Origin and Limitations of the Antarctic Treaty

Elzinga, Aant

doi:10.5479/si.9781935623069.59

Cited by 15 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The representations of Antarctica as an undifferentiated totality have ‘privileged science, an endeavor that claims for itself universality of method and knowledge’ (Antonello, 2016, p. 188). Crucial is Article IX of the Antarctic Treaty, which established that before any country could become a Consultative Party to the Treaty (i.e., with decision‐making power), it had to demonstrate a substantial scientific interest in the Southern continent (see Elzinga, 2011; Roberts, 2023). This led to ‘many poorer nations being excluded on account of not being able to afford the costs of Antarctic research’ (Howkins, 2016, p. 142).…”

Section: The Antarctic Treaty System Policies and Practicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Antarctic conservation policies and practices: Towards a more inclusive and sustainable future

Senatore

2023

Geographical Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contemporary archaeology brings a unique perspective from which to critically think about Antarctic Treaty System conservation policies and practices concerning material things. The article begins by highlighting how they have relied on several underlying assumptions, which we summarise as the "wilderness" and "heritage" principles. It then discusses how these policies and practices have often led to nonsustainable or noninclusive outcomes. In particular, the application of the wilderness and heritage principles to environmental conservation has, on the one hand, reinforced the dominant images and narratives of Antarctica, selectively neglecting and erasing diverse human and nonhuman stories, and on the other hand, led to human-thing entanglements that are currently difficult to overcome. The paper conclusions encourage readers to envision more inclusive and sustainable conservation models by challenging the assumptions underlying current policies and practices. Acknowledgments:The author wishes to thank Alejandra Mancilla and two anonymous referees for their constructive and helpful comments. Funding information: The author's participation in the Workshop "Political Philosophy Looks to Antarctica. On its 60 th birthday, is the Antarctic Treaty in good health?" at the University of Oslo, on which this paper is based, was supported by the Research Council of Norway under project number 267692, "Political Philosophy Looks to Antarctica".This article has been accepted for publication and undergone full peer review but has not been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process which may lead to differences between this version and the Version of Record. Please cite this article as

show abstract

Section: The Antarctic Treaty System Policies and Practicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Antarctic conservation policies and practices: Towards a more inclusive and sustainable future

Senatore

2023

Geographical Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Since doing science is an entry ticket into the ATS CPs club, and therefore a currency of the decision-making authority, he argues that states sometimes pursue research projects that may be far less than optimal from a scientific point of view. 29 Antarctic expert Anne-Marie Brady also notes that some states prioritise investments that maintain their presence in the region rather than high-level scientific research. 30 The reality is that scientists are not always free to follow their scientific agendas and that the freedom to conduct scientific investigations is in practice often limited by state interests.…”

Section: Dual Purpose Of Sciencementioning

confidence: 99%

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

Yermakova

2021

The Polar Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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

show abstract

“…The ATS demanded "substantial scientific research activity" (Art. IX §2) for the acquisition of consultative status, which contradicted science as a tool of inclusion and allowed for the continuity of post-colonial domination (Elzinga, 2009;Dodds, 2017) 7 . This monopoly of power and resistance to relinquish the status quo could have affected the durability and effectiveness of the regime if it had been maintained in the following phases (Puchala and Hopkins, 1983).…”

Section: Brazil´s Accession To the Atsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tripartite periodization of the Antarctic Treaty System from a systemic perspective

Aguiar¹

2019

RRII

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 1959, twelve countries with a strong record of interest in Antarctica signed a Treaty allowing accessibility to all signatories wishing to conduct peaceful scientific research. The Antarctic Treaty established science and international cooperation as its cornerstones but raised controversies because of its hosting of sovereignty claims over Antarctic territory. This research aims to fill a gap in literature proposing a strict periodization of the Antarctic Treaty System under a systemic perspective. The paper also examines Brazil's accession into the Treaty. Using as indicators of legitimacy the increase in membership and the transparency of decision-making processes, the author argues that the Antarctic Treaty System has become recognized as a legitimate international regime.

show abstract

Origin and Limitations of the Antarctic Treaty

Cited by 15 publications

References 1 publication

Antarctic conservation policies and practices: Towards a more inclusive and sustainable future

Antarctic conservation policies and practices: Towards a more inclusive and sustainable future

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

Tripartite periodization of the Antarctic Treaty System from a systemic perspective

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About