4TH GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON OCEANS,
COASTS, AND ISLANDS
Organization of Working Group
on Compliance and Enforcement
POLICY BRIEF ON COMPLIANCE
AND ENFORCEMENT
Global Oceans Conference
GOC 2008
Vietnam
R O Korea
Indonesia
Organized by the
Global Forum on Oceans,
Coasts, and Islands and
Hosted by the Government of
CANADA
Vietnam, Ministry of
Flemish Government,
Belgium
Agriculture and Rural
Development
with principal funding
from the Global
Environment Facility
Pre-conference version, April 2, 2008

---

Global Forum on Oceans, Coasts, and Islands--Strategic Oceans Planning to
2016
The Global forum on Oceans, Coasts, and Islands has undertaken a strategic planning effort for the period
2006-2016 to develop policy recommendations for specific next steps needed to advance the global oceans
agenda aimed at governments, UN agencies, NGOs, industry, and scientific groups. To this effect, Working
Groups have been organized around 12 major topic areas related to the global oceans commitments made at
the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development and to emerging issues facing the global oceans
community.

The Working Groups have been organized and coordinated by the Global Forum Secretariat, under the
direction of Dr. Biliana Cicin-Sain, Co-Chair and Head of Secretariat, Global Forum on Oceans, Coasts, and
Islands, and involving the following staff from the Gerard J. Mangone Center for Marine Policy, University of
Delaware: Miriam Balgos, Kateryna Wowk, Caitlin Snyder, Shelby Hockenberry, and Kathleen McCole.

Working Group on Compliance and Enforcement

WORKING GROUP LEADERS:



Carl Bruch, Environmental Law Institute (ELI)



Paul Nemitz, Maritime Policy Task Force,

European Commission

Fuensanta Candela-Castillo, Maritime Policy Task Force,
European Commission

WORKING GROUP MEMBERS:

Daniela Chitu, Maritime Policy Task Force, European
Commission

Kathryn Mengerink, Environmental Law Institute
(ELI)

Biliana Cicin-Sain, Global Forum

---

Global Forum on Oceans, Coasts, and Islands

Working Group on Compliance and Enforcement











Policy Brief:
Compliance and Enforcement

Lead Authors
Carl Bruch and Kathryn Mengerink








Draft March 30, 2008

---

Table of Contents


Foreword by Biliana Cicin-Sain, Global Forum
iii
Policy Brief

1. Overview of General Status and Trends
1
2. Goals and Options: Increasing Compliance with and
4
Enforcement of Ocean Law and Policy
3. Conclusions and Future Directions
8



ii

---

Foreword



While the international community has made significant strides in developing agreements, rules,
and regulations to improve ocean and coastal management, compliance and enforcement of these
instruments often lags. This is true at the international, national, and sub-national levels.
This is due variously to insufficient institutional mechanisms and mandates, capacity, and
political will. Improving compliance and enforcement of ocean and coastal management, then,
requires a range of initiatives. These include developing and strengthening compliance
mechanisms at the international level, as well as enhancing national and sub-national capacity to
implement and enforce. The approaches will necessarily include a suite of regulatory and
nonregulatory mechanisms (including incentives, planning, and information-based approaches).

Compliance and enforcement is an important topic that is relevant to all the issues discussed at
the 4th Global Conference on Oceans, Coasts, and Islands. The Global Forum Secretariat is in
the process of mobilizing a Working Group to address compliance and enforcement. We are
grateful to the efforts of Carl Bruch, Kathryn Mengerink, Fuensanta Candela-Castillo and
Daniela Chitu to develop this policy brief, as well as advance the development of the Working
Group.


Biliana Cicin-Sain
Global Forum on Oceans, Coasts, and Islands

























iii

---

POLICY BRIEF:
OCEAN COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT


Compliance and enforcement cut across all ocean and coastal management sectors.
This policy brief considers challenges, actions, options for improving ocean
compliance and enforcement at the national, regional, and international levels.


Overview of General Status and Trends

Major Challenges

Over the past several decades, a number of national laws and multilateral
environmental agreements (MEAs) have been adopted to promote the sustainable
management of marine and coastal resources. Unfortunately, the effectiveness of
these laws and MEAs is frequently limited by poor implementation and insufficient
enforcement necessary to ensure compliance. Many parties to these agreements have
limited technical, financial, and personnel capacity, lack political will, and face other
pressing priorities, making it difficult for them to fully implement each agreement. In
addition, lack of compliance and enforcement in some nations in turn makes it
politically difficult for other nations to enforce against their own citizens. Without
effective compliance and enforcement, these laws and MEAs can do little to conserve
ocean and coastal ecosystems or ensure sustainable use of resources.

