Comparing the robustness and effectiveness of the Antarctic treaty system and the UNFCCC regime. Issue 2 (3rd April 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Scott, Shirley V.
• Is Part Of: Australian journal of maritime and ocean affairs. Volume 11:Issue 2(2019)
• Page Start: 94
• Page End: 106
• Publication Date: 2019-04-03
• Subjects: Maritime law -- Australia -- Periodicals; Maritime law -- Indo-Pacific Region -- Periodicals; Law of the sea -- Australasia -- Periodicals; Law of the sea -- Indo-Pacific Region -- Periodicals; Shipping -- Australia -- Periodicals; Shipping -- Indo-Pacific Region -- Periodicals; Maritime law -- Periodicals; Shipping -- Periodicals; Periodicals; 341.45
• DOI: 10.1080/18366503.2019.1589898
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1836-6503

Abstract

ABSTRACT: Both the UNFCCC governing climate change and the Antarctic Treaty System that governs Antarctica can now be understood as multi-treaty regimes situated within an Antarctic and Southern Ocean regime complex. The theory of Cognitive Structures of Cooperation (CSC Theory) provides a framework within which to analyse normative developments within a regime complex. Using CSC Theory this paper compares the two regimes in terms of robustness and effectiveness, before considering their interaction within the Antarctic and Southern Ocean regime complex. It finds that both have prioritised regime robustness over effectiveness. This is contrary to an assumption implicit in the Paris Agreement – that as the climate change challenge becomes worse, ambition (to increase effectiveness) will increase. For the ATS, the risk of prioritising institutional robustness over effectiveness is ultimately a loss of relevance.