Download: Full Text

(1)

or ld in T ra ns iti on – G ov er nin g t he M ar in e H er ita ge

Flagship Report

ISBN 978-3-936191-40-0

Governing the Marine Heritage

Despite numerous international treaties and voluntary commitments, the seas are still being massively overfished, polluted and increasingly exploited as the Earth’s last resort. In view of the oceans’ poor condition the WBGU developed a long-term vision of the conservation and

sustainable use of the blue continent: All marine zones with the exception of territorial waters should be declared the common heritage of mankind. In order to move closer to this ultimate goal for ocean governance, the WBGU also makes recommendations for action that link up with ongoing political processes. In this context it examines the example of two focal themes: food (sustainable fisheries and aquaculture) and energy from the sea. The report shows that sustainable stewardship of the oceans is urgently necessary, that the seas can be incorporated into a transformation towards a low-carbon, sustainable society, and that such a transformation can achieve substantial benefits worldwide both for a sustainable energy supply and for food security.

“The ‘World in Transition – Governing the Marine Heritage’ report presents a thought provoking look at crucial aspects of oceans governance. It resonates strongly with our thinking in the World Bank and among the partners of the Global Partnership for Oceans. Nation states, civil society and industry need to work together to support more sustainable and productive ocean use. This report makes a valuable contribution to global thinking on how best we might secure a sustainable future from healthy oceans.”

Rachel Kyte, Vice President, Sustainable Development, The World Bank

Governing the Marine Heritage

World in Transition

(2)

(3)

Governing the Marine Heritage

In memoriam Professor Jürgen Schmid

World in Transition

(4)

WBGU is an independent, scientific advisory body to the German Federal Government set up in 1992 in the run-up to the Rio Earth Summit.

The Council has nine members, appointed for a term of four years by the federal cabinet. The Council is supported by an interministerial committee of the federal government comprising representatives of all ministries and of the federal chancellery. The Council’s principal task is to provide scientifically-based policy advice on global change issues to the German Federal Government.

The Council

• analyses global environment and development problems and reports on these,

• reviews and evaluates national and international research in the field of global change,

• provides early warning of new issue areas,

• identifies gaps in research and initiates new research,

• monitors and assesses national and international policies for sustainable development,

• elaborates recommendations for action,

• raises public awareness and heightens the media profile of global change issues.

WBGU publishes flagship reports every two years, making its own choice of focal themes. In addition, the German government can commission the Council to prepare special reports and policy papers. For more information please visit www.wbgu.de.

The Council Members

Prof Hans Joachim Schellnhuber CBE (chair)

Director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, external professor at the Santa Fe

Institute and chair of the Governing Board of the Climate-KIC of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology

Prof Dirk Messner (vice chair)

Director of the German Development Institute, Bonn and Co-Director of the Center for Advanced Studies on Global Cooperation Research, University Duisburg-Essen

Prof Claus Leggewie

Director of the Institute for Advanced Study in the Humanities, Essen, Institute for Advanced Study of the University Alliance Metropolis Ruhr and Co-Director of the Center for Advanced Studies on Global Coope- ration Research, University Duisburg-Essen

Prof Reinhold Leinfelder

Professor at the Institute of Geological Sciences, Free University Berlin, focus on geobiology, biodiversity, anthropocene science and science communication

Prof Nebojsa Nakicenovic

Professor of Energy Economics, Vienna University of Technology and Deputy Director, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), Laxenburg, Austria

Prof Stefan Rahmstorf

Professor of Physics of the Oceans, Potsdam University and head of the Climate System department at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research

Prof Sabine Schlacke

Professor of Public Law, specializing German, European and International Environmental and Administrative Law, Bremen University

Prof Jürgen Schmid †

Director of the Fraunhofer Institute for Wind Energy and Energy System Technology (IWES), Kassel

Prof Renate Schubert

Professor for Economics at the Swiss Federal Institute for Technology and director of the Institute for Environmental Decisions, ETH Zurich (Switzerland)

(5)

Governing the Marine Heritage

World in Transition

(6)

IV

Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek

The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie;

detailed bibliographic data are available in the Internet at http://dnb.d-nb.de.

ISBN 978-3-936191-40-0

Translation: Bob Culverhouse, Berlin

The R&D project that generated this report was conducted on behalf of the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research and the Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety under grant number 01RIO708A2. Responsibility for the content of this publication rests with the author.

Design: WERNERWERKE GbR, Berlin

Cover photo: © Doreen Wild (www.mobilefotografie.net) Production: WBGU

Typesetting: WBGU

Printing and binding: AZ Druck und Datentechnik GmbH

WBGU used certified eco-friendly paper for this publication.

WBGU Secretariat Luisenstraße 46 D-10117 Berlin Germany

Phone.: +49 30 263948 0 Email: wbgu@wbgu.de Web: www.wbgu.de Copy deadline: 28.02.2013

(7)

V This report would not have been possible without

the excellent scientific and editorial work carried out by the WBGU office and the remarkable commitment of the scientific staff to the Council Members.