The legal and regulatory framework governing the marine environment relies on
international, regional, and national laws and institutions. However, in most instances
relating to ocean resources, enforcement occurs at the national level--including
enforcement on land, within a nation's exclusive economic zone, or enforcement of
vessels registered to a particular nation. There are few effective regional or
international institutions for enforcing legal frameworks governing ocean and coastal
resources.

Regulation of activities taking place on the high seas is problematic, as not all nations
adhere to international treaties regulating this area. In instances where vessels are
registered to uncooperative nations and act in contravention to governing treaties,
their activities may not violate international laws but are rather "unregulated," a
critical challenge facing international ocean law.

At-sea enforcement is particularly difficult due to the vast space, challenging
conditions, difficulties in detection, lack of clear enforcement mandate (especially on
the high seas), and expensive equipment needed to conduct enforcement operations.
Dockside or onshore enforcement may be comparatively less expensive and easier to
conduct, but experience has shown that these measures alone cannot achieve effective
compliance. The nature of ocean resources and the human activities conducted at sea
make it necessary for nations and individuals to cooperate in order to improve ocean
compliance and enforcement.


1

---

Remote Marine Protected Areas: An Example of the Challenges and Opportunities

A rough estimation suggests that only a limited number of islands (likely well less than 100 of the
thousands across the Pacific) still support large and healthy shark populations. In the Central Pacific,
remote islands that are largely uninhabited still have relatively intact ecosystems. Many of these
islands are formally designated as protected areas where fishing is not allowed. For example, within
the island nation of Kiribati, the uninhabited islands of the southern Line Islands are protected as
Kiribati Wildlife Sanctuaries, and the Phoenix Islands have just been granted protection as the
Phoenix Islands Protected Area.1 Among United States protections in the Pacific, islands are
variously protected as US Fish and Wildlife Refuges, National Monuments, and other designations.2
Despite these legal protections, the remote nature of the islands makes it difficult to rigorously
enforce against illicit fishing operations.

Legal fishing operations often take place in the EEZ and high seas waters abutting these remote reefs.
Fishing vessels are principally part of the Pacific tuna fleets and are flagged by various states.
Anecdotal reports suggest that some of the longline vessels occasionally come closer to shore during
the night to set lines to catch reef sharks. Only the fins are collected and are sold at home ports
providing additional, illicit income for the captain and crew. By operating at night, the vessels avoid
detection by airplane-based monitoring programs, while their daytime, open-ocean fishing activities
are legal and permitted. Because of the slow growth of shark populations, these removals have
dramatic impacts on the population dynamics of protected sharks.

Technological advances in remote sensing may provide the best opportunity to enforce management
measures on these remote reefs. One approach would be to employ underwater acoustic receivers to
`listen' for sounds characteristic of nearshore boating and fishing activity. For example, repeated
engagement and disengagement of engines is characteristic of deployment and retrieval of longline
fishing gear. A transmitter attached to such an acoustic receiver can send a signal when characteristic
sounds are detected. A second candidate approach would employ satellites or unmanned drones to
image reef areas documenting the presence of fishing vessels in shallow reef areas. Other novel
technologies may be available to detect spatial infractions around protected reef areas and to notify
authorities. Small island developing states (SIDS) would likely need technical and financial
assistance in deploying and utilizing these technologies.

The detection of infracting vessels is notably only one step in ensuring compliance and enforcing
conservation measures on remote reefs. Of critical importance is establishment of approaches to track
illegally operating vessels and punish responsible parties either at sea or when the vessels reach their
destination ports.

One of the greatest challenges for international and multilateral approaches to vessel-
based ocean activities--e.g., commercial shipping and fishing--is the issue of flags of
convenience. Flags of convenience vessels circumvent existing management regimes
and regulations by registering with states not party to management arrangements or
those that fail to adequately enforce existing obligations. These, so called flags of
convenience serve as loopholes for evading necessary controls. For example,
commercial vessels may seek to avoid the costs of compliance by registering with
countries that have minimal pollutant discharge regulations or minimal enforcement
of existing laws.3 Similarly fishing vessels may register with countries that are not
party to regional fishery management organizations to circumvent these multilateral
regulatory frameworks--a problem that is exacerbated by fishing fleet overcapacity
(another challenge to compliance).4

1 See Phoenix Islands Protected Area, http://www.phoenixislands.org.
2 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Pacific Islands, http://www.fws.gov/pacificislands.
3 U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, CRUISE SHIP WHITE PAPER (August 22, 2000),
http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/cruise_ships/white_paper.pdf.
4 See, e.g., Rome Declaration on Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing (Mar. 12, 2005),
"[r]ecognizing that there is often a relationship between fleet overcapacity and IUU fishing and

2

---

Land-Based Marine Pollution: Compliance and Enforcement Challenges

International and multilateral agreements that attempt to address land based sources of marine pollution
and include the following:

United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Articles 207 and 213
Agenda 21 of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development
The Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine-Environment from
Land-Based Activities (GAP); and
UN Millennium Goals.

