Analysis and Potential Alternatives for the Disputed South China Sea from Ocean Governance in the Polar Regions
Sovereignty claims over insular features and maritime jurisdiction in the South China Sea have been disputed for decades, and a governance regime to address ocean-related issues is urgently needed. This article first introduces the notion of a regime, and examines details of cooperation mechanisms i...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Coastal management 2015-11, Vol.43 (6), p.609-627 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 627 |
---|---|
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | 609 |
container_title | Coastal management |
container_volume | 43 |
creator | Tai, Ray Tsung-Han Pearre, Nathaniel S. Kao, Shih-Ming |
description | Sovereignty claims over insular features and maritime jurisdiction in the South China Sea have been disputed for decades, and a governance regime to address ocean-related issues is urgently needed. This article first introduces the notion of a regime, and examines details of cooperation mechanisms in the Polar Regions. Lessons that can be applied to the South China Sea include that both soft and hard law regimes work to bring States concerned together to cooperate on the "commons" issues even when military conflicts or sovereignty disputes still exist. Consensus among bordering States would be necessary to make the South China Sea a "zone of peace." Mechanisms that accommodate the various sovereignty claims and freeze existing and new claims to, as well as to prohibit military activities in, the South China Sea are recommended. Lastly, if a cooperative mechanism were to be established in the future, the Arctic regime would be more applicable to the South China Sea than the Antarctic regime due to their geographic nature. Thus, only States bordering the South China Sea should have voting and decision-making rights in the cooperative mechanism. As always, the political will of all parties is paramount to the success of such an endeavor. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1080/08920753.2015.1086949 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_infor</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1753468900</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3900915091</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c437t-2fd6fefc99cdd03e72859069f81c21dba6db4ff31c38c50b3fbe77b53f5fe59e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkUFLHDEYhkOx0NX6E4SAFy-jyWQymdxcttYKglL1HDKZL24km2yTjGX_fWdce-mhePrg5Xnfw_cgdELJOSUduSCdrIng7LwmlM9RKxv5CS0or2lFmpoeoMXMVDP0BR3m_ELIlHO6QHEZtN9ll7EOA76PBUJx2uOlL5CCLu4VMrYx4bIG_M3l7VhgwA9xLGu8Wrug8QNobFPc4DsDOuDr-DoXgwHswlvrPnqd8E94djHkr-iz1T7D8fs9Qk_frx5XP6rbu-ub1fK2Mg0Tpart0FqwRkozDISBqDsuSSttR01Nh163Q99Yy6hhneGkZ7YHIXrOLLfAJbAjdLbf3ab4a4Rc1MZlA97rAHHMigrRkYZzKj-ActYIKprmY2jbSUIm9PQf9CWO02P8GzVbmfRMFN9TJsWcE1i1TW6j005Roma56q9cNctV73Kn3uW-58IkZ6N_x-QHVfTOx2TT9H2XFfv_xB99Rqrc</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1750421152</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Analysis and Potential Alternatives for the Disputed South China Sea from Ocean Governance in the Polar Regions</title><source>PAIS Index</source><source>EBSCOhost Business Source Complete</source><creator>Tai, Ray Tsung-Han ; Pearre, Nathaniel S. ; Kao, Shih-Ming</creator><creatorcontrib>Tai, Ray Tsung-Han ; Pearre, Nathaniel S. ; Kao, Shih-Ming</creatorcontrib><description>Sovereignty claims over insular features and maritime jurisdiction in the South China Sea have been disputed for decades, and a governance regime to address ocean-related issues is urgently needed. This article first introduces the notion of a regime, and examines details of cooperation mechanisms in the Polar Regions. Lessons that can be applied to the South China Sea include that both soft and hard law regimes work to bring States concerned together to cooperate on the "commons" issues even when military conflicts or sovereignty disputes still exist. Consensus among bordering States would be necessary to make the South China Sea a "zone of peace." Mechanisms that accommodate the various sovereignty claims and freeze existing and new claims to, as well as to prohibit military activities in, the South China Sea are recommended. Lastly, if a cooperative mechanism were to be established in the future, the Arctic regime would be more applicable to the South China Sea than the Antarctic regime due to their geographic nature. Thus, only States bordering the South China Sea should have voting and decision-making rights in the cooperative mechanism. As always, the political will of all parties is paramount to the success of such an endeavor.