Scientific Staff at the Secretariat Dr Inge Paulini

(Secretary-General) Dr Carsten Loose

(Deputy Secretary-General) Dr Karin Boschert

(until 30.4.2012) Dr Rüdiger Haum Dr Benno Pilardeaux (Media and Public Relations) Rasmus Relotius, MPP (1.6.2012 until 31.5.2013) Dr Astrid Schulz

Dr Birgit Soete

Administration, Editorial Work and Secretariat Vesna Karic-Fazlic (Accountant)

Mario Rinn, B Sc (System Administration and Graphics)

Martina Schneider-Kremer, M A (Editorial Work and Typesetting)

Margot Weiß (Secretariat)

Scientific Staff to the Council Members Dipl-Volksw Julia E. Blasch (Institute for Environ- mental Decisions, ETH Zurich, Switzerland) Dipl-Kfm Sebastian Busch (Vienna University of Technology, Energy Economics Group)

Hannes Hotz, MSc (German Development Institute, DIE, Bonn; until 31.10.2012)

Dipl-Pol Jan-Hendrik Kamlage (Institute for Advanced Study in the Humanities, KWI, Essen;

since 1.9.2012)

Dr Daniel Klingenfeld (Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, PIK; until 31.5.2012) Dipl-Soz Silvia Kodeih (Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, PIK)

Dr Susanna Much (Bremen University, Research Centre for European Environmental Law;

until 31.5.2011)

Dr Carsten Pape (Fraunhofer Institute for Wind Energy and Energy System Technology, IWES, Kassel) Alex ander Schülke, M Sc, MPP

(Museum für Naturkunde, Berlin; Institute for Biology at the Humboldt University Berlin;

until 29.2.2012)

Verena Seemann, LLM (Bremen University, Research Centre for European Environmental Law; 1.6.2011 until 31.5.2012)

Olivia Serdeczny, M A

(Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, PIK) Ass iur Michael Stadermann (Bremen University, Research Centre for European Environmental Law;

since 1.6.2012)

Dr Bernd Sommer (Institute for Advanced Study in the Humanities, KWI, Essen; until 31.8.2012)

Council Staff

(8)

VI

The WBGU would like to thank the external contribu- tors for their valuable input and assistance. Specifically, the following commissioned expert studies, which are available on the WBGU website, were integrated into this report:

> Prof Bela H. Buck and Dr Gesche Krause (SeaKult, Bremerhaven): Short Expertise on the Potential Com- bination of Aquaculture with Marine-Based Renew- able Energy Systems, 2012.

> Dr Till Markus (University Bremen, Research Centre for European Environmental Law): Die EU-Fischereihandels politik: Analyse und Handlungs- bedarf, 2012.

> Prof Rüdiger Wolfrum and Johannes Fuchs (Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law, Heidelberg and University Kiel):

Ocean Governance und das Seerechtsüberein kommen der Vereinten Nationen, 2011.

The WBGU received valuable suggestions at hearings of experts conducted during its regular meetings:

Prof Boris Worm (Dalhousie University, Canada);

Prof Bela H. Buck (Alfred Wegener-Institute Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research – AWI, Bremer- haven); Poul Degnbol (The International Council for the Exploration of the Sea – ICES, Copenhagen).

Furthermore, the WBGU wishes to thank all those who provided valuable support through discussions, comments, contributions, advice, research, and peer reviews for this report:

Dipl-Phys Jochen Bard (Fraunhofer IWES, Kassel); Prof Antje Boetius (Alfred Wegener Institute Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research – AWI, Bremerhaven); Prof Bela H. Buck (Alfred Wege- ner Institute Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research – AWI, Bremerhaven); Ass jur LLM Miriam Dross (The German Advisory Council on the Environ- ment – SRU, Berlin); Dr Rainer Froese (Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research – GEOMAR; Kiel); Prof Rüdiger Gerdes (Alfred Wegener Institute Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research – AWI – Sea Ice Physics, Bremerhaven); Dr Kristin Gunnarsdóttir von Kistowski (The Pew Charitable Trusts, USA); Dorothée Herr (IUCN, Marine Programme Officer, Global Marine and Polar Programme, Berlin); Dr Christoph Humrich (Assistant Professor for International Relations, University Gro- ningen; Research Assistant at the Hessische Stiftung Friedens- und Konfliktforschung – Internationale Organ-

isationen und Völkerrecht, Frankfurt/M.); Dr Inge Kaul (Global Policy Studies, Berlin); Markus Knigge (The Pew Charitable Trusts, European Marine Programme, USA); PhD John Roald Isaksen (Norwegian Institute of Food, Fishery and Aquaculture – Nofima, Tromsø);

Dr Gesche Krause (Alfred Wegener Institute Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research – AWI – Earth System Knowledge Platform, Bremerhaven); Dr Birgit Lode (German Institute for International and Security Affairs – SWP, Berlin); Francisco J. Marí (‘Brot für die Welt’ – Protestant Centre for Development and Social Service, Berlin); Dr Till Markus (University Bremen, Research Centre for European Environmental Law);

Prof Nele Matz-Lück (University Kiel, Faculty of Law);

Dr Juliane Müller (Alfred Wegener- Institute Helm- holtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research – AWI, Bremerhaven); Dr Markus Salomon (The German Advi- sory Council on the Environment – SRU, Berlin); Judith Schett, BSc (Vienna University of Technology); Prof Boris Worm ( Dalhousie University, Canada).