Complicating the ability to address transboundary land-based marine pollution is the difficulty of
identifying pollution from nonpoint and atmospheric sources. Inability to easily identify violations
prevents governments from determining responsibility, extracting payments, and enforcing compliance.
Furthermore, the need for compliance may be masked by the lack of mechanisms to value the full set of
ecosystem services affected rather than just the more easily measured cash values generated by
destructive activities. Also, environmental impacts may seem small and inconsequential for individual
actors but cause major changes to ecosystems in the aggregate.5 Fragmented management systems and
the number of distinct stakeholders and sectors responsible for polluting further complicates attempts at
addressing compliance and enforcement of land based marine pollution. Additionally, financial
constraints, such as cost of appropriate infrastructure facilities and equipment, and the potential
implications for local livelihoods, serve as obstacles to compliance and enforcement. This is especially
true in Small Island Developing States (SIDS), where marine degradation can be acutely felt, and
resources for addressing land-based pollution are limited.6

Another major obstacle to effective compliance and enforcement--and perhaps
underlying some open-access countries' lack of enforcement--is the cost of attaining
compliance through enforcement and other means in comparison to the value of the
resource to a country's economy. For some countries that do not have substantial
fisheries or commercial shipping operations, the value of the resource lies in vessel
registration fees and access permits. In the absence of international pressure, such as
trade sanctions used by the International Commission for Conservation of Atlantic
Tuna, open access countries have little financial incentive to change registration and
enforcement policies.

Vessel Pollution: Compliance and Enforcement Challenges
The International Maritime Organization (IMO), an agency of the United Nations, is the central
governing body that deals with issues of vessel pollution. Several key conventions established by the
IMO constitute the core legal framework governing vessel pollutants. These include: International
Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL), 1973/78, the International
Convention for the Control and Management of Ships' Ballast Water and Sediments, 2004, the
International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Co-operation (OPRC), 1990,
and the International Convention for Safety at Sea (SOLAS), 1974.7 Other international, regional and
national agreements exist to address vessel pollution as well.

The most common violations are the result of discharge of waste through bypass equipment, false

acknowledging the economic incentives that drive these phenomena."
5 http://www.gpa.unep.org/documents/2006_npa_handbook_for_english.pdf, at p. 16.
6 Arwen L Edsall, Integrating Watershed and Coastal Resource Management: Wider Caribbean (2007)
http://www.csc.noaa.gov/cz/2007/Coastal_Zone_07_Proceedings/PDFs/Poster_Abstracts/3452.Edsall.p
df.
7 Prevention of Marine Pollution Conventions. www.imo.org.

3

---

records, repeated tampering with monitoring system, discharge of bilge waste and sludge through
bypass equipment, and obstruction of investigations.8 The estimated operational oil discharge from
compliant tankers is 34 tons per year, and the estimated operational oil discharge from non-compliant
tankers is 1,129 tons per year.9 Worldwide it is estimated that 85 percent of commercial vessels and
70percent of other vessels are compliant with MARPOL regulations on bilge oil discharge.10
Compliance rates for fuel oil sludge discharge regulation is assumed to be at 95 percent for tankers
with 18,400 tons of discharge per year, and 85 percent for non-tankers with sludge discharge of
237,299 tons per year.11

Technical tools can aid in enforcement and achieve compliance. For example,
tamper-resistant recording systems, alarms, and printouts to verify equipment
operation, valve position, flow, incineration, and ship's position can ease the
challenges of vessel pollution enforcement.12 Vessel monitoring systems (VMS),
remote sensing, database systems, and technical assistance programs help to achieve
compliance and enforcement in fisheries, as well as with respect to illegal discharges
and dumping. However, in many cases, technological disparities (including the lack
of internet access) hinder the dissemination of information to countries and fishing
communities, preventing optimal implementation of policies. While new technologies
can be expensive, over time these costs may drop and provide more inexpensive
means to conduct monitoring, surveillance, and enforcement operations. However,
many developing countries are likely to require technical, financial, and personnel
assistance in deploying and utilizing these technologies to improve compliance and
enforcement.

Goals and Options:
Increasing Compliance with and Enforcement of Ocean Law
and Policy

This section highlights nine key goals for improving ocean compliance and
enforcement, as well as some options for achieving those goals.

Goal 1: Increase international support for existing international and multilateral
instruments that seek to increase compliance with ocean laws and policies.
Increasing international support for existing instruments is essential to improving
ocean compliance and enforcement. It is necessary to expand the number of countries
that are party to the relevant agreements. Increased political and financial support are
also essential. Options for achieving this goal include:
o Expanding accession to the High Seas Compliance Agreement.
o Strengthening the Straddling Stocks Agreement.

