A selection of articles on marine conservation and ocean policy with special relevance to the South China Sea and surrounding regional seas.
#ASEAN@50_PH(1)
The ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) : The Philippines stake and contribution to economic/political integration and consolidation, and connectivity
(The Philippines will be hosting the 31st ASEAN Summit later this year, at mid-century of its founding and into the second year of the establishment of the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) in 2015. The 50th year of the ASEAN also marks a milestone with the implementation of the AEC Blueprint 2025 which is the second phase of constructing the AEC. The Philippines must take these important ASEAN milestones as an opportunity to project national concerns and core interests in the context of ASEAN regional integration and consolidation. It must seize the opportunity to promote regional ocean governance as a core regional interest for the AEC, projecting a core interest of the Philippines.)
The ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) : The Philippines stake and contribution to economic/political integration and consolidation, and connectivity
(The Philippines will be hosting the 31st ASEAN Summit later this year, at mid-century of its founding and into the second year of the establishment of the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) in 2015. The 50th year of the ASEAN also marks a milestone with the implementation of the AEC Blueprint 2025 which is the second phase of constructing the AEC. The Philippines must take these