 |
 |
 |
 |
International Whaling Commission Scenario*Overview In anticipation of the IWC meeting, ten key members of the commission are coming together to discuss the Japanese proposal to end the whaling ban. Although this is a working group meeting and not an official meeting of the entire IWC membership, it is assumed that any compromise reached here will likely be adopted and implemented by the rest of the IWC body later this year. While these ten states have agreed to participate in this preliminary meeting, they do not all agree on the moratorium issue.
Background Information In 1986, the IWC passed a moratorium on all commercial whaling by the commission's member-states. The commission enacted the ban on whaling in reaction to worldwide concerns that existing whale stocks were depleted and whales were in grave danger of extinction. In recent years, pro-whaling countries have advocated an end to this moratorium for a variety of reasons, arguing that managed whaling (rather than the existing total ban on whaling) can be both environmentally and economically sound. These countries have questioned the accuracy of the science behind the projections of depleted whale stocks and charge that the IWC--originally created to manage the whaling industry--has been "hijacked" by environmentalists. Officials from pro-whaling countries have tried several tactics to bring about an end to the moratorium. Japan, for example, has increased its scientific hunts of certain species of whales--that is, the killing of whales for a specific scientific purpose, as permitted in the 1946 whaling convention--and has ignored threats from the U.S. that it would enact retaliatory economic sanctions against Japan if it continued these practices. Japan asserts that the imposition of such sanctions would represent unfair trade practices. It also contends that the World Trade Organization would find the threatened U.S. policy to be illegal, were Japan to challenge the United States over the matter. Anti-whaling states disagree, maintaining that any whaling poses a threat to the survival of species of whales. The recovery and re-emergence of several species of whales from the large-scale exploitation they faced in the past has been slow and would be wholly undermined by a resumption of commercial whaling. Whaling opponents point out that despite the claims that whaling can be done in an "environmentally and economically sound" manner, there is little incentive for for-profit whale hunters to take ecological factors into consideration as they do their business, as an examination of past whaling practices demonstrates. Whale populations are threatened by environmental factors other than whaling, and anti-whaling states maintain that a ban on commercial whaling remains the most effective way to ensure the preservation of whale populations. Complicating the debate between these two sides is the fact that actual numbers of current whale populations are not available, owing to substantial discrepancies in the data. During the last ten years, the IWC's Scientific Commission has tried to compile numbers on specific species, but its efforts have not yet produced a reliable finished product. Its best estimates at this point suggest that Minke whales are no longer endangered, although most other species under consideration are. The Bowhead, Gray, North Right, and Blue whales, for example, are considered highly endangered. Even when the IWC's Scientific Commission completes its report, disagreement will likely continue, given the uncertainty reflected in the counts. For instance, the commission reported humpback whale numbers to be around 10,000 but has admitted that this number is based on a possible range of between 5,900 to 14,000 humpback whales. The numbers controversy is furthered by the Convention in the Trading of Endangered Species (CITES), a larger and more diverse international organization operating under the auspices of the United Nations, which has come out with more conservative estimates about the size of whale populations. CITES has stated that, given its estimates about the existing number of whales, managed whaling is not a feasible option. CITES opposes lifting the moratorium on commercial whaling. Resources Pro-whaling Anti-whaling Useful Definitions Managed Whaling: Sustainable use of the world’s whale resources, can include such measures as designated “safe levels” of catches (without causing species depletion), sanctuaries, quotas etc. World Trade Organization: An international organization that regulates trade and investment. The WTO has been called on to review the legality of sanctions against countries engaged in whaling activities. Scientific: In the IWC context, this term applies to practices in the search of knowledge. High Seas: the equivalent of international waters Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY): The scientifically recommended proportion of total catch that would ensure the long-term health of the whale stocks. In this scenario, it is 5% of the total whale stock. Economic Empowerment Zone (EEZ): The area extending 200 miles from a country’s shore where that country has control over economic activity. Whale Sanctuary: a physical geographic area of preservation in which regulations exist for the conservation of whales. Game Mechanics Essentially, there are four negotiation outcomes:
Levels of Compromise
Sub-Issues to be Negotiated
Possibilities for State Action
|
|
About ICONS | Participant Resources
| Current Simulations |
© 2001, ICONS Project http://www.icons.umd.edu/current/univ/scenario/iwc.htm
|
||