8 Intertanko, Criminal Vessel Enforcement. March 21, 2005.
www.intertanko.com/upload/presentations/INTERTANKOLESSPHOTOS.UDELL.PPT.
9 Committee on Oil in the Sea: Inputs, Fates, and Effects, National Research Council. Oil in the Sea III:
Inputs, Effects and Fates, 2003. http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10388&page=208.
10 Committee on Oil in the Sea: Inputs, Fates, and Effects, National Research Council. Oil in the Sea
III: Inputs, Effects and Fates, 2003. http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10388&page=210.
11 Committee on Oil in the Sea: Inputs, Fates, and Effects, National Research Council. Oil in the Sea
III: Inputs, Effects and Fates, 2003. http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10388&page=210.
12 The Shipping Industry's Guide to Oily Water Separators (2006),
http://www.marisec.org/ows/OILYWATER6pp.pdf.

4

---

o Expanding non-party implementation of the treaties and resolutions adopted
by regional fishery management organizations.
o Encouraging states to develop national plans of action to prevent, deter, and
eliminate IUU fishing.

Goal 2: Strengthen flag state control over registered vessels.
In the last two decades, international and multilateral bodies have taken several
approaches to addressing IUU fishing from developing action plans to calling upon
state parties to take trade restrictive measures against vessels registered to states that
are not in compliance with regional agreements.13 However, flag-of-convenience
vessels continue to undermine multilateral efforts to conserve increasingly limited
resources.

Potential approaches to strengthening flag state control include:
o Expanding accession to the High Seas Compliance Agreement.
o Building support for a common definition of "genuine link" that is adopted in
practice to provide the basis for a definition accepted as customary
international law. Article 91 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of
the Sea provides the key legal language to address flag of convenience
countries. It requires that a "genuine link" exist between the vessel and the
country of registry. However, "genuine link" is not defined by UNCLOS, and
there is not agreement among states as the definition "genuine link."
o Encourage states to have a centralized VMS receiving station in multilateral
fisheries to prevent tampering with VMS data.
o Exploring the development of dedicated access privilege (DAP; also known as
individual transferable quotas or catch shares) programs in international
fisheries. Facilitative programs, which place limits on access and utilize
transferable quotas have successfully increased compliance with catch limits,
helped rebuild depleted fish stocks, improved science and monitoring, reduced
bycatch, reduced fishing impacts on the environment, made fishing safer, and
improved economic performance.14

Technology-based approaches can include use of the following electronic monitoring
tools:
o VMS are electronic transmitters installed onboard vessels that transmit
information via satellite to a receiving station on land. Enforcement officials
can use this information to track the location of vessels and to verify that they
comply with area closures. One drawback to the use of technology such as
VMS is the current cost of equipment and monitoring stations, as well as
ensuring that there are sufficient human resources with specialized knowledge.
For example, VMS is approximately $4,735 USD.15 While this cost may be
low for developed countries or large-scale fishing operations, it may be
prohibitively high especially for small-scale and subsistence fishing
communities. Another drawback is concern that monitoring may reveal the

13 See, e.g., FAO, International Plan of Action to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported and
Unregulated Fishing.
14 ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE, SUSTAINING AMERICA'S FISHERIES AND FISHING COMMUNITIES: AN
EVALUATION OF INCENTIVE BASED MANAGEMENT (2007).
15 US EPA, Fisheries of the Northeastern United States, http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-
IMPACT/2005/June/Day-02/i10988.htm.

5

---

locations where specific vessels fish, so that other vessels may also try to fish
there.
o Electronic monitoring uses video technology to observe catch and bycatch
obviating the need for human observers. This approach has been tested in
Canada's halibut fishery and shows promise as an alternative to onboard
observers.16
o Expand the use of the automatic identification system (AIS) beyond
commercial shipping vessels to include fishing vessels: AIS is a broadcast
system that operates on the VHS mobile broadband allowing ship to ship, ship
to shore, and shore to ship information transfers regarding identification,
position, course, and speed. The International Maritime Organization (IMO)
requires commercial ships to use AIS; however, this requirement does not
apply to fishing vessels.

Goal 3: Increase compliance of existing marine protected areas in remote EEZs.
Technology can improve compliance of existing marine protected areas, particularly
in remote EEZs. Expanded use of remote sensing can help to detect illegal activity.
Passive acoustic sensing can be used to monitor vessel traffic and fishing activities.
Passive acoustic sensors are listening devices that could be used to detect the presence
of vessels and in some circumstances used to determine if a vessel is fishing.

Another approach is satellite monitoring to detect illegal discharges or IUU fishing.
High-quality satellite imagery can monitor the emission of pollution from vessels or
land based sources. It can also be used to detect the presence of IUU fishing vessels
in remote areas. For example, RADARSAT-1 is used for fisheries enforcement in
Norway.17

Goal 4: Strengthen regional collaborative approaches to achieving compliance.
Shared databases and web-based dissemination of information can help to overcome
the challenge of information dissemination by providing easy access to information.
The Monitoring, Control and Surveillance Network (MCS Network) is one web-based
information-sharing approach that allows enforcement officers to share information
about suspicious fishing vessel activity. Dissemination of positive or negative lists of
vessels through regional management organizations is another web-based data-sharing
approach.