We thank the staff of the Federal Environment Agency (UBA) for an internal consultation in Berlin:

Director and Professor Ulrich Claussen, Hans-Peter Damian and Wulf Hülsmann.

Thanks are also due to the representatives of the German Marine Research Consortium (KDM), who held a lively discussion with the WBGU on key research issues on ocean management, resource exploitation, and ocean conservation:

Prof Gerhard Bohrmann ( University Bremen); Dr Gerd Kraus (The Johann Heinrich von Thünen Institute, Federal Research Institute for Rural Areas, Forestry and Fisheries, Hamburg); Prof Karin Lochte ( Alfred Wege- ner Institute Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research – AWI, Bremerhaven); Prof Harry W. Palm ( University Rostock); Prof Carsten Schulz (University Kiel, Büsum); Prof Klaus Wallmann ( Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research – GEOMAR, Kiel); Prof Gerold Wefer (MARUM, University Bremen); Prof Hildegard Westphal (Leibniz Center for Tropical Marine Ecology – ZMT, Bremen).

The WBGU would moreover like to thank MinDir Dr Karl Eugen Huthmacher (head of department) and MinR Karl Wollin (head of section) of the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF), Bonn, for their partici- pation in the above discussion with the KDM.

Acknowledgments

(9)

VII

Boxes

(17)

XV Box 8.1-1 Research recommendations relating to the ICSU Grand Challenges . . . 299

Box 8.1-2 Structural challenges to marine research . . . 300 Box 8.2-1 Research as a ‘laboratory of the future’ – the Anthropocene and global ocean

governance . . . 304 Box 8.4-1 Stronger institutionalization of interdisciplinary marine research . . . 319

(18)

XVI

Tables

Table 1.1-1 Countries and territories with the largest owned fleets . . . 30

Table 1.1-2 The ten biggest container-ship owners (by nationality) . . . 31

Table 1.2-1 Coastal ecosystems and the carbon cycle . . . 39

Table 4.1-1 Examples of instruments used to monitor fishing activities . . . 132

Table 4.2-1 Global aquaculture production . . . 154

Table 4.2-2 The world’s top ten aquaculture producers in 2010 . . . 157

Table 4.3-1 Share of fishmeal in industrially produced feed for several fish species and species groups . . . 174

Table 5.1-1 Global fossil reserves and resources . . . 191

Table 5.1-2 Production costs of oil . . . 202

Table 5.1-3 Cost estimates of geological carbon dioxide storage in the seabed . . . 203

Table 5.1-4 Current and projected gas consumption . . . 204

Table 5.2-1 The potential for offshore wind energy . . . 213

Table 5.4-1 Offshore wind energy: Innovation potential in the areas of resource assessment, installations and the value chain . . . 239

Table 7.3-1 Compilation of the cost estimates . . . 269

(19)

XVII

Figures

Figure 1 Status quo of ocean governance . . . .6

Figure 2 Vision for a future system of ocean governance . . . .7

Figure 1.1-1 Average density of global shipping traffic . . . 28

Figure 1.1-2 International seaborne trade . . . 29

Figure 1.1-3 Global production of plastics . . . 33

Figure 1.2-1 PCBs found in marine organisms (fish and seafood) . . . 41

Figure 1.2-2 Evolution of the global near-surface ocean temperatures . . . 42

Figure 1.2-3 Area of Arctic sea ice in September . . . 44

Figure 1.2-4 Shipping routes and ice cover in the Arctic . . . 44

Figure 1.2-5 Global distribution of dead zones caused by eutrophication and specific fertilizer use . . . 46

Figure 1.2-6 Regions that are particularly vulnerable to stress factors caused by anthropogenic CO₂ emissions such as ocean warming, ocean acidification and deoxygenation . . . 47

Figure 1.2-7 Rise in the global sea level since 1993 as measured by satellite . . . 48

Figure 1.2-8 Cumulative impact of human activity on the oceans . . . 49

Figure 3.2-1 Sequence of marine zones under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) . . . 73

Figure 3.2-2 The International Seabed Authority . . . 77

Figure 4.1-1 World marine fisheries production . . . 110

Figure 4.1-2 Development of global marine fish stocks . . . 111

Figure 4.1-3 Overall effectiveness of fisheries management of the world’s EEZs . . . 111

Figure 4.1-4 Regional breakdown of marine fishery yields between 2000 and 2007 . . . 113

Figure 4.1-5 Contribution of fish to animal protein supply . . . 115

Figure 4.1-6 Comparison of industrial marine fisheries and small-scale fisheries . . . 119

