| Summary: | This thesis applies four international relations theories to the International Agreement to Prevent Unregulated Commercial Fishing on the High Seas of the Central Arctic Ocean (the Agreement) to determine which theory best explains the Agreement and the Canadian government’s justification for its ratification. Using both Rational (Realism and Liberalism) and Reflective (Constructivism and Pluralism) schools of thought, I ultimately conclude that the English School’s theory of Pluralism provides the best framework for understanding the Agreement and Canada’s perspective. Pluralism allows for insights into the general reasons for the Agreement’s creation, Canada’s inclusion of the Inuit Circumpolar Council Canada in negotiations and ultimately Canada’s enthusiastic promotion of the Agreement. The other theories, either because of the ontology or epistemology they prefer, can shed light on only parts of the Agreement and/or Canada’s perspective. May 2020
|
|---|