Goal 5: Increase use of market-based approaches to achieve compliance.
Certification programs take advantage of consumer choice to drive sustainable
practices. Catch certification can also be a useful tool to ensure that catches are legal:
for example, the Northeast Atlantic Fisheries Commission requires a catch
certification in order for fisheries products to be imported. For example, the creation
of environmental certification or labeling systems, which provide information to
consumers regarding the environmental impact of a product, can provide incentives
for increased compliance. Ecolabeling programs should include compliance measures
to ensure labeled programs or industries are in compliance with the certification

16 See ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH, LTD., ELECTRONIC MONITORING,
http://www.archipelago.ca/highlight.aspx?ID=9EEE0F65-6A30-4B0C-AA11-573F1D7F8022.
17 Terje Wahl, Using RADARSAT-1 for Fisheries Enforcement Operations,
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/iel3/4810/13413/00615795.pdf?arnumber=615795.

6

---

requirements. Taxes and subsidies can also influence markets, positively or
negatively.

Goal 6: Increase political will to expand compliance and enforcement programs
through non-governmental approaches.
NGOs and business associations can have an important role in promoting compliance
and in enforcing, complementing government agencies and international institutions.
For example, many NGOs lead campaigns to raise public awareness about high
profile illegal fishing activities such as those occurring in the Patagonian toothfish
fishery and encourage consumers to avoid purchasing fish from potentially illegal
operators. Also, in the case of the toothfish fishery, legal fishing industry operators
have launched a website that publicizes information about alleged illegal fishing
operations.18 Collaborative efforts by the shipping industry, through organizations
such as the Maritime International Secretariat Services Limited (MARISEC) 19 and
InterTanko,20 have been established to help facilitate compliance through education-
based approaches.

Goal 7: Encourage compliance through increased public participation and
education.
Programs to increase public participation can also increase compliance rates by
raising public awareness, creating, pressure groups, and heightening transparency,
accountability, and monitoring.21 Tools that can effectively demonstrate to
stakeholders the costs of coastal and marine degradation can increase the willingness
to take steps to conserve ocean resources. Accounting systems that demonstrate the
value of coastal preservation are a useful tool for monitoring the impact of human
activities on water resources and identifying the economic valuations, costs, and
social impacts of management systems.22 By defining the value of ecosystems,
stakeholders can more concretely see the costs and benefits of preserving the
environment, thereby increasing willingness to comply with regulations. Scenario
development and integrated assessment modeling tools, like those used to predict
climate change and the impact of greenhouse gases, can be used to examine
alternative perspectives regarding consequences for stakeholders.23

Goal 8: Promoting integrated control measures.
Most countries have extremely limited resources to devote to promoting compliance
or effectively and vigorously enforcing their ocean and coastal laws. Moreover, these
resources are often allocated sectorally to fishing, commercial shipping, energy
development, and so forth. Integrated control measures can enhance compliance and
enforcement by helping to validate data through cross-referencing information. In
addition, integrated control measures can help to use scarce financial, personnel, and
technical resources more efficiently and effectively.


18 See Coalition of Legal Toothfish Operators, http://www.colto.org.
19 Maritime International Secretariat Services Limited. http://www.marisec.org/index.htm.
20 InterTanko and International Chamber of Shipping,
21 http://www.euro.who.int/document/e68690.pdf.
22 United Nations Statistics Division. http://unstats.un.org/unsd/envaccounting/default.asp.
23 NPA- p.51

7

---

An ongoing EU pilot project in the Mediterranean illustrates the potential, through
integrating marine surveillance systems. The project aims to validate and show that in
practice bringing together information collected from various maritime surveillance
systems and fusing them into a common operational picture creates cross-border and
cross-sectoral advantages and can lead to more effective government actions against
illegal activities. Ongoing projects24 are already testing integrated solutions based on
emerging capabilities such as e-navigation, satellite observation, etc.

Goal 9: Increase penalties to reflect damage to the resource and deter continued
violations.
"Command-and-control" methods, in which governments prescribe desired
management through regulations and standards, can work effectively when
implemented along with sufficient penalties and threat of enforcement. The certainty
and severity of the penalties imposed must be sufficient to deter would-be violators.
In many instances, however, penalties are nominal and readily incorporated into the
cost of doing business. Moreover, penalties are rarely applied. There is a large body
of experience in setting effective penalties ­ as well as options for creative alternative
penalties ­ from the sectors outside the specific ocean context can inform the reform
of penalty regimes.

