proclaimed to be free to all and belonging to none. While this situation prevailed into the twentieth century, by mid-century there was an impetus to extend national claims over offshore resources. There was growing concern over the toll taken on coastal fish stocks by long-distance fishing fleets and over the threat of pollution and wastes from transport ships and oil tankers carrying noxious cargoes that plied sea routes across the globe. The hazard of pollution was ever present, threatening coastal resorts and all forms of ocean life. The navies of the maritime powers were competing to maintain a presence across the globe on the surface waters and even under the sea.A tangle of claims, spreading pollution, competing demands for lucrative fish stocks in coastal waters and adjacent seas, growing tension between coastal nations' rights to these resources and those of distant-water fishermen, the prospects of a rich harvest of resources on the sea floor, the increased presence of maritime powers and the pressures of long-distance navigation and aseemingly outdated, if not inherently conflicting,freedom-of-the-seas doctrine - all these were threatening to transform the oceans into another arena for conflict and instability. In 1945, President Harry S Truman, responding in part to pressure from domestic oil interests, unilaterally extended United States jurisdiction over all natural resources on that nation's continental shelf - oil, gas, minerals, etc. This was the first major challenge to the freedom-of-the-seas doctrine. Other nations soon followed suit. In October 1946, Argentina claimed its shelf and the sea above it. Chile and Peru in 1947, Ecuador in 1950, asserted sovereign rights over a 200-mile zone, hoping thereby to limit the access of distant-water fishing fleets and to control the depletion of fish stocks in their adjacent seas.Soon after the Second World War, Egypt, Ethiopia, Saudi Arabia, Libya, Venezuela and some Eastern European countries laid claim to a 12-mile territorial sea, thus clearly departing from the traditional three-mile limit.Later, the archipelagic nation of Indonesia asserted the right to dominion over the water that separated its 13,000 islands. The Philippines did likewise. In 1970, Canada asserted the right toregulate navigation in an area extending for 100 miles from its shores in order to protect Arctic water against pollution.From oil to tin, diamonds to gravel, metals to fish, the resources of the sea are enormous. The reality of their exploitation grows day by day as technology opens new ways to tap those resources.In the late 1960s, oil exploration was moving further and further from land, deeper and deeper into the bedrock of continental margins. From a modest beginning in 1947 in the Gulf of Mexico, offshore oil production, still less than a million tons in 1954, had grown to close to 400 million tons. Oil drilling equipment was already going as far as 4,000 meters below the ocean surface.The oceans were being exploited as never before. Activities unknown barely two decades earlier were in full swing around the world. Tin had been mined in the shallow waters off Thailand and Indonesia. South Africa was about to tap the Namibian coast for diamonds. Potato-shaped nodules, found almost a century earlier and lying on the seabed some five kilometers below, were attracting increased interest because of their metal content.And then there was fishing. Large fishing vessels were roaming the oceans far from their native shores, capable of staying away from port for months at a time. Fish stocks began to show signs ofdepletion as fleet after fleet swept distant coastlines. Nations were flooding the richest fishing waters with their fishing fleets virtually unrestrained: coastal States setting limits and fishing States contesting them. The so-called "Cod War" between Iceland and the United Kingdom had brought about the spectacle of British Navy ships dispatched to rescue a fishing vessel seized by Iceland for violating its fishing rules.Offshore oil was the centre of attraction in the North Sea. Britain, Denmark and Germany were in conflict as to how to carve up the continental shelf, with its rich oil resources.It was late 1967 and the quietness of the sea was slowly being disrupted by technological breakthroughs, accelerating and multiplying uses, and a super-Power rivalry that stood poised to enter man's last preserve - the seabed.It was a time that held dangers and promises, risks and hopes. The dangers were numerous: nuclear submarines charting deep waters never before explored; designs for antiballistic missile systems to be placed on the seabed; supertankers ferrying oil from the Middle East to European and other ports, passing through congested straits and leaving behind a trail of oil spills; and rising tensions between nations over conflicting claims to ocean space and resources.The oceans were generating a multitude of claims, counterclaims and sovereignty disputes.The hope was for a more stable order, promoting greater use and better management of ocean resources and generating harmony and goodwill among States that would no longer have to eye each other suspiciously over conflicting claims.On 1 November 1967, Malta's Ambassador to the United Nations asked the nations of the world to look around them and open their eyes to a looming