Uncertainty in Australia's and China's science, risk and regulation in Antarctica
In Antarctica, science and regulation tightly and deliberately interact. In this interaction, science is the privileged provider of information for decision-making and embodies people's judgements, including risk. Regulation achieves objectives through strategies of enforcement and compliance....
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Doctoral or Postdoctoral Thesis |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
UNSW, Sydney
2018
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/1959.4/61191 https://unsworks.unsw.edu.au/bitstreams/7ba17dca-ac79-463b-89fa-6585ae447c1d/download https://doi.org/10.26190/unsworks/20906 |
| Summary: | In Antarctica, science and regulation tightly and deliberately interact. In this interaction, science is the privileged provider of information for decision-making and embodies people's judgements, including risk. Regulation achieves objectives through strategies of enforcement and compliance. Yet, both science and regulation consider risks and uncertainties in different ways. Antarctic governance is expected to accommodate increasing risk, as many countries, including Australia and China, continue to collaborate and compete on the scientific, political and legal frontiers of Antarctica. Although a collapse of the Antarctic Treaty System seems unlikely, potential conflicts between growing national interests and various human activities put pressure on the governance of Antarctica. Uncertainty inherently exists in science, regulation, individuals and their interaction; however, there is lack of relevant research in Antarctica. Without a comprehensive understanding and investigation of the science–regulation interface, there is a greater risk of conflict among Antarctic nations and individuals. To investigate the uncertainties in the science–regulation interface in Antarctic governance, a new conceptual framework is proposed that incorporates three conceptualised uncertainties: regulatory uncertainty, scientific uncertainty and individuals’ uncertainty. To analyse these uncertainties, this research investigates different understandings and considerations of regulations, reports of governmental meetings, scientific efforts in decision-making, and the views of experienced Antarctic research scientists from Australia and China. Uncertainty is established as the link between the different disciplines and stakeholder paradigms, and it is posited that the degrees of uncertainty should be managed by the cooperation between science, knowledge and individuals in Antarctica. This new conceptual framework and its application to three types of uncertainty identifies improvements to the long-term goals of avoiding conflict and ... |
|---|