The role of the protected area concept in protecting the world’s largest natural reserve: Antarctica

Should the entire Antarctic continent and the surrounding islands be recognised as a ‘protected area’ or as a continent where certain areas, just like anywhere else, may be designated as protected areas? To find an answer to this question, this paper first discusses the most important agreements and...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Utrecht Law Review
Main Authors: Bastmeijer, Kees, van Hengel, Steven
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Published: Utrecht Law Review 2009
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.utrechtlawreview.org/jms/article/view/URN%3ANBN%3ANL%3AUI%3A10-1-101114
https://doi.org/10.18352/ulr.95
id ftjulr:oai:ojs.utrechtlawreview.org:article/95
record_format openpolar
spelling ftjulr:oai:ojs.utrechtlawreview.org:article/95 2023-05-15T13:55:00+02:00 The role of the protected area concept in protecting the world’s largest natural reserve: Antarctica Bastmeijer, Kees van Hengel, Steven 2009-06-11 application/pdf https://www.utrechtlawreview.org/jms/article/view/URN%3ANBN%3ANL%3AUI%3A10-1-101114 https://doi.org/10.18352/ulr.95 eng eng Utrecht Law Review https://www.utrechtlawreview.org/jms/article/view/URN%3ANBN%3ANL%3AUI%3A10-1-101114/95 10.18352/ulr.95 https://www.utrechtlawreview.org/jms/article/view/URN%3ANBN%3ANL%3AUI%3A10-1-101114 doi:10.18352/ulr.95 Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:Authors retain copyright and grant Utrecht Law Review right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in the Utrecht Law Review.Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in Utrecht Law Review.Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).Once accepted for publication, the final version of the paper must be provided. A completed and signed copyright form, which will be sent by the Managing Editor, must accompany each paper. By signing the form the author states to accept the copyright notice of Utrecht Law Review. The copyright notice for authors is also included in the copyright acceptance form. CC-BY Utrecht Law Review; Volume 5, Issue 1, June 2009; 61-79 1871-515X Antarctica protected area natural reserve ASPA management plan info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion Peer-reviewd Article 2009 ftjulr https://doi.org/10.18352/ulr.95 2021-11-29T18:05:57Z Should the entire Antarctic continent and the surrounding islands be recognised as a ‘protected area’ or as a continent where certain areas, just like anywhere else, may be designated as protected areas? To find an answer to this question, this paper first discusses the most important agreements and declarations on environmental protection in Antarctica. Next, these instruments are compared with the components of IUCN’s ‘protected area’ definition (2008). In the light of this overall protection of Antarctica, the instrument of designating areas as Antarctic Specially Protected Areas (ASPAs) is discussed on the basis of a quick scan of 42 management plans for existing ASPAs. It is concluded that Antarctica could indeed be considered as a protected area and that the ASPA instrument is so shaped to provide specific areas with ‘extra protection’ by regulating human activities in those areas with a high level of detail. However, the continuous increase in human activities in Antarctica raises concerns with respect to the scope and completeness of the existing legal instruments. These concerns regarding the overall protection of Antarctica could become an argument for applying the ASPA instrument in respect of larger areas to ensure the comprehensive protection of at least certain parts of Antarctica. This would make the ASPA system more comparable with protected area systems in other parts of the world; however, strengthening the overall protection of Antarctica – parallel to the further development of the ‘specially’ protected area system - would be more consistent with Antarctica’s protected status as has developed since the Antarctic Treaty was signed 50 years ago. Article in Journal/Newspaper Antarc* Antarctic Antarctica Utrecht Law Review Antarctic The Antarctic Utrecht Law Review 5 1 61
institution Open Polar
collection Utrecht Law Review
op_collection_id ftjulr
language English
topic Antarctica
protected area
natural reserve
ASPA
management plan
spellingShingle Antarctica
protected area
natural reserve
ASPA
management plan
Bastmeijer, Kees
van Hengel, Steven
The role of the protected area concept in protecting the world’s largest natural reserve: Antarctica
topic_facet Antarctica
protected area
natural reserve
ASPA
management plan
description Should the entire Antarctic continent and the surrounding islands be recognised as a ‘protected area’ or as a continent where certain areas, just like anywhere else, may be designated as protected areas? To find an answer to this question, this paper first discusses the most important agreements and declarations on environmental protection in Antarctica. Next, these instruments are compared with the components of IUCN’s ‘protected area’ definition (2008). In the light of this overall protection of Antarctica, the instrument of designating areas as Antarctic Specially Protected Areas (ASPAs) is discussed on the basis of a quick scan of 42 management plans for existing ASPAs. It is concluded that Antarctica could indeed be considered as a protected area and that the ASPA instrument is so shaped to provide specific areas with ‘extra protection’ by regulating human activities in those areas with a high level of detail. However, the continuous increase in human activities in Antarctica raises concerns with respect to the scope and completeness of the existing legal instruments. These concerns regarding the overall protection of Antarctica could become an argument for applying the ASPA instrument in respect of larger areas to ensure the comprehensive protection of at least certain parts of Antarctica. This would make the ASPA system more comparable with protected area systems in other parts of the world; however, strengthening the overall protection of Antarctica – parallel to the further development of the ‘specially’ protected area system - would be more consistent with Antarctica’s protected status as has developed since the Antarctic Treaty was signed 50 years ago.
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Bastmeijer, Kees
van Hengel, Steven
author_facet Bastmeijer, Kees
van Hengel, Steven
author_sort Bastmeijer, Kees
title The role of the protected area concept in protecting the world’s largest natural reserve: Antarctica
title_short The role of the protected area concept in protecting the world’s largest natural reserve: Antarctica
title_full The role of the protected area concept in protecting the world’s largest natural reserve: Antarctica
title_fullStr The role of the protected area concept in protecting the world’s largest natural reserve: Antarctica
title_full_unstemmed The role of the protected area concept in protecting the world’s largest natural reserve: Antarctica
title_sort role of the protected area concept in protecting the world’s largest natural reserve: antarctica
publisher Utrecht Law Review
publishDate 2009
url https://www.utrechtlawreview.org/jms/article/view/URN%3ANBN%3ANL%3AUI%3A10-1-101114
https://doi.org/10.18352/ulr.95
geographic Antarctic
The Antarctic
geographic_facet Antarctic
The Antarctic
genre Antarc*
Antarctic
Antarctica
genre_facet Antarc*
Antarctic
Antarctica
op_source Utrecht Law Review; Volume 5, Issue 1, June 2009; 61-79
1871-515X
op_relation https://www.utrechtlawreview.org/jms/article/view/URN%3ANBN%3ANL%3AUI%3A10-1-101114/95
10.18352/ulr.95
https://www.utrechtlawreview.org/jms/article/view/URN%3ANBN%3ANL%3AUI%3A10-1-101114
doi:10.18352/ulr.95
op_rights Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:Authors retain copyright and grant Utrecht Law Review right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in the Utrecht Law Review.Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in Utrecht Law Review.Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).Once accepted for publication, the final version of the paper must be provided. A completed and signed copyright form, which will be sent by the Managing Editor, must accompany each paper. By signing the form the author states to accept the copyright notice of Utrecht Law Review. The copyright notice for authors is also included in the copyright acceptance form.
op_rightsnorm CC-BY
op_doi https://doi.org/10.18352/ulr.95
container_title Utrecht Law Review
container_volume 5
container_issue 1
container_start_page 61
_version_ 1766261211191574528