conflict that could devastate the oceans, the lifeline of man's very survival. In a speech to the United Nations General Assembly, he spoke of the super-Power rivalry that was spreading to the oceans, of the pollution that was poisoning the seas, of the conflicting legal claims and their implications for a stable order and of the rich potential that lay on the seabed.Significant documents―Marine and coast sustainable development blueprintThe United Nations convention on the international oceanAthens protocolAgenda 21: put forward in United Nations Conference on 1992-Environment and Development (UNCED) held in Rio deJaneiro, BrazilThe northeast Atlantic oceans environmental protection conventions 1954- International convention of preventing oil pollution of the sea 1972-convention of preventing dumping waste or other matter pollution of the seaCurrent situation and global challenges: Enormous disparities currently exist between the actions taken by different countries. The preservation of marine arouses global awareness and calls for international cooperation.Some countries have turned their thoughts into actions, taking the lead in the protection of marine. Take Australian government for instance, the Australian Maritime Safety Authority (AMSA) manages the National Plan, working with State/Northern Territory (NT) governments, the shipping, oil, exploration and chemical industries, emergency services to maximize Australia’s marine pollution response capability. The National Plan Management Committee (NPMC) provides strategic management of the National Plan while the National Plan Operations Group (NPOG) handles operational functions.The measurements have been accepted universally, and triggered wider emphasis throughout the globe, especially during this very occasion, where the marine is under the onslaught ofnumerous technical innovations. As for some countries which abut oceans, they tend to utilize the marine resources in every way that the resources can be utilized. Being confronted with brand new fishing methods, many countries choose to pollute rather than protect. Ship sourced pollution seems to be increasingly serious that calls for worldwide actions. Another action taken up by Australia is that all the individuals are entitled to report the incident to AMSA or the local marine authority if had witnessed a vessel polluting. The polluting actions shall include, first, any quantity of oil, waste oil, fuel oil, sludge, lube oil, etc; second, any discharge from a ship involving washings of chemical or dry cargoes; third, any plastic material and garbage disposed of in the sea within 12nm of land.It seems like not a single country can really deny the fact that the pervasive and influential technologies has already been used in marine exploitation, and of course, the certain countries are enjoying the benefits that have been brought with. With such merits and edges, technology speaks for itself. It is not the technology itself to blame for, but the awareness that worthy rational consideration. There are several countries have been taking steps towards marine conservation.Past International actionsUnder the international cooperation proposed by UN, marineprotection has been placed on a higher level.European Union has adopted an instrument, Marine Strategy Framework Directive, in 2008, which offers a comprehensive and integrated approach to the protection of all European marine waters.The Directive involves many implementation challenges, which are addressed through a Common Implementation Strategy between the Commission and the Member States and a regional approach to the implementation of its objectives.Marine conservation is a long-run project and serves forlong-term benefit of general interest, therefore, the certain project shall be given priority to.Proposed solutionIn 2009, UNEP in collaboration with the Government of Kenya produced the publication Kenya: Atlas of Our Changing Environment which revealed the grave extent of the forest’s depletion – over 25 percent of forest cover has been lost over the past two decades to ecosystem encroachments like unplanned settlements and illegal logging. Based on these findings, a ten-point plan was prepared by the Mau Forest Task Force together with other major stakeholders. UNEP and the Government of Kenya are now working to restore this vital ecosystem.The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development was held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in June 1992. This conference,which has also come to be known as the ―Earth Summit,‖ marked the beginning of a new round of world conferences focusing on the analysis of development problems. This ―new social cycle‖ of United Nations conferences was launched in response to the wishes of Member States and has led to a renewal of efforts first made 20 years ago to find solutions to the most pressing problems coming to the fore on the global stage. These conferences have also contributed to the ethical and political consolidation of a cooperation regime based on new international legal principles.The Conference in Rio de Janeiro laid the groundwork for a new world consensus on sustainable development and on global conventions dealing with emerging issues such as biological diversity and climate change.1 This led to the creation of institutions and to the