Legitimacy of the Antarctic Treaty System: is it time for a reform?

Abstract

The Antarctic Treaty System (ATS) has governed the Antarctic for the last six decades ensuring it to be a place of peace and scientific cooperation. Like any institution, the ATS exists in order to solve collective action problems through coordination and the creation of norms. But how do we know if a particular institution is the right one to solve a specific problem or address issues regarding the governance of a region? And when is it time to replace or reform such an institution? To answer these questions, we need an account of institutional legitimacy. An assessment of the legitimacy of the ATS is necessary in order to determine whether it is worthy of being empowered through support, or if it is time to reform some aspects of it. Building on the account of legitimacy of global governance institutions proposed by Buchanan and Keohane, the paper assesses the legitimacy of the ATS and argues that it is time to reform some components of it. Specifically, the paper assesses the legitimacy of the ATS based on the following criteria: minimal moral acceptability; comparative benefit; institutional integrity; and accountability. The paper highlights the ATS' shortcomings based on these criteria and suggests reforms that will strengthen the legitimacy of the ATS

Turned 60, is the Antarctic treaty system in good health?

“…The question that drives this special issue is, accordingly, whether after six decades of existence the AT and its related instruments are in good enough health. A fully healthy international governance arrangement, in our view, should be efficient in fulfilling the goals it sets for itself and the goals that the international community expects it to fulfil; legitimate , in the sense of providing authoritative reasons for members to abide by its rules and for non‐members to respect them (for a detailed account, see Yermakova, 2021); and fair both in terms of procedure and outcome, by incorporating into the decision‐making process the opinions of all those who have a stake in the system, and by achieving results that are deemed equitable by them.…”

How the COVID-19 pandemic signaled the demise of Antarctic exceptionalism

“…Broad geopolitical factors relating to Antarctica, which, while already of concern ( 12 , 14 ), have accelerated during and since the pandemic. With Russia and Ukraine, both ATCPs, the invasion of Ukraine has affected activities in the Antarctic.…”

“…This required looking at broader geopolitical shifts, especially within the most influential Treaty Parties, and increasing protectionism within the Antarctic spheres of activity. This aligns with growing concern more generally about the condition of the ATS (12)(13)(14). For example, Mancilla and Jabour conclude with a prognosis that, "if not severely ill, the [Antarctic Treaty] system's chronic ailments-particularly laggardness-must be addressed if it is to respond satisfactorily to rapid social, political, environmental and economic changes on a global scale" (14).…”

“…These criticisms raise questions around shortcomings of the regime with respect to its integrity, accountability, moral acceptability, benefit sharing, and, ultimately, its legitimacy ( 12 , 38 , 39 ). The pandemic exacerbated these challenges, especially regarding the slowness to respond to issues such as climate change ( 8 ).…”

La relevancia del Derecho Antártico frente los desafíos regionales y el papel primordial de Argentina y Chile en su fortalecimiento.

“…Todos los continentes están representados en las RCTA, y aproximadamente dos tercios de la población humana mundial vive en un país que es parte del Tratado. lla, 2020;Yermakova, 2021). A pesar de que estos planteos no son nuevos y se lo creía superados, especialmente desde que la «cuestión de la Antártica» fue removida de la Agenda de la Asamblea General de la Organización de las Naciones Unidas (AGNU) en 2005 y Malasia, su principal impulsor, se uniera al Tratado Antártico en 2011, la internacionalización de la Antártica continúa teniendo relevancia no solo académica, sino que también práctica, especialmente para Argentina y Chile, dos Estados que han mantenido una postura constante a través de la historia con relación a este tema.…”