Arindam Basu*
Sharda Mandal**
Ananya Das***
On Tragedy of Commons, State Sovereignty and BBNJ Treaty: Reconnoitring for Harmony
Suggested citation:
Basu, A., Mandal, Sh., & Das, A. (2024). On Tragedy of Commons, State Sovereignty and BBNJ Treaty: Reconnoitring for Harmony. Lex Portus, 10(6), 18–36. https://doi.org/10.62821/lp10602
Published online: 17.12.2024
*Assistant Professor, Rajiv Gandhi School of Intellectual Property Law (IIT Kharagpur, West Bengal 721302, India)
**Rajiv Gandhi School of Intellectual Property Law (IIT Kharagpur, West Bengal 721302, India)
***Rajiv Gandhi School of Intellectual Property Law (IIT Kharagpur, West Bengal 721302, India)
ABSTRACT
Garrett Hardin’s ‘Tragedy of the Commons’ may be almost half a century old. But the centrality of the theory is still relevant for the environmental challenges associated to the management of global commons. In this article, we examine the newly adopted treaty for the conservation of marine biological diversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ) in the light of Hardin’s basic postulation that a tragedy eventually materializes following an indiscriminate use of resources freely available to all and used to pursue self-interests. Today, the problem transcends beyond self-seeking state actions and analogous cost-benefit inquiry. A deeper examination is absent largely from the analytical framework of commons management, leaving an important question unanswered – how far does the concept of state sovereignty hold the potential to alter the boundary of the legal framework on global commons, thinning the theoretical underpinnings of the ‘tragedy’ itself? This in effect reduces the transparency of choices and reduces the incentives of states to negotiate a strong global agreement for commons. Because the BBNJ Treaty is expected to upgrade the legal framework of the United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), it is desirable to compare the structural features of both. It is our argument that the BBNJ Treaty has failed to alter the boundary of state sovereignty or sovereign rights sufficiently to advance a novel solution towards the problems of high sea commons. The challenges that frustrated UNCLOS to cast a strong protective net over high seas, resurfaced and gridlocked BBNJ Treaty, too. As, conservation and management of common resources leaves narrow space for all nations irrespective of their positions in international politics, there is a need to revisit the pitch of negotiation to avoid any further ‘tragedy’ that already has turned up high seas a battleground for interest-negotiation.
Keywords: UNCLOS, the tragedy of commons, BBNJ treaty, areas beyond national jurisdiction, negotiations, the common heritage of mankind.
REFERENCES
Agreement 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, 2023. https://treaties.un.org/doc/Treaties/2023/06/20230620%2004-28%20PM/Ch_XXI_10.pdf
Anand, R. P. (1983). Origin and Development of the Law of the Sea: History of International Law Revisited. Brill.
Austin, J. (1832). The province of jurisprudence determined. Prometheus Books.
Axelrod, R. (1981). The emergence of cooperation among egoists. American Political Science Review, 75(2), 306–318.
Beaulac, S. (2003). The social power of Bodin’s ‘sovereignty’ and international law. Melbourne Journal of International Law, 4(1), 1–28.
Bekker, P. H. (1998). Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia), Judgment. American Journal of International Law, 92(2), 273–278.
Bodansky, D. (2023). Advisory Opinions on Climate Change: Some Preliminary Questions. RECIEL, 32(2), 185–192. https://doi.org/10.1111/reel.12497
Bodansky, D., & van Asselt, H. (2024). The art and craft of international environmental law. Oxford University Press.
Bodin, J. (2005). Jean Bodin on sovereignty. Standford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/bodin/
Churchill, R. R. (1975). The Fisheries Jurisdiction Cases: The Contribution of the International Court of Justice to the Debate on Coastal States’ Fisheries Rights. The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 24(1), 90–91.
Convention on Biological Diversity, 1993. https://www.cbd.int/convention/text
Convention on the Continental Shelf, 1958. https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/8_1_1958_continental_shelf.pdf
Convention on the High Seas, 1958. https://treaties.un.org/doc/Treaties/1963/01/19630103%2002-00%20AM/Ch_XXI_01_2_3_4_5p.pdf
De Carvalho, B., Leira, H., & Hobson, J. M. (2011). The big bangs of IR: The myths that your teachers still tell you about 1648 and 1919. Millennium, 39(3), 735–758.
Declaration of President Bedjaoui, 1996. https://www.icj-cij.org/index.php/node/141831
Fisheries Jurisdiction. Federal Republic of Germany v Iceland. https://www.icj-cij.org/case/56#:~:text=In%20Judgments%20delivered%20on%202,opposable%20to%20either%20the%20United
Fisheries Jurisdiction. United Kingdom v Iceland. https://www.icj-cij.org/case/55
Frischmann, B. M., Marciano, A., & Ramello, G. B. (2019). Retrospectives: Tragedy of the Commons after 50 years. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 33(4), 211–228. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.33.4.211
Goldsmith, J., & Levinson, D. (2009). Law for states: international law, constitutional law, public law. Harvard Law Review, 122(7), 1791.