formulation of government strategies and policies for the promotion of sustainable development. It also prompted steps to address this issue within the spheres of education, culture and the media.Bloc positionWestern Asian Note: Western Asia Region includes the following 13 countries only: Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Oman, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syrian Arab republic, United ArabEmirates and Yemen.The present report portrays the wide gap currently separating between the requirements of sustainability and the reality of economic development politics in the Western Asia Region. Despite the facts that SD has become one of the basic commitments of the Western Asia Region since Rio1992, much more remains to be done to transform the principle into daily practice. The report is a stock-taking, almost nine year after Rio, of what has been attempted and achieved in the Western Asia Region by national governments, regional and sub-regional bodies to implement the concepts of Sustainable Development (SD). The report also sets out the major issues that the roundtable believes prevent the attainment of coherent and strong SD policies in the Western Asia Region. On the positive side, National & local agenda-21 (LA-21), National Sustainable Development Strategies (NSDS), cross-sector National Environmental Strategies (NES) and National Environmental Action Plans (NEAP) have been formulated in most of the Western Asia Region providing blueprints for action and setting time-bound goals and targets.Since UNCED, 1992 there has also been a fast growing participation by the major groups through NGOs, civil societies, trade unions, and private sectors in the environmental decision-making process in the region. On the institutional level, some countries of the Western Asia Region have made substantial progress in setting up for SD. Furthermore,national councils or coordinating bodies in the field of SD and NGOs are flourishing in some countries of the Western Asia Region.A major positive development was the declaration of the Council of Arab Ministers Responsible for Environment (CAMRE) in their meeting in Abu-Dhabi, UAE on 3r d of February 2001, that there is an urgent need for alleviation of poverty and improvement of living standards and economic conditions of the Arab citizen through programs of SD. This declaration including its associated commitments was later adopted at the Arab summit meeting in March 2001 in Amman giving the declaration the legitimacy and momentum for implementation at the regional level. Unfortunately, the roundtable discussions revealed that most of the countries of the Western Asia Region are faced with inadequate technical, human and financial resources. The regional situation is further complicated by unfavorable international atmosphere. The main challenge facing most decision-makers in the Western Asia Region is how to effectively integrate multi- sector SD policies in a consolidated strategy. Despite all their efforts to avoid the prevailing piece-meal approach, governments in the Western Asia Region are still away from achieving inter-linkages, interdependencies, synergy and coherence in their policy initiatives and policies. The roundtable was able to identify and sum-up four major obstacles, which impede the achievement of SD in the Western Asia Region, these are: 1.Inadequate freshwater supplies andpoor land resources. 2. Lack of peace and security in the region. 3. Inadequate monitoring and access to credible information. 4. Inadequate public participation in decision-making led to ineffective governance for SD. Freshwater supply in the Western Asia Region was found to be highly variable in time and space. The collection of hydrological, meteorological, ecological and socio-economic information for water resources management is still severely hindered at the field level by inadequate resources and financial constraints. Most countries of the region have developed water policies to manage water scarcity by devising programs based mostly on resources development and to a much lower extent on demand management. The situation at the regional level is also aggravated by the social and cultural impact of globalization on societies including uneven distribution of the benefits of development, rapid pace of technological change and the information revolution. This resulted into faster socio-economic growth, created new opportunities and consequently yielded higher living standards in most of the developed world. However, these benefits were unevenly distributed and the Western Asia Region was almost marginalized. The imbalance between the fast expanding global markets and the inadequate access to the market by countries of the Western Asia Region has hindered their beneficial integration in the world economy. There is a general feeling of suspicion among countries of the Western Asia Region that it is a dubious conceptthat will signify increase social economic and ecological 4 vulnerability. Some efforts are underway to formulate an Arabic Economic Alliance. The impact of these efforts remains to be seen. In face of prevailing unemployment, poverty and weak infrastructures in some countries of the Western Asia Region, the roundtable expressed deep concern that there is a danger that SD could take a backseat and its