Antarctica – A Wilderness Continent for Science: The ‘Public’s Dream’ as a Mission Impossible?

The Consultative Parties to the Antarctic Treaty have frequently declared their collective ambition to manage Antarctica “in the interest of all mankind.” However, the concrete implications of these declarations are not clear. As part of an international research project, the authors asked people fr...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:The Yearbook of Polar Law Online
Main Authors: Bastmeijer, Kees, Tin, Tina
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:unknown
Published: Brill 2014
Subjects:
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/1876-8814_020
https://brill.com/view/journals/yplo/6/1/article-p559_20.xml
https://data.brill.com/files/journals/22116427_006_01_s020_text.pdf
id crbrillap:10.1163/1876-8814_020
record_format openpolar
spelling crbrillap:10.1163/1876-8814_020 2023-07-02T03:30:42+02:00 Antarctica – A Wilderness Continent for Science: The ‘Public’s Dream’ as a Mission Impossible? Bastmeijer, Kees Tin, Tina 2014 http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/1876-8814_020 https://brill.com/view/journals/yplo/6/1/article-p559_20.xml https://data.brill.com/files/journals/22116427_006_01_s020_text.pdf unknown Brill The Yearbook of Polar Law Online volume 6, issue 1, page 559-597 ISSN 1876-8814 2211-6427 journal-article 2014 crbrillap https://doi.org/10.1163/1876-8814_020 2023-06-09T14:44:39Z The Consultative Parties to the Antarctic Treaty have frequently declared their collective ambition to manage Antarctica “in the interest of all mankind.” However, the concrete implications of these declarations are not clear. As part of an international research project, the authors asked people from different parts of the world to respond to a questionnaire about Antarctica, its values, and the way it should be managed. Notwithstanding differences in respondents’ nationalities, ages and the time of data collection, our results indicate that a significant proportion of the public values Antarctica both as a scientific laboratory and as one of the world’s last wildernesses. Is this ‘public’s dream’ of co-existence of science and wilderness a Mission Impossible? In this article, we contend that: 1) in theory, it is a Possible Mission that would connect well with the recognition of science and wilderness in the Antarctic Treaty System (ATS) instruments; 2) in practice, science in Antarctica has gradual and cumulative impacts on all three main wilderness qualities of Antarctica (absence of permanent infrastructure, naturalness and large size); 3) currently, the co-existence of science and wilderness is not an important consideration in the management of human activities in Antarctica; and 4) in the future, unless a proactive and concerted effort is taken by the Consultative Parties, it appears to be a Mission Impossible, as the expansion of scientific activities and associated logistics remains uncontrolled, inexorably eroding the Antarctic wilderness. Recent ATS resolutions and high-level interventions may signify that Treaty Parties are becoming more aware of the need to increase their cooperation on the ground in Antarctica and hence, open up a space to allow the coexistence of science and wilderness in Antarctica to become possible. We propose the adoption of principles providing clear and concrete guidance on scientific facilities and international cooperation as a constructive step forward in realising the ... Article in Journal/Newspaper Antarc* Antarctic Antarctica Yearbook of Polar Law Brill (via Crossref) Antarctic The Antarctic The Yearbook of Polar Law Online 6 1 559 597
institution Open Polar
collection Brill (via Crossref)
op_collection_id crbrillap
language unknown
description The Consultative Parties to the Antarctic Treaty have frequently declared their collective ambition to manage Antarctica “in the interest of all mankind.” However, the concrete implications of these declarations are not clear. As part of an international research project, the authors asked people from different parts of the world to respond to a questionnaire about Antarctica, its values, and the way it should be managed. Notwithstanding differences in respondents’ nationalities, ages and the time of data collection, our results indicate that a significant proportion of the public values Antarctica both as a scientific laboratory and as one of the world’s last wildernesses. Is this ‘public’s dream’ of co-existence of science and wilderness a Mission Impossible? In this article, we contend that: 1) in theory, it is a Possible Mission that would connect well with the recognition of science and wilderness in the Antarctic Treaty System (ATS) instruments; 2) in practice, science in Antarctica has gradual and cumulative impacts on all three main wilderness qualities of Antarctica (absence of permanent infrastructure, naturalness and large size); 3) currently, the co-existence of science and wilderness is not an important consideration in the management of human activities in Antarctica; and 4) in the future, unless a proactive and concerted effort is taken by the Consultative Parties, it appears to be a Mission Impossible, as the expansion of scientific activities and associated logistics remains uncontrolled, inexorably eroding the Antarctic wilderness. Recent ATS resolutions and high-level interventions may signify that Treaty Parties are becoming more aware of the need to increase their cooperation on the ground in Antarctica and hence, open up a space to allow the coexistence of science and wilderness in Antarctica to become possible. We propose the adoption of principles providing clear and concrete guidance on scientific facilities and international cooperation as a constructive step forward in realising the ...
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Bastmeijer, Kees
Tin, Tina
spellingShingle Bastmeijer, Kees
Tin, Tina
Antarctica – A Wilderness Continent for Science: The ‘Public’s Dream’ as a Mission Impossible?
author_facet Bastmeijer, Kees
Tin, Tina
author_sort Bastmeijer, Kees
title Antarctica – A Wilderness Continent for Science: The ‘Public’s Dream’ as a Mission Impossible?
title_short Antarctica – A Wilderness Continent for Science: The ‘Public’s Dream’ as a Mission Impossible?
title_full Antarctica – A Wilderness Continent for Science: The ‘Public’s Dream’ as a Mission Impossible?
title_fullStr Antarctica – A Wilderness Continent for Science: The ‘Public’s Dream’ as a Mission Impossible?
title_full_unstemmed Antarctica – A Wilderness Continent for Science: The ‘Public’s Dream’ as a Mission Impossible?
title_sort antarctica – a wilderness continent for science: the ‘public’s dream’ as a mission impossible?
publisher Brill
publishDate 2014
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/1876-8814_020
https://brill.com/view/journals/yplo/6/1/article-p559_20.xml
https://data.brill.com/files/journals/22116427_006_01_s020_text.pdf
geographic Antarctic
The Antarctic
geographic_facet Antarctic
The Antarctic
genre Antarc*
Antarctic
Antarctica
Yearbook of Polar Law
genre_facet Antarc*
Antarctic
Antarctica
Yearbook of Polar Law
op_source The Yearbook of Polar Law Online
volume 6, issue 1, page 559-597
ISSN 1876-8814 2211-6427
op_doi https://doi.org/10.1163/1876-8814_020
container_title The Yearbook of Polar Law Online
container_volume 6
container_issue 1
container_start_page 559
op_container_end_page 597
_version_ 1770274990216708096