Commentary: In Response to the Paper by Oran R. Young, How Can International Regimes Solve Environmental Problems? (see pp. 9–29)
The terrain, wonderfully covered by Oran Young, is a dichotomized world consisting of stories wishing to be theories. On the one side we find the economizers – disembedded consequentialists acting according to something called ‘collective action theory.’ On the other side we have the socially embedded citizens of the world intent on practicing what is good (or right). Young helps us to see that both ‘theories’ (and I use that term with great resistance) are ample enough to accommodate almost anything that might appear threatening. We have, in other words, accommodating metaphors whose adherents can pick and choose among confirming signals (assiduously watched for), and can fail to notice disconfirming signals with alacrity. Philosophers would mumble something about verificationist tendencies. As Shackle would put it, ‘what is seen is built upon what is thought (Shackle 1992, p. 66).’ To be fair here, economists have perfected the craft of seeing only what is thought so my comment should not be considered a criticism of political scientists and others who worry about international regimes.
Visa-Free Movement and Intercultural Communication: Expectations and Experiences of Kenyans in Ghana
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
Protection of the Marine Environment: The International and National Regulation of Deep Seabed Mining Activities
This chapter provides an overview of the international and national regulatory framework pertaining to deep seabed mining activities. It begins by discussing the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, the backdrop for all marine activities – be they national or international – and examines the obligations of states to protect the marine environment from the harmful effects arising from deep seabed mining. Next, the chapter examines the international regime for deep seabed mining (i.e. “activities in the Area”), explaining the “common heritage of mankind” status of the Area (i.e. the international seabed); the functions of the International Seabed Authority (ISA), the international organization established to govern deep seabed mining in the Area; and the concept of state sponsorship of non-state entities (i.e. private actors) for deep seabed mining in the Area. The chapter follows with a discussion of the development of national legislation to regulate deep seabed mining, examining efforts in the Pacific region where many prospective deep-sea mining sites are located. This includes a look at the legislative regimes of several Pacific Island nations, namely, Papua New Guinea, Tonga and the Cook Islands, for whom deep seabed mining may soon become a reality – as well as New Zealand and Japan, countries with comparatively developed rule of law and legislative regimes that have undertaken or considered deep seabed mining in their national waters. Overall, the chapter critically describes and evaluates the current regulatory status in the international and national seabed areas and highlights some salient gaps that require urgent attention in order to ensure marine environmental protection and mitigate impacts on humans.