Figure 4.1-7 Relocation of fishing activities from industrialized nations to African countries . . . . 121

Figure 4.1-8 Impacts of increasing exploitation rates on catch volumes and fish stocks . . . 124

Figure 4.1-9 Cartographic depiction of the EEZs in which catch shares are currently used for fisheries . . . 127

Figure 4.1-10 Global observations of blast and poison fishing . . . 131

Figure 4.1-11 Different types of stocks relevant to the high seas . . . 137

Figure 4.1-12 Regional fisheries management organizations (RFMOs) of relevance to the high seas . . . 141

Figure 4.2-1 World aquaculture production and trends . . . 156

Figure 4.2-2 Mean production quantities from coastal aquaculture systems in different countries . . . 158

Figure 4.2-3 Norwegian salmon farming: use of antibiotics and salmon production . . . 161

Figure 4.3-1 Actual and predicted reduction in fishmeal use relative to the global production of compound aquaculture feed . . . 172

Figure 4.4-1 Absolute change in potential catch sizes under the A1B climate scenario . . . 176

Figure 4.4-2 Vulnerability of national economies to potential climate change impacts on fisheries . . . 177

(20)

XVIII

Figure 4.4-3 Projections on atmospheric CO₂ concentration and the surface global mean pH

difference for a range of IPCC emission scenarios . . . 179

Figure 4.4-4 Accumulated number through time of coastal sites where hypoxia has been reported . . . 180

Figure 4.4-5 The flow chart shows the direct causes of ocean acidification, the impacts on ocean chemistry, marine ecosystems and society . . . 184

Figure 5.1-1 Onshore and offshore distribution of reserves of conventional mineral oil in 2007 by region . . . 190

Figure 5.1-2 Size of methane hydrate deposits by deposit type . . . 193

Figure 5.1-3 National onshore and offshore oil and gas reserves and their production in the Arctic . . . 195

Figure 5.1-4 Different offshore extraction methods for different water depths and types of oil rig . . . 196

Figure 5.1-5 Geological locations for storing carbon dioxide under the seabed . . . 201

Figure 5.1-6 Estimate of 2008 production costs for the global oil supply with conventional and unconventional reserves and resources . . . 202

Figure 5.1-7 Transport costs of mineral oil and natural gas, depending on the distance and the type of transport (ship, pipeline) . . . 203

Figure 5.2-1 Various anchoring systems for offshore wind turbines and their costs, depending on the water depth . . . 206

Figure 5.2-2 Development of the number of installed offshore wind turbines and their cumulated capacity in Europe . . . 207

Figure 5.2-3 Different technologies of marine-energy generation and their level of development . . . 208

Figure 5.2-4 Worldwide distribution of the half-daily main moon tide M2 . . . 209

Figure 5.2-5 Ocean-current power plant (SeaGen) . . . 210

Figure 5.2-6 Global distribution of average ocean-temperature differences between the near surface and a depth of 1,000 m . . . 211

Figure 5.2-7 Different levels of environmental effects of marine renewable-energy generation . . 216

Figure 5.2-8 Use of a large bubble curtain to reduce noise emissions during pile-driving work to anchor an offshore wind turbine . . . 218

Figure 5.2-9 Diagram of electromagnetic fields around undersea cables . . . 219

Figure 5.2-10 Westward-oriented movements of marine birds after a wind farm has started operations . . . 220

Figure 5.2-11 Schematic diagram showing the possible design of an offshore grid . . . 223

Figure 5.2-12 Schematic diagram of a deep-sea pumped-storage power plant . . . 224

Figure 5.3-1 Schematic diagram of the status quo of fossil offshore energy generation and integration into the onshore energy system . . . 228

Figure 5.3-2 Vision of an integrated, sea-based supply of electrical energy . . . 229

Figure 7.2-1 Status quo of ocean governance . . . 254

Figure 7.2-2 Vision for a future system of ocean governance . . . 255

Figure 7.3-1 Maritime jurisdiction and boundaries in the Arctic region . . . 266

(21)

XIX

Acronyms and Abbreviations

ABNJ Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction

ACCOBAMS Agreement on the Conservation of Cetaceans of the Black Sea, Mediterranean Sea and Contiguous Atlantic Area

AEPS Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy ALLFISH The Alliance for Responsible Fisheries

AMAP Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (UNEP) AOSIS Alliance of Small Island States

ASC Aquaculture Stewardship Council (WWF, IDH)

ASCOBANS Agreement on the Conservation of Small Cetaceans of the Baltic and North Seas (CMS) AWTS Advanced Wastewater Treatment Systems

BBNJ Biological Diversity Beyond Areas of National Jurisdiction (UNGA) BMBF Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung

Federal Ministry of Education and Research, Germany

BMELV Bundesministerium für Ernährung, Landwirtschaft und Verbraucherschutz Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection, Germany BMP Best Management Practices

BMU Bundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz und Reaktorsicherheit

Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety, Germany BMVBS Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Bau und Stadtentwicklung

Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Development, Germany BMZ Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung

Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development, Germany BSAP Baltic Sea Action Plan (HELCOM, EU)

BSH Bundesamt für Seeschifffahrt und Hydrographie Federal Maritime and Hydrographic Agency, Germany

C Carbon

CBD Convention on Biological Diversity

CBM Community-Based Management

CCAMLR Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources CCS Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage

CCSBT Commission for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna CDM Clean Development Mechanism (Kyoto Protocol, UNFCCC) CFP Common Fisheries Policy (EU)

CGIAR Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research CH₄ Methane (main component of natural gas)

CITES Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (UN) CMS The Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals,

also: Bonn Convention (UNEP)

CNG Compressed Natural Gas

CoC FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries COFI Committee on Fisheries (FAO)

COP Conference of the Parties

(22)

XX

CO₂ Carbon dioxide

CtL Coal-to-Liquid

DDT Dichlordiphenyltrichlorethan (insecticide)

DG Devco Directorate-General Development and Cooperation (EU) DG Mare Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries (EU) DOALOS Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea (UN) EASAC European Academies Science Advisory Council

EBSAs Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Areas (CBD) ECSC European Coal and Steel Community (Coal and Steel Union) EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone

EFF European Fisheries Fund (EU)

EIA Energy Information Administration (USA) EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EJ Exajoule (10¹⁸ Joule)

EOR Enhanced Oil Recovery

EPA Environmental Protection Agency (USA)

ERICA Environmental Risk from Ionising Contaminants: Assessment and Management

EU European Union

EWEA The European Wind Energy Association

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

FAOSTAT Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Statistics Division FCR Feed Convertion Ratio

FFH Fauna-Flora-Habitat-Richtlinie Habitats Directive, EU

FONA Rahmenprogramm Forschung für nachhaltige Entwicklung Framework Programme Research for Sustainability, BMBF

FOS Friend of the Sea

FPAs Fisheries Partnership Agreements (EU) FSA Fish Stocks Agreement (UN)

GAA Global Aquaculture Alliance

GAPI Global Aquaculture Performance Index GATT General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade GDP Gross Domestic Product

GEA Global Energy Assessment

GEF Global Environment Facility (UNDP, UNEP, World Bank) GFCM General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean GAA Global Aquaculture Alliance

GIZ Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit German Society for International Cooperation

GLOMAR Global Change in the Marine Realm (Bremen International Graduate School for Marine Sciences)

GOOS Global Ocean Observing System GPS Global Positioning System Gt Gigatonnes (10⁹ t, Mrd. t)

GtL Gas to Liquids

GW Gigawatts (10⁹ W, Mrd. W)

HELCOM Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission, also: Helsinki Commission HEPCA Hurghada Environmental Protection and Conservation Association

HFO Heavy Fuel Oil

HVDC High-Voltage Direct Current Electric Power Transmission System

IAASTD International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development

IATTC Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission

ICCAT International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas

(23)

XXI ICSEAF International Commission for the South East Atlantic Fisheries

ICSID International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (FAO) ICZM Integrated Coastal Zone Management

IDH Dutch Sustainable Trade Initiative IEA International Energy Agency (OECD) IMTA Integrated Multi-Trophic Aquaculture IMO International Maritime Organization (UN)

IOC Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (UNESCO) IODE International Oceanographic Data and Information Exchange (IOC) IOTC Indian Ocean Tuna Commission

IPBES Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (UN) IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (WMO, UNEP)

IRENA International Renewable Energy Agency ISA-Virus Infectious Salmon Anaemia Virus

ISA International Seabed Authority (UNCLOS) ISSC International Social Science Council

ITLOS International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) ITQs Individual Transferable Quotas

IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature, also: World Conservation Union IUU Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing

JCOMM Joint Technical Commission for Oceanography and Marine Meteorology (IOC)

KfW KfW Bank Group (Germany)

KRAV Kontrollföreningen för Alternativ Odling (Ecolabel, Sweden) LCA Life-Cycle Assessment

LIFDC Low-Income Food-Deficit Countries (FAO, WFP) LIFE Low-Impact, Fuel-Efficient Fishing (FAO)

LNG Liquid Natural Gas

MARPOL International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (IMO) MCEB Marine and Coastal Ecosystems Branch (UNEP)

MCS Monitoring, Control and Surveillance MDG Millennium Development Goals (UN)

MFMR Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources (Namibia) MMSY Maximum Multispecies Sustainable Yield

MPAs Marine Protected Areas MSC Marine Stewardship Council MSD Marine Sanitation Devices

MSFD European Marine Strategy Framework Directive MSY Maximum Sustainable Yield

MW Megawatts (10⁶ W, Mio. W)

N Nitrogen

NAFO Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NatMIRC Ministry’s National Marine Information and Research Centre (Namibia) NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organization

NEAFC North East Atlantic Fisheries Commission NGO Non-Governmental Organization

NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NPFC North Pacific Fisheries Commission

NRC National Research Council (USA) NTC Nutrient Trading Credits

NTZ No-Take Zone

N₂O Nitrous Oxide, laughing gas

OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

OPRC International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Co-operation (IMO)

(24)

XXII

ORECCA Offshore Renewable Energy Conversion Platform Coordination Action (EU)

OSPAR Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic OSS Offshore Site Selection for a Sustainable and Multi-Functional Use of Marine Areas in

Heavily Utilized Seas with the North Sea as an Example (BMELV) OTEC Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion

OWC Oscillating Water Column

P Phosphorus

PCBs Polychlorinated biphenyls PES Payments for Ecosystem Services PFCs Polyfluorinated Compounds Pg Petagramms (10¹⁵ g, Gt) POPs Persistent Organic Pollutants PRO Pressure Retarded Osmosis

PROFISH The Global Program for Fisheries (World Bank) PSMA Port State Measures Agreement (FAO) PSSA Particularly Sensitive Sea Area (IMO) RAS Recirculating Aquaculture Systems R&D Research and Development

REDD Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Developing Countries (UNFCCC)

RFMO Regional Fisheries Management Organizations (UN)

RMMO Regional Marine Management Organizations (WBGU proposal) RSP Regional Seas Programme (UNEP)

SCO Single Cell Oils

SEAFO South East Atlantic Fisheries Organisation SIDS Small Island Developing States

SIOFA South Indian Ocean Fisheries Agreement

SOLAS International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (UN) SPRFMO South Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Organisation SRU Sachverständigenrat für Umweltfragen

German Advisory Council on the Environment SUP Strategische Umweltprüfung

TAC Total Allowable Catch TEU Twenty feet Equivalent Unit

TFEU Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union TTS Temporary Threshold Shift

TURFs Territorial Use Rights in Fisheries

TWh Terawatt hour

UN United Nations

UNCED United Nations Conference on Environment and Development UNCLOS United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea

UNCSD United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development UNDP United Nations Development Programme

UNEP United Nations Environment Programme

UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change UNGA United Nations General Assembly

UNICPOLOS United Nations Open-ended Informal Consultative Process on Oceans and the Law of the Sea

VCLT Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties

VECTORS Vectors of Change in Ocean and Seas Marine Life (EU Project) VME Vulnerable Marine Ecosystems (FAO)

VMS Vessel Monitoring System

WAVES Wealth Accounting and Valuation of Ecosystem Services (World Bank)

(25)

XXIII WBGU Wissenschaftlicher Beirat der Bundesregierung Globale Umweltveränderungen

German Advisory Council on Global Change WCD World Commission on Dams

WCMC World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP) WCPFC Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission

WFD Water Framework Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council WMO World Meteorological Organization (UN)

WOO World Oceans Organization (WBGU recommendation) WSSD World Summit on Sustainable Development

WTO World Trade Organization WWF World Wide Fund for Nature

(26)

(27)

1 Rethinking the oceans

For a long time humanity thought of the sea as some- thing inexhaustible. Given the sheer size of the oceans, it seemed inconceivable that humans might be able to exert any appreciable influence on the ‘blue continent’.

Changes caused by humans take place gradually, and even today they are very difficult to detect or measure. It therefore took a long time before it was discovered that the impact of humankind on the sea grew ever stronger as our society became more industrialized, finally reach- ing disturbing dimensions: marine fish stocks are in a poor state due to overfishing, so that almost two-thirds of stocks need time to recover; a fifth of the species-rich coral reefs have already disappeared and three-quarters are at risk; and not least, our societies use the oceans as a rubbish dump, threatening species and ecosystems with nutrients, toxins and plastic. Man-made hazards also include CO₂ emissions from fossil fuels, which are increasingly acidifying the oceans and thus endangering marine ecosystems. The acid concentration has already risen by almost a third since industrialization began, and this can have considerable effects on marine ecosystems and fishery.

Further examples of humanity’s huge impact include cases of large-scale pollution (like after the disastrous accident involving the Deepwater Horizon oil rig in April 2010), the sudden collapse in the early 1990s of the once seemingly inexhaustible stocks of cod off Newfound- land, and the rising temperature of the world’s oceans, which has already led to a dramatic reduction in the size of the Arctic sea ice. Overall, the oceans are in an unsat- isfactory state. This largely still undiscovered ‘blue continent’ is proving to be fragile, and in parts it is already irreversibly damaged. For these reasons, the oceans – their treasures and the threats they face – repeatedly find themselves at the focus of public attention.

Human influence grows with technological development. Today, new ways of using the seas promise great opportunities, but they can also put new pressure on the oceans and their ecosystems. Using the huge potential of

offshore wind power can contribute to a climate-friendly energy supply. On the other hand, unprecedented and unquantifiable risks are involved in the extraction of fossil oil and gas resources from the deep sea and the Arctic, and in mining methane hydrates – all of which are now becoming technically feasible. Similarly, the increasingly effective methods being used to detect and catch fish in remote areas of the high seas and at ever-greater depths are increasing pressure on fish stocks and marine ecosystems.

