Integrated oceans management and the institutional performance of exclusive economic zones the Australian case

Abstract

This paper addresses key issues in relation to the performance of exclusive economic zones (EEZs) as institutions, with particular reference to Australias Oceans Policy. Specifically: 1) What national institutions has Australia created within the framework provided by the EEZs, 2) What is the interplay between global agreements such as the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC), the Australian Oceans Policy and regional management plans? These questions are considered in the case of Australias Oceans Policy with some comparison to other countries institutional arrangements. In the past five years Australia, Canada, the US, New Zealand, Pacific Islands, Korea, China, Thailand and other coastal states have either published or initiated work on a national policy for integrated oceans management. The institutional arrangements in each case vary considerably but, notwithstanding the cultural and economic differences among countries implementing oceans policies, there are emerging similarities such as the application of integrated management, ecosystem-based management, sustainable development and precautionary approaches. In 1998, the Australian government released its Oceans Policy (Australian Government, 1998) with a broad agenda of sustainable, multiple-use management of marine resources and the aim of combining both conservation and economic development in an integrated framework. A significant part of the policy included the goal of implementing Regional Marine Plans to ensure natural resources are managed for sustainable use. Specific challenges for implementing integrated oceans management in Australia include (a) integration of fisheries resource management in an ecosystem-based way across all gear types and regions where species are harvested; (b) integration of the designation and management of Marine Protected Areas with fisheries resource management to ensure that both conservation and industrial development goals are achieved; (c) development of adequate knowledge bases to support resource management of ocean ecosystems. The issues of institutional fit, interplay and scale provide a useful framework to assess the performance of EEZs (Young et al, 1999). The emerging issues in policy development outlined for the Australian case show that the large scale of ecosystems within EEZs call for the adjustment of institutional arrangements to fit biophysical systems and industrial structures. This seems to be happening through national cooperation in the Australian case, however the interplay between sectors below the level of the over-arching Oceans Policy are problematic and politically difficult to implement. It is likely to take decades before the success of integrated ocean management within EEZs can be properly evaluated.