Conclusions and Future Directions

While the international community has made significant strides in developing
agreements, rules, and regulations to improve ocean and coastal management,
compliance and enforcement of these instruments often lags. This is true at the
international, national, and sub-national levels. This is due variously to insufficient
institutional mechanisms and mandates, capacity, and political will. Improving
compliance and enforcement of ocean and coastal management will require a range of
initiatives, including a suite of regulatory and non-regulatory mechanisms (such as
incentives, planning, and information-based approaches) to develop and enhance
compliance mechanisms and approaches at the international level, as well as to
enhance national and sub-national capacity to implement and enforce.

At the Fourth Global Conference on Oceans, Coasts, and Islands ­ in Hanoi, Vietnam
on April 7-11, 2008 ­ the Global Forum will launch a Working Group on Compliance
and Enforcement. This Working Group seeks to advance effective approaches for
compliance and enforcement of laws and treaties affecting ocean resources. The
Working Group will bring together ocean resource managers, law enforcement
personnel, decisionmakers, and scholars to:

· Identify priorities and challenges for improving ocean compliance and
enforcement;
· Share lessons learned between the ocean management community and the
compliance and enforcement community; and

24 GSE MARISS (http://www.gmes-mariss.com/), FP6 LIMES (http://www.fp6-limes.eu/LIMES/jsp/index.jsp), FP6 TANGO
(http://www.teladnetgo.eu/), GSA MARUSE (http:/ec.europa.eu/transport/gsa/rd/rdmaruse.html), FP6 MARNIS
(http://www.marnis.org/).

8

---

· Develop specific options for short- and long-term measures to improve ocean
compliance at different levels.

Initial organizers of the Working Group are the Global Forum on Oceans, Coasts, and
Islands, the Environmental Law Institute, and the European Commission Maritime
Policy Task Force. The initial organizers include: Biliana Cicin-Sain and Kateryna
Wowk (Global Forum), Carl Bruch and Kathryn Mengerink (Environmental Law
Institute), and Maria De La Fuensanta Candela Castillo, Daniela Chitu, and Paul
Nemitz (European Commission Maritime Policy Task Force).

The work of the Working Group will be organized as follows:

Task 1. Lead an In-Depth Dialogue at the 2008 4th Global Conference on Oceans,
Coasts, and Islands: Advancing Ecosystem Management and Integrated Coastal
and
Ocean Management by 2010 in the Context of Climate Change, Hanoi, Vietnam
April 7-11, 2008 to Explore Key Challenges, Potential Solutions, and Priorities

The Working Group will convene at the Hanoi conference to identify challenges to
and options for improving ocean compliance and enforcement, including short-term
and long term approaches. The Working Group will be led by the Global Forum, ELI,
Maritime Policy Task Force, European Commission, and will seek to include
representatives from the Bucerius Law School, IUCN Commission on Environmental
Law, and the UNEP Division of Environmental Law and Conventions. The Working
Group will also seek the involvement of the International Tribunal for the Law of the
Sea and the International Foundation for the Law of the Sea.

The Global Forum dialogue will also engage a broader group of stakeholders,
especially from industry, in the process of identifying options for improving
compliance and enforcement, with the aim of building political and technical support.
The Working Group will work on addressing the obstacles facing both developed and
developing nations as they attempt to enforce and comply with international oceans
agreements, such as scarce domestic resources, corruption, and limited stakeholder
participation. Actions which can be taken to mitigate these issues will be considered,
including capacity building, regional and international cooperation, technology
transfer, and legal assistance.

Task 2. Conduct Background Research and Convene a Preliminary Meeting to
Outline Major Challenges and Options
· Conduct background research to identify challenges to and options for improving
ocean compliance and enforcement; and
· Convene a select group of ocean and compliance and enforcement experts in Fall
2008 to outline major challenges to and options for effective compliance and
enforcement of ocean agreements.

Task 3. Develop a Draft White Paper Summarizing Challenges and Options

Based on the preliminary research and outcomes of the preliminary meeting, draft a
white paper summarizing current compliance and enforcement challenges nations face

9

---

when implementing ocean agreements, as well as options on how to best assist nations
with promoting and enhancing effective and equitable compliance and enforcement
mechanisms.

Task 4. Foster a Dialogue on Next Steps to Improve Ocean Compliance and
Enforcement

The Working Group will revise, refine, and expand the white paper surveying the
importance of ocean compliance and enforcement, challenges to effective compliance
and enforcement, and ways in which to promote effective and equitable compliance
and enforcement at the international, national, and local levels. The final report will
serve as a roadmap of options and considerations for improving compliance and
enforcement.


