What is clear, however, is that most contemporary regimes significantly limit or
even oppose commercial pursuit of marine mammals. This stems largely from the
fact that non-governmental organisations have successfully applied inside and
outside advocacy to influence decision-makers themselves and the public’s discourse on marine mammal and marine mammal hunting. Ultimately, of course, it
is the nation states that have changed their attitude towards the commercial hunt of
marine mammals over the course of the last few decades.
In conclusion, we have seen that international marine mammal law is inherently
diverse. It consists of a myriad of international past and present regimes with
different foci and institutional settings. To further understand the way marine
mammals are internationally protected, their hunt is internationally regulated and
to find more commonalities and differences between the different regimes, more
research is certainly necessary.
Questions and Research Tasks
• Discuss whether the concept of ‘international marine mammal law’ is
adequate.
• Think of more common elements as well as differences between the legal
regimes presented in this book.
• Are there specific trends that you can determine when considering the different
regimes?
• What are the interplays between the regimes that constitute international
marine mammal law and other spheres of international law?
References
Betzold C (2013) Business insiders and environmental outsiders? Advocacy strategies in international climate change negotiations. Int Group Adv 2–3:302–322
Epstein C (2008) The power of words in international relations. Birth of an anti-whaling discourse.
The MIT Press, Cambridge
Scopelliti M, Sellheim N (2019) Sustaining a conservationist agenda? NGO influence on Arctic
sealing, whaling and hydrocarbon regimes. In: Shibata A, Zou L, Sellheim N, Scopelliti M
(eds) Emerging legal orders in the Arctic. The role of non-Arctic actors. Routledge, Abingdon,
pp 91–106
Sellheim N (2016) The legal question of morality: seal hunting and the European moral standard.
Soc Legal Stud 25(2):141–161
Strand JR, Tuman JP (2012) Foreign aid and voting behavior in an international organization: the
case of Japan and the international whaling commission. FPA 8(4):409–430
Waters M, Rose N, Todd P (2009) The economics of polar bear trophy hunting in Canada. IFAW,
Yarmouth
Port.
https://www.zeit.de/wissen/umwelt/2013-03/trophy-hunting-ifaw.pdf.
Accessed 11 June 2019
WTO (1996) European Communities — Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products
(Hormones), DS26
188
8 The Characteristics of International Marine Mammal Law
even oppose commercial pursuit of marine mammals. This stems largely from the
fact that non-governmental organisations have successfully applied inside and
outside advocacy to influence decision-makers themselves and the public’s discourse on marine mammal and marine mammal hunting. Ultimately, of course, it
is the nation states that have changed their attitude towards the commercial hunt of
marine mammals over the course of the last few decades.
In conclusion, we have seen that international marine mammal law is inherently
diverse. It consists of a myriad of international past and present regimes with
different foci and institutional settings. To further understand the way marine
mammals are internationally protected, their hunt is internationally regulated and
to find more commonalities and differences between the different regimes, more
research is certainly necessary.
Questions and Research Tasks
• Discuss whether the concept of ‘international marine mammal law’ is
adequate.
• Think of more common elements as well as differences between the legal
regimes presented in this book.
• Are there specific trends that you can determine when considering the different
regimes?
• What are the interplays between the regimes that constitute international
marine mammal law and other spheres of international law?
References
Betzold C (2013) Business insiders and environmental outsiders? Advocacy strategies in international climate change negotiations. Int Group Adv 2–3:302–322
Epstein C (2008) The power of words in international relations. Birth of an anti-whaling discourse.
The MIT Press, Cambridge
Scopelliti M, Sellheim N (2019) Sustaining a conservationist agenda? NGO influence on Arctic
sealing, whaling and hydrocarbon regimes. In: Shibata A, Zou L, Sellheim N, Scopelliti M
(eds) Emerging legal orders in the Arctic. The role of non-Arctic actors. Routledge, Abingdon,
pp 91–106
Sellheim N (2016) The legal question of morality: seal hunting and the European moral standard.
Soc Legal Stud 25(2):141–161
Strand JR, Tuman JP (2012) Foreign aid and voting behavior in an international organization: the
case of Japan and the international whaling commission. FPA 8(4):409–430
Waters M, Rose N, Todd P (2009) The economics of polar bear trophy hunting in Canada. IFAW,
Yarmouth
Port.
https://www.zeit.de/wissen/umwelt/2013-03/trophy-hunting-ifaw.pdf.
Accessed 11 June 2019
WTO (1996) European Communities — Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products
(Hormones), DS26
188
8 The Characteristics of International Marine Mammal Law