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0892-0753</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1521-0421</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/08920753.2015.1086949</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Taylor & Francis</publisher><subject>Alternative dispute resolution ; Antarctica ; Boundaries ; China ; climate change, ocean governance ; Conflicts ; Decision making ; Disputes ; Governance ; International cooperation ; International disputes ; International law ; Jurisdiction ; Law ; Military ; Military operations ; Oceans ; Polar environments ; Polar regions ; regimes ; Regions ; Right of access ; South China Sea ; Sovereignty ; Territorial issues ; Voting rights</subject><ispartof>Coastal management, 2015-11, Vol.43 (6), p.609-627</ispartof><rights>Copyright © Taylor and Francis Group, LLC 2015</rights><rights>Copyright Taylor & Francis Ltd. 2015</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c437t-2fd6fefc99cdd03e72859069f81c21dba6db4ff31c38c50b3fbe77b53f5fe59e3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c437t-2fd6fefc99cdd03e72859069f81c21dba6db4ff31c38c50b3fbe77b53f5fe59e3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27843,27901,27902</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Tai, Ray Tsung-Han</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pearre, Nathaniel S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kao, Shih-Ming</creatorcontrib><title>Analysis and Potential Alternatives for the Disputed South China Sea from Ocean Governance in the Polar Regions</title><title>Coastal management</title><description>Sovereignty claims over insular features and maritime jurisdiction in the South China Sea have been disputed for decades, and a governance regime to address ocean-related issues is urgently needed. This article first introduces the notion of a regime, and examines details of cooperation mechanisms in the Polar Regions. Lessons that can be applied to the South China Sea include that both soft and hard law regimes work to bring States concerned together to cooperate on the "commons" issues even when military conflicts or sovereignty disputes still exist. Consensus among bordering States would be necessary to make the South China Sea a "zone of peace." Mechanisms that accommodate the various sovereignty claims and freeze existing and new claims to, as well as to prohibit military activities in, the South China Sea are recommended. Lastly, if a cooperative mechanism were to be established in the future, the Arctic regime would be more applicable to the South China Sea than the Antarctic regime due to their geographic nature. Thus, only States bordering the South China Sea should have voting and decision-making rights in the cooperative mechanism. As always, the political will of all parties is paramount to the success of such an endeavor.</description><subject>Alternative dispute resolution</subject><subject>Antarctica</subject><subject>Boundaries</subject><subject>China</subject><subject>climate change, ocean governance</subject><subject>Conflicts</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>Disputes</subject><subject>Governance</subject><subject>International cooperation</subject><subject>International disputes</subject><subject>International law</subject><subject>Jurisdiction</subject><subject>Law</subject><subject>Military</subject><subject>Military operations</subject><subject>Oceans</subject><subject>Polar environments</subject><subject>Polar regions</subject><subject>regimes</subject><subject>Regions</subject><subject>Right of access</subject><subject>South China Sea</subject><subject>Sovereignty</subject><subject>Territorial issues</subject><subject>Voting rights</subject><issn>0892-0753</issn><issn>1521-0421</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkUFLHDEYhkOx0NX6E4SAFy-jyWQymdxcttYKglL1HDKZL24km2yTjGX_fWdce-mhePrg5Xnfw_cgdELJOSUduSCdrIng7LwmlM9RKxv5CS0or2lFmpoeoMXMVDP0BR3m_ELIlHO6QHEZtN9ll7EOA76PBUJx2uOlL5CCLu4VMrYx4bIG_M3l7VhgwA9xLGu8Wrug8QNobFPc4DsDOuDr-DoXgwHswlvrPnqd8E94djHkr-iz1T7D8fs9Qk_frx5XP6rbu-ub1fK2Mg0Tpart0FqwRkozDISBqDsuSSttR01Nh163Q99Yy6hhneGkZ7YHIXrOLLfAJbAjdLbf3ab4a4Rc1MZlA97rAHHMigrRkYZzKj-ActYIKprmY2jbSUIm9PQf9CWO02P8GzVbmfRMFN9TJsWcE1i1TW6j005Roma56q9cNctV73Kn3uW-58IkZ6N_x-QHVfTOx2TT9H2XFfv_xB99Rqrc</recordid><startdate>20151102</startdate><enddate>20151102</enddate><creator>Tai, Ray Tsung-Han</creator><creator>Pearre, Nathaniel S.