Humankind is dependent on the seas, their ecosystem services and their biological diversity – for food, energy generation, medical products, tourism, climate- regulating functions and the oceans’ absorption of CO₂. Against the background of humanity’s influence on the seas – which is already big today and could potentially become much larger in the future – and in view of the seas’ key importance for our societies, the WBGU asks how humanity might best go about the task of developing a sustainable stewardship of the oceans.

What condition will the oceans be in when we hand them over to coming generations in the middle of this century? Are we now going to take on responsibility and embark on the path of sustainability in the real world and not merely on paper? Much will depend on how marine conservation and ocean uses are organized, in other words on ocean governance. This report therefore focuses on the global, regional and national rules governing the conservation and sustainable use of the oceans, and above all on how we can ensure that these rules are implemented, which has been a huge problem in the past.

The WBGU puts the debate on the seas into the context of the ‘Great Transformation’ towards a low-carbon, sustainable society – the subject of its 2011 flagship report ‘A Social Contract for Sustainability’. Here, the WBGU argued that if greenhouse-gas emissions continued growing unabated, the Earth system would breach planetary guard rails within a few decades and enter domains that would be incompatible with sustainable development. The WBGU is convinced that nothing short of a new industrial revolution can prevent this.

Summary

(28)

2

For that to happen, the world will have to phase out not only fossil power generation, but also energy-intensive urbanization and emissions-intensive land use within the next few decades. The WBGU believes the seas should be fully incorporated into this transformation towards a low-carbon, sustainable society, in particular because of the irreversibility of some of the processes involved.

The oceans have the potential to give the transformation massive support; in turn, the transformation is necessary for the long-term conservation of the marine ecosystems.

The WBGU already focused on the seas in its 2006 special report ‘The Future Oceans – Warming Up, Rising High, Turning Sour’. In particular it took a closer look at the interface between greenhouse-gas emissions and the oceans (e. g. warming, sea-level rise, ocean acidification). In the present report the WBGU examines the examples of food and energy, which were already at the centre of its 2011 flagship report on transformation. It studies the sustainable management of fish stocks, sustainable aquaculture and the development of marine renewable-energy systems. It also shows how the oceans can make a substantial contribution to the transformation. At the same time, the seas and their ecosystems are threatened by the effects of climate change and ocean acidification.

The WBGU shows that the conservation and sustainable use of the oceans are urgently necessary, that a transformation towards low-carbon, sustainable development is possible including the oceans, and that it can yield substantial advantages worldwide for sustainable energy supplies and food security.

Guiding principles for future ocean governance Future ocean governance – i. e. how to develop a sustainable stewardship of the oceans – will play a crucial role if mankind is to reverse the present trend and manage the seas in a sustainable way. The current situ- ation is quite favourable as a starting point: the world already has a comprehensive international treaty – the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, or UNCLOS – which, together with accompanying agreements, functions as a kind of ‘constitution of the seas’.

However, UNCLOS was adopted in 1982, so that more recent insights are either absent altogether or given inadequate attention. In particular, it has meanwhile become increasingly accepted that humanity is a dom- inant factor in the entire Earth system. Humankind’s new shaping impact is expressed by the term ‘Anthro- pocene’ to describe our present era. In the Anthro- pocene, humanity should take on responsibility for the stewardship of the natural environment. This also applies to the seas.

The existing system of ocean governance has failed in several areas, not only because the intergovernmental regulations that have been agreed are insufficient, but primarily because these regulations are not reso- lutely implemented and misconduct is hardly ever pre- vented by sanctions.

Given these challenges, the WBGU recommends bas- ing our interaction with the oceans on three guiding principles. They are crucial for designing a regime for protecting and sustainably using the oceans which, in combination with ten criteria for sustainable ocean governance (Box 1), can ensure the long-term conservation of ecosystem services, biodiversity, and yields from the sustainable use of the sea. The starting point is a fundamental change of position and perspective applying the following three principles:

1. The oceans as a common heritage of mankind: The oceans are a global public good for which no clearly defined, sustainability-based conservation obliga- tions or rights of use exist. The idea that the oceans are a ‘common heritage of mankind’ was put for- ward as early as the 1960s by Arvid Pardo and Elisabeth Mann Borgese in the negotiations on UNCLOS. Although it was not enforced as a principle of international law for the oceans as a whole, it was codified for the mineral resources of the seabed beyond national jurisdiction (‘the Area’). In the WBGU’s view, it follows from the common heritage of mankind principle that global public goods must be accessible to all people and not be fully at the disposal of any state, individual or company. The conservation and sustainable use of the common heritage of mankind requires stewards, a management regime for conservation and sustainable use, and rules on sharing to ensure that the costs and benefits of the regime are distributed fairly. From a political perspective this results in a system of shared sovereignty between states which is based on a global regulatory framework geared towards sustainability goals. The marine public goods are to be conserved and their short-term exploitation and overexploitation avoided, thus also enabling future generations to use them.