priority reduced as the social & political pressures for accelerated economic development overwhelm governments. On the positive side, the age structure is in favor of all countries of the Western Asia Region where youth represent a relatively high percent of the societies. At the regional level, the Western Asia Region has to assess their degree of success and/or failure in reconciling their economic and environmental agendas. Countries of the Western Asia Region should co-operatively be able to define the characteristics of modern SD governance tools & trends that reflect the practical lessons learned from our shared past experience. These should definitely include the need to carefully set priorities, pursue cost-effective solutions and seek synergy in policy reforms that result in environmental improvements while promoting socio -economic development. AfricanOn the basis of the UNEP GC decisions on support to Africa and NEPAD, UNEP and a number of UN agencies, continue to work together within the Regional Coordination Mechanism (RCM), a mechanism forcoordinated UN support to the African Union (AU) and its NEPAD program, under the overall coordination of the UN Economic Commission for Africa (ECA). UNEP is the governor of the cluster on Environment, Population and Urbanization of the Regional Coordination Mechanism (RCM). Through its Addis Ababa office, UNEP has a strategic role and presence which facilities closer cooperation in furtherance of the African Union Commission (AUC) programs, including NEPAD. The UNEP Addis Ababa office also takes part in the UN partnerships aimed at extending support to the implementation of the actions recommended by the regional coordination mechanism particularly with respect to the UN clusters of support to NEPAD. In addition, UNEP as the secretariat of the African Ministerial Conference on the Environment (AMCEN) continues to support the implementation of the decisions of AMCEN and its work program, which is an integral part of the action plan for the environment initiative of NEPAD. It will be recalled that AMCEN led the process for the development of the action plan for the environment initiative of NEPAD. Financial supports for NEPAD programs and projects. During the period from July 2010 to April 2011, UNEP continued to extend support to NEPAD through the provision and mobilization of financial resources for the implementation of a number of activities. The specific areas of support include the following: Program Area 1: Combating land degradation, drought anddesertification It will be recalled that recognizing the pervasiveness and severity of land degradation and its impact on livelihoods and on the economies of sub-Saharan African countries, and to complement the Global Environment Facility country partnership program targeting that problem, the World Bank initiated the Terror Africa program. Terror Africa is a global partnership designed as a multi-partner platform organized around three programmatic outcomes, with a view to enabling African Governments and their partners to scale up the mainstreaming and financing of effective and efficient country-driven sustainable land management approaches. It serves to focus attention, facilitate sharing of knowledge and best practices, galvanize advocacy and make the case for increased investment in support of sustainable land management interventions. In Kenya, UNEP has, during the period in consideration, been supporting the country to restore the Mau Forest Complex, which is the anchor of Kenya’s natural resources. In 2009, UNEP in collaboration with the Government of Kenya produced the publication Kenya: Atlas of Our Changing Environment which revealed the grave extent of the forest’s depletion – over 25 percent of forest cover has been lost over the past two decades to ecosystem encroachments like unplanned settlements and illegal logging. Based on these findings, a ten-point plan was prepared by the Mau Forest Task Force together with other major stakeholders. UNEP and the Government of Kenya are now working torestore this vital ecosystem. Programmatic Area 4: Conservation and sustainable use of marine, coastal and freshwater resources The implementation of the marine, coastal and freshwater resources component of the action plan for the environment initiative of NEPAD continues to be implemented through the Abidjan Convention for Protection, Management and Development of the Marine and Coastal Environment of the West and Central African region (Abidjan Convention) and the Nairobi Convention for Protection, Management and Development of the Marine and Coastal Environment of the Eastern African Region (Nairobi Convention).Latin AmericaLatin America and the Caribbean, only Barbados, Haiti and Peru suffer from water stress,6 although there are various areas of other countries which are in this situation (northeast and northwest Mexico, areas of the Pacific coast of Central and South America, some areas of the Andean Plateau and extensive areas of Patagonia). Whereas in other regions of the world the population clearly perceive water shortage to be the main limitation on their development processes and have generated a special culture in this respect, in LatinAmerica and the Caribbean there is only an incipient awareness of the need for rational management of water resources because of。