10

---

Steering Committee, Global Forum on Oceans, Coasts, and Islands*

Co-Chairs
Management Project (MACEMP),
Satya Nandan, Secretary-General,
Charles Ehler, Consultant to UNESCO
Biliana Cicin-Sain, Director, Gerard J.
Ministry of Natural Resources and
International Seabed Authority,
Julius Francis, Executive Secretary,
Mangone Center for Marine Policy,
Tourism
Jamaica
Western Indian Ocean Marine Science
University of Delaware (also Head of
Rolph Payet, Advisor to the President,
Tiago Pitta e Cunha, Member, Cabinet
Association, Tanzania
Secretariat, Global Forum)
Seychelles
of Fisheries and Maritime
Matthew Gianni, Political Advisor,
Patricio A. Bernal, Executive-
Lori Ridgeway, Director-General,
Commissioner, European Commission
Deep Sea Conservation Coalition,
Secretary, Intergovernmental
International Coordination and Policy
Mary Power, Director, Resource
Netherlands
Oceanographic Commission,
Analysis, Department of Fisheries and
Mobilization Office, World
Vladimir Golitsyn, Professor of
UNESCO, Paris, France
Oceans, Canada, and Camille Mageau,
Meteorological Association
International Law, Moscow State
Veerle Vandeweerd, Director,
Director, Marine Ecosystems
Cristelle Pratt, Director, South Pacific
University of International Relations
Environment and Energy Group,
Conservation Branch, Department of
Applied Geoscience Commission
Lynne Hale, Director, Marine
United Nations Development
Fisheries and Oceans, Canada
(SOPAC), Fiji
Strategy, The Nature Conservancy
Programme (UNDP)
Mario Ruivo, Intersectoral
Diane Quarless, Chief, Small Island
Art Hanson, former Ministerial Ocean
Governmental
Oceanographic Commission, Ministry
Developing States Unit, UNDESA
of Science, Technology, and Higher
Ambassador, Department of Fisheries
David Balton, Deputy Assistant
Education, Portugal
John Richardson, Head, Maritime
and Oceans, Canada, member of the
Secretary for Oceans and Fisheries,
Policy Task Force, European
Canadian Foundation for Innovation
Indroyono Soesilo, Chairman, Agency
Bureau of Oceans, U.S. Department of
Commission
(CFI)
for Marine and Fisheries Research,
State
Department of Marine Affairs and
Anne Rogers, United Nations
Gregor Hodgson, Director, Reef
Phil Burgess, Director, Cetacean
Fisheries, Indonesia
Department of Economic and Social
Check
Policy and Recovery, Department of
Affairs (UNDESA)
Ambassador Enele S. Sopoaga,
Paul Holthus, Independent Consultant
the Environment and Water
Tuvalu, Former Vice-Chair, Alliance
Eduard Sarukhanian, Director, World-
Gunnar Kullenberg, Independent
Resources, Australia
of Small Island Developing States
Weather-Watch-Applications, World
Consultant and former Director,
Nguyen Chu Hoi, Director, Institute of
(AOSIS)
Meteorological Organization (WMO),
Intergovernmental Oceanographic
Fisheries Economics and Planning,
Switzerland
Chris Tompkins, Independent
Commission (IOC)
Ministry of Agriculture and Rural
Consultant
Alan Simcock, Independent
Dan Laffoley, World Commission on
Development, Vietnam
Consultant
Intergovernmental
Protected Areas-Marine, IUCN
Aldo Cosentino, Director-General,
Dann Sklarew, Director and Chief
Carl Lundin, Head, IUCN Marine
Directorate for Nature Protection, Sea
Salvatore Arico, Programme
Technical Advisor, GEF, IW:LEARN
Programme
Protection, Ministry for Environment
Specialist, Ecological Sciences,
Asterio Takesy, Director, Secretariat
and Protection of the Territory, Italy
UNESCO
Dawn Martin, President, Sea Web,
for the Pacific Regional Environment
USA
Margaret Davidson, Director, Coastal
Julian Barbiere and Stefano Belfiore,
Programme
Services Center, National Oceanic and
Intergovernmental Oceanographic
Gerald Miles, The Nature
Khulood Tubaishat, Advisor, The
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commission, France
Conservancy, Pacific Region,
Regional Organization for the
USA
Chua Thia-Eng, Partnership in
Brisbane, Australia
Conservation of the Environment of
Antonio Diaz de Leon, Director-
Environmental Management for the
the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden
Iouri Oliounine, Executive Director,
General, Environmental, Regional
Seas of East Asia (PEMSEA),
(PERSGA)
International Ocean Institute, Malta
Integration and Sectoral Policy,
IMO/UNDP/GEF, Philippines
Chika Ukwe, Industrial Development
Pietro Parravano, President, Institute
Environment and Natural Resources
Anjan Datta, Global Programme for
Officer (International Waters), United
for Fisheries Resources, World
Ministry (SEMARNAT), Mexico