2. The systemic approach: The sectoral approach, which is widely prevalent in ocean governance at present, is characterized by a narrow view of the different forms of use (e. g. fishing, oil extraction, conservation) and does not do justice to the systemic requirements of sustainability. The WBGU proposes the introduction of a systemic approach in order to integrate both the different levels of the system and the interactions between the natural and social systems that should be taken into account when dealing with the oceans. The approach com-

(29)

3 prises the following levels: First, marine ecosys-

tems are themselves complex systems which should be protected and used according to the ‘ecosystem approach’. The ecosystem approach was developed in the context of the Convention on Biological Diversity and is now widely recognized by governments. Second, the systemic approach should go far beyond the uses of the marine ecosystems and also take land/sea interactions into account – after all, many of the risks to the oceans are caused by economic activities on land. For example, industrial production can damage the oceans when plastic products or long-lived pollutants find their way into the sea via the atmosphere or rivers. Regulat- ing industrial production can therefore also contribute to marine conservation. Last, but not least, agriculture too is responsible for considerable input of nutrients and sediments into the oceans. Third, in the era of the Anthropocene, linkages in the Earth system should also be taken into account – e. g. CO₂ emissions from fossil fuels, which damage marine ecosystems both indirectly – via climate change by raising temperatures – and directly by acidifying the seawater. Fourth, on all these levels it must be taken into account that there are complex and dynamic interactions between society and nature.

The WBGU therefore regards the integrated obser- vation of these interactions between marine ecosystems and societies as indispensable to a comprehensive systemic approach.

3. The precautionary principle: According to the pre- cautionary principle, steps based on the state of the art in science and technology are taken to prevent possible environmental damage, even when there is no full scientific certainty on how likely it is that there actually will be any damage or how much it might cost. The application of the precautionary principle is particularly important in complex systems – to which marine ecosystems and their land/

sea interactions definitely belong – because their reactions to influences or disturbances are difficult to predict. It is therefore important to allow enough scope for decisions to be flexible and reversible.

Although the precautionary principle is reflected in many regulations and decisions on ocean governance, it is rarely strictly applied in practice.

Ways toward a future form of ocean governance The need for a radical turnaround in the use of the oceans is well known, as is what needs to change. And although this is already enshrined to some extent in the existing system of ocean governance, in practice

governments do not implement or follow the corre- sponding regulations strictly enough. Not least, there are loopholes in the existing international law of the sea. In this report, therefore, the WBGU has scrutinized UNCLOS from the perspective of the three guiding principles and ten criteria. The future system of ocean governance should not only correspond to these principles and criteria, it should also establish suitable mech- anisms for ensuring compliance with, and the enforce- ment of, the rules and for sanctioning misconduct.

The regulatory framework that needs to be observed is defined by shared responsibility for conserving the oceans according to the common heritage of mankind principle. The players should be able to move as freely and autonomously as possible within this framework.

Ultimately, however, all users need to fundamentally rethink the way they interact with the oceans at all levels of governance. Humanity must stop the way in which the seas are predominantly managed today, which is often geared to short-term profits. The focus should be on marine conservation for the benefit of present and future generations, including the conservation of bio diversity and marine ecosystem services.

The WBGU is convinced that profound changes in the governance of the oceans are necessary and appropriate in order to create a suitable institutional and political framework for a sustainable stewardship of the oceans.

However, resolute implementation of the proposed guiding principles would require major changes to UNCLOS.

In the WBGU’s view, such an initiative currently has little chance of implementation, because the gap between the changes in ocean governance that are necessary from the sustainability perspective and political feasibility seems too deep at present.

Against this background, the WBGU has decided to focus attention on two paths, each with a different ambi- tion and speed. First, the WBGU outlines the vision of a fundamental reform of the existing law of the sea – irrespective of the current chances of implementing it – offering orientation on how best to address the challenges of marine conservation and the sustainable use of the oceans. Second, the WBGU develops recommendations for action which link up with ongoing political processes, are easier to implement, and are therefore suitable as steps towards the vision without requiring a reform of UNCLOS.

As a basis for its vision of a reformed law of the sea, the WBGU recommends extending the common heritage of mankind principle as a binding guiding principle to cover all uses of all marine biological and mineral resources – but varying in specificity across the maritime zones seaward of the territorial sea (exclusive economic zone (EEZ), continental shelf, high seas and the Area). The vision also outlines the institutional design

Download: Full Text

or ld in T ra ns iti on – G ov er nin g t he M ar in e H er ita ge

Flagship Report

Governing the Marine Heritage

Governing the Marine Heritage

World in Transition

Governing the Marine Heritage

In memoriam Professor Jürgen Schmid

World in Transition

The Council Members

Prof Hans Joachim Schellnhuber CBE (chair)

Prof Dirk Messner (vice chair)

Prof Claus Leggewie

Prof Reinhold Leinfelder

Prof Nebojsa Nakicenovic

Prof Stefan Rahmstorf

Prof Sabine Schlacke

Prof Jürgen Schmid †

Prof Renate Schubert

Governing the Marine Heritage

World in Transition

Council Staff

Acknowledgments

Contents

Boxes

Tables

Figures

Acronyms and Abbreviations

Summary