As a non-binding instrument/framework, and having a geographical coverage
where OSPAR, IMO and the International Convention of Atlantic Tunas operate, the
Sargasso Sea Alliance demonstrates the particular need and challenges to coordinate
with competent organizations.
71
2.1.4 Remaining Challenges/Gaps
In conclusion, despite the existence of regional initiatives with mandates that
intersect with the conservation and sustainable use of BBNJ, it is important to note
that most of these initiatives were established with a specific purpose and legal
mandate to regulate particular activities.
72 As such, the majority of them lack the
competence, capacity, or mandate to adopt measures to protect BBNJ and none of
them have a mandate to implement the cross sectoral and coordinated measures
needed for comprehensive protection.
73
The multiplication of regional initiatives has led to the increased fragmentation
and complexity of ABNJ governance, particularly regarding the establishment of
MPAs.
74 Consequently, despite a possible extension of their mandates in the future,
these initiatives cannot be solely in charge of the establishment and management of
MPAs.
75
The foregoing discussions on BBNJ have not only highlighted the role of regional
initiatives in the conservation of BBNJ through MPAs, but also identified a number
of important challenges.
76
Such challenges include the lack of an explicit multilateral legal basis to support
or facilitate MPA designation, the relationship between MPA management and the
principle of freedom of the HS, and the complexity of the jurisdictional regimes
governing ABNJ, in particular the HS and the OCS regimes.
77
71 Freestone and Bulger (2016), pp. 83–85; Rochette et al. (2014), p. 114.
72 Rochette et al. (2014), pp. 112–115; Wright et al. (2015), pp. 284–287; Scott (2012),
pp. 854–856.
73 Rochette et al. (2014), p. 112; Wright et al. (2015), pp. 283–284; Freestone and Bulger (2016),
pp. 80–85; Submission by the High Seas Alliance following the Second Session of the Preparatory
Committee on the Development of an International Legally Binding Instrument under the United
Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine
Biological Diversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction, 22 November 2016, p. 3.
74 Ibid.
75 Ibid.
76 Wright et al. (2015), pp. 284–286; Rochette et al. (2014), pp. 112–116.
77 Wright et al. (2015), pp. 284–286; Rochette et al. (2014), pp. 112–116; Scott (2012),
pp. 854–856.
432
I. Aguiar Branco
where OSPAR, IMO and the International Convention of Atlantic Tunas operate, the
Sargasso Sea Alliance demonstrates the particular need and challenges to coordinate
with competent organizations.
71
2.1.4 Remaining Challenges/Gaps
In conclusion, despite the existence of regional initiatives with mandates that
intersect with the conservation and sustainable use of BBNJ, it is important to note
that most of these initiatives were established with a specific purpose and legal
mandate to regulate particular activities.
72 As such, the majority of them lack the
competence, capacity, or mandate to adopt measures to protect BBNJ and none of
them have a mandate to implement the cross sectoral and coordinated measures
needed for comprehensive protection.
73
The multiplication of regional initiatives has led to the increased fragmentation
and complexity of ABNJ governance, particularly regarding the establishment of
MPAs.
74 Consequently, despite a possible extension of their mandates in the future,
these initiatives cannot be solely in charge of the establishment and management of
MPAs.
75
The foregoing discussions on BBNJ have not only highlighted the role of regional
initiatives in the conservation of BBNJ through MPAs, but also identified a number
of important challenges.
76
Such challenges include the lack of an explicit multilateral legal basis to support
or facilitate MPA designation, the relationship between MPA management and the
principle of freedom of the HS, and the complexity of the jurisdictional regimes
governing ABNJ, in particular the HS and the OCS regimes.
77
71 Freestone and Bulger (2016), pp. 83–85; Rochette et al. (2014), p. 114.
72 Rochette et al. (2014), pp. 112–115; Wright et al. (2015), pp. 284–287; Scott (2012),
pp. 854–856.
73 Rochette et al. (2014), p. 112; Wright et al. (2015), pp. 283–284; Freestone and Bulger (2016),
pp. 80–85; Submission by the High Seas Alliance following the Second Session of the Preparatory
Committee on the Development of an International Legally Binding Instrument under the United
Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine
Biological Diversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction, 22 November 2016, p. 3.
74 Ibid.
75 Ibid.
76 Wright et al. (2015), pp. 284–286; Rochette et al. (2014), pp. 112–116.
77 Wright et al. (2015), pp. 284–286; Rochette et al. (2014), pp. 112–116; Scott (2012),
pp. 854–856.
432
I. Aguiar Branco