ArticleMarine policy2020
Marine protected areas in the Southern Ocean: Is the Antarctic Treaty System ready to co-exist with a new United Nations instrument for areas beyond national jurisdiction?
Article in Marine policy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Measuring the performance of Antarctic Treaty decision-making.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Marine protected areas (MPAs) are a fundamental tool for effective marine conservation and areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ) prove most challenging for their designation. Largely to blame is the currently fragmented and sector-based governance framework under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS, 1982). In the face of rapidly deteriorating biodiversity in ABNJ, negotiations are underway for a new international legally binding instrument (ILBI) mandated to promote the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction using tools including MPAs. The Southern Ocean, however, is a uniquely governed space, with two MPAs already established in ABNJ under the Antarctic Treaty System (ATS). This article critically examines the status quo for designating MPAs under the ATS and uses the findings to reflect on how the system might interact with the new United Nations ILBI. Despite this critique, complementary synergies between the two instruments are still possible. I therefore hypothesise that Antarctic Treaty Consultative Parties (ATCPs) and members of the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) must collectively engage with the ILBI process and across instruments within the ATS, to ensure the future interplay is one of opportunity, not conflict. The article concludes with recommendations to help ATCPs and CCAMLR members more proactively and effectively engage with progressions in the international law of the sea.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.