the Protection of the Marine
Nations Industrial Development
Fisheries Forum
Ambassador Angus Friday, Chair,
Environment from Land-Based
Organization (UNIDO)
Sian Pullen, Independent Consultant,
Alliance of Small Island States
Activities, The Hague
Marjo Vierros, Visiting Professor,
New Zealand, and former Head of
(AOSIS), Permanent Representative of
Ahmed Djoghlaf, Executive Secretary,
Institute of Advanced Studies, United
European and Middle East Marine
Grenada to the United Nations
Convention on Biological Diversity
Nations University, Vancouver
Program, WWF International, UK
Gi-Jun Han, Ministry of Maritime
Al Duda, Senior Advisor, International
Eugenio Yunis, Chief, Sustainable
Victoria Radchenko, Director,
Affairs and Fisheries, Republic of
Waters, Global Environment Facility
Development of Tourism World
International Ocean Institute, Ukraine
Korea
(GEF)
Tourism Organization
Tony Ribbink, Director, Sustainable
Elie Jarmache, Chargé de Mission,
Serge Garcia, Independent Consultant,
A.H. Zakri, Director, Institute of
Seas Trust
Secrétariat Général de la Mer, France
and Former Director, Marine Fisheries
Advanced Studies, United Nations
Evelia Rivera-Arriaga, Centro de
Magnus Johannesson, Secretary-
Resources Division, Food and
University, Yokohama
Ecologia, Pesquerias y Oceanographia
General, Ministry for the
Agriculture Organization (FAO)
Nongovernmental
del Golfo de Mexico (EPOMEX),
Environment, Iceland
Marea E. Hatziolos, Senior Coastal
Mexico
Ambassador Jagdish Koonjul,
and Marine Specialist, Environment
Milton Asmus, International
Nirmal Jivan Shah, Chief Executive,
Mauritius, former Chair, Alliance of
Department, The World Bank
Representative, Brazilian Agency for
Nature Seychelles
Small Island States (AOSIS)
Coastal Management
Indumathie Hewawasam, Independent
Alan Simcock, former Executive
Gerhard Kuska, Associate Director
Consultant
Awni Behnam, President, International
Director, OSPAR, and former co-
and Director of Ocean and Coastal
Ocean Institute, Malta
Andrew Hudson, Principal Technical
chair, UN Informal Consultative
Policy, White House Council on
Advisor, International Waters,
Charles A. Buchanan, Administrator
Process on Ocean Affairs and Law of
Environmental Quality, USA
UNDP/GEF
Luso-American Development
the Sea
Tom Laughlin, Deputy Director,
Foundation, Portugal
David Johnson, Executive Secretary,
Nancy Targett, Dean, University of
International Affairs Office, National
OSPAR Convention, London
Torkil J. Clausen, Managing Director,
Delaware College of Marine and Earth
Oceanic and Atmospheric
DHI Water Policy and Senior Adviser,
Studies
Administration (NOAA), USA
Vladimir Mamaev, GEF Regional
Global Water Partnership
Technical Advisor, UNDP, Europe
Kristian Teleki, International Coral
Haiqing Li, Deputy Director-General,
and the CIS, Slovak Republic
Simon Cripps, Director, Global
Reef Action Network, Switzerland
State Oceanic Administration (SOA),
Marine Programme, World Wide Fund
Hiroshi Terashima, Executive
China
Franklin McDonald, Adviser, UNEP
For Nature (WWF) International
Caribbean Environment Programme
Director, Institute for Ocean Policy,
John Low, Adviser to the Minister of
(UNEP/CEP), and former Director,
Richard Delaney, Executive Director,
Ocean Policy Research Foundation,
Marine Resources for the Cook Islands
National Environmental Policy
Center for Coastal Studies,
Japan
Rejoice Mabudafhasi, Deputy Minister
Agency, Jamaica
Provincetown, Massachusetts, USA
Grant Trebble, African Marine and
of Environmental Affairs and
Vaclav Mikulka, Director, UN
Annick de Marffy, former Director of
Coastal Resource Over-exploitation
Tourism, South Africa
Division for Ocean Affairs and the
Division of Ocean Affairs and Law of
Prevention Strategy (AMCROPS),
Jan Mees, Director, Flanders Marine
Law of the Sea
the Sea (UNDOALOS), United
South Africa
Institute, Belgium
Nations International Consultant
Ali Mohamed, Coordinator, Coastal
Philippe Vallette and Manuel Cira,
Guillermo Garcia Montero, President,
and Marine Secretariat, New
Sylvia Earle, Chair, Deep Ocean
NAUSICAA, France, and the World
National Aquarium, Havana, Cuba
Partnership for Africa's Development
Exploration and Research (DOER),
Ocean Network
and Explorer-in-Residence, National
Magnus Ngoile, Team Leader, Marine
(NEPAD), Kenya
Geographic Society
David VanderZwaag, IUCN Specialist
and Coastal Environmental
Group on Ocean Law and Governance
* Please note: Members of the Steering Committee participate in their individual capacities.

---