Goldsmith, J. L., & Posner, E. A. (2005). The limits of international law. Oxford University Press.
Grotius, H. (1609). Mare Liberum.
Hardin, G. (1968). The Tragedy of the Commons. Science, 162, 1243–1248.
Hart, H. L. A., & Green, L. (2012). The concept of law. Oxford University Press.
Hobbes, T. (1904). Leviathan: Or the Matter, Forms Power of a Commonwealth, Ecclesiastical and Civil. Oxford University Press.
Holst, R. J. R. (2022). Change in the Law of the Sea: Context, Mechanisms, and Practice. Brill.
IISD Earth Negotiations Bulletin. (2023). Further resumed the 5th Session of the Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) on BBNJ. https://enb.iisd.org/marine-biodiversity-beyond-national-jurisdiction-bbnj-igc5-further-resumed/
Jaksic, I. (2006). Andrés Bello: Scholarship and nation-building in nineteenth-century Latin America. Cambridge University Press.
Kelsen, H. (1967). Pure Theory of Law. Translation from the Second (Enlarged and Revised) German. University of California Press.
Krasner, S. D. (1999). Sovereignty: organized hypocrisy. Princeton University Press.
Leung, H. (2024). The Extended Continental Shelf in Nicaragua v Colombia: Identifying a Customary Rule Based on CLCS Submissions? Ocean Development International law, 55(1–2), 207–208. https://doi.org/10.1080/00908320.2024.2366865
Maland, D. (1983). Europe in the seventeenth century (2nd ed.). Palgrave Macmillan.
Morgera, E. (2012). Bilateralism at the service of community interests? Non-judicial enforcement of global public goods in the context of global environmental law. European Journal of International Law, 23(3), 749.
Murray, J., & Payandeh, M. (2010). The concept of international law in the jurisprudence of HLA Hart. European Journal of International Law, 21(4), 967–995.
Nussbaum, A. (1964). A concise history of the law of nations. The Macmillan Company.
Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press.
Preliminary Draft of a World Constitution, 1948. https://www.lex.unict.it/sites/default/files/files/Crio/FogliLavoro/2018-1/FLADI_2018_1_5-Preliminary_Draft_impaginato.pdf
Question of the Delimitation of the Continental Shelf between Nicaragua and Colombia beyond 200 nautical miles from the Nicaraguan Coast (Nicaragua v Colombia). https://www.icj-cij.org/case/154
Raz, J. (1980). The concept of a legal system: an introduction to the theory of a legal system. Oxford University Press.
Rigaux, F. (1998). Hans Kelsen on international law. European Journal of International Law, 9(2), 327.
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, 1998. https://www.icc-cpi.int/sites/default/files/2024-05/Rome-Statute-eng.pdf
Runge, C. F. (1986). Common property and collective action in economic development. World Development, 14(5), 623–635.
Sadurski, W., Sevel, M., & Walton, K. (Eds.). (2019). Legitimacy: the state and beyond. Oxford University Press.
Schrijver, N. (2018). Managing the global commons: common good or common sink? In The UN and the Global South, 1945 and 2015. Routledge.
Snidal, D. (1985). Coordination versus prisoners’ dilemma: Implications for international cooperation and regimes. American Political Science Review, 79(4), 923–942.
Sorell, T., & Foisneau, L. (Eds.). (2004). Leviathan after 350 years. Clarendon Press.
Stavins, R. N. (2011). The problem of the commons: Still unsettled after 100 years. American Economic Review, 101(1), 81–108.
Stevenson, G. (1991). Common property economics. Cambridge University Press.
Strayer, J. R. (2005). On the medieval origins of the modern state. Princeton University Press.
Suganami, H. (2007). Understanding Sovereignty through Kelsen/Schmitt. Review of International Studies, 33(3), 518.
Symonides, J. (2018). Unresolved Issues and Emerging Challenges in the Law of the Sea. Prawo Morskie, XXXIV, 17–39. https://doi.org/10.24425/pm.2018.125828
Territorial and Maritime Dispute (Nicaragua v Colombia). Judgment. I.C.J. Reports 2012, 624. https://www.icj-cij.org/node/103212
United Nations Charter, 1945. https://treaties.un.org/doc/publication/ctc/uncharter.pdf
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, 1982. https://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/unclos_e.pdf
Wolff, R. P. (1990). The conflict between authority and autonomy. Basil Blackwell.
WWF. (2023). High Seas Treaty critical to achieving 30% global ocean protection goal. https://wwf.panda.org/wwf_news/?7704966/high-seas-treaty-2023/