</creator><creator>Kao, Shih-Ming</creator><general>Taylor & Francis</general><general>Taylor & Francis Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7TN</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>H97</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7U6</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20151102</creationdate><title>Analysis and Potential Alternatives for the Disputed South China Sea from Ocean Governance in the Polar Regions</title><author>Tai, Ray Tsung-Han ; Pearre, Nathaniel S. ; Kao, Shih-Ming</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c437t-2fd6fefc99cdd03e72859069f81c21dba6db4ff31c38c50b3fbe77b53f5fe59e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Alternative dispute resolution</topic><topic>Antarctica</topic><topic>Boundaries</topic><topic>China</topic><topic>climate change, ocean governance</topic><topic>Conflicts</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>Disputes</topic><topic>Governance</topic><topic>International cooperation</topic><topic>International disputes</topic><topic>International law</topic><topic>Jurisdiction</topic><topic>Law</topic><topic>Military</topic><topic>Military operations</topic><topic>Oceans</topic><topic>Polar environments</topic><topic>Polar regions</topic><topic>regimes</topic><topic>Regions</topic><topic>Right of access</topic><topic>South China Sea</topic><topic>Sovereignty</topic><topic>Territorial issues</topic><topic>Voting rights</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Tai, Ray Tsung-Han</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pearre, Nathaniel S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kao, Shih-Ming</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Oceanic Abstracts</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy & Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 3: Aquatic Pollution & Environmental Quality</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Coastal management</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Tai, Ray Tsung-Han</au><au>Pearre, Nathaniel S.</au><au>Kao, Shih-Ming</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Analysis and Potential Alternatives for the Disputed South China Sea from Ocean Governance in the Polar Regions</atitle><jtitle>Coastal management</jtitle><date>2015-11-02</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>43</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>609</spage><epage>627</epage><pages>609-627</pages><issn>0892-0753</issn><eissn>1521-0421</eissn><abstract>Sovereignty claims over insular features and maritime jurisdiction in the South China Sea have been disputed for decades, and a governance regime to address ocean-related issues is urgently needed. This article first introduces the notion of a regime, and examines details of cooperation mechanisms in the Polar Regions. Lessons that can be applied to the South China Sea include that both soft and hard law regimes work to bring States concerned together to cooperate on the "commons" issues even when military conflicts or sovereignty disputes still exist. Consensus among bordering States would be necessary to make the South China Sea a "zone of peace." Mechanisms that accommodate the various sovereignty claims and freeze existing and new claims to, as well as to prohibit military activities in, the South China Sea are recommended. Lastly, if a cooperative mechanism were to be established in the future, the Arctic regime would be more applicable to the South China Sea than the Antarctic regime due to their geographic nature. Thus, only States bordering the South China Sea should have voting and decision-making rights in the cooperative mechanism. As always, the political will of all parties is paramount to the success of such an endeavor.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Taylor & Francis</pub><doi>10.1080/08920753.2015.1086949</doi><tpages>19</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0892-0753 |
ispartof | Coastal management, 2015-11, Vol.43 (6), p.609-627 |
issn | 0892-0753 1521-0421 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1753468900 |
source | PAIS Index; EBSCOhost Business Source Complete |
subjects | Alternative dispute resolution Antarctica Boundaries China climate change, ocean governance Conflicts Decision making Disputes Governance International cooperation International disputes International law Jurisdiction Law Military Military operations Oceans Polar environments Polar regions regimes Regions Right of access South China Sea Sovereignty Territorial issues Voting rights |
title | Analysis and Potential Alternatives for the Disputed South China Sea from Ocean Governance in the Polar Regions |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-29T21%3A21%3A28IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_infor&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Analysis%20and%20Potential%20Alternatives%20for%20the%20Disputed%20South%20China%20Sea%20from%20Ocean%20Governance%20in%20the%20Polar%20Regions&rft.jtitle=Coastal%20management&rft.au=Tai,%20Ray%20Tsung-Han&rft.date=2015-11-02&rft.volume=43&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=609&rft.epage=627&rft.pages=609-627&rft.issn=0892-0753&rft.eissn=1521-0421&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/08920753.2015.1086949&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_infor%3E3900915091%3C/proquest_infor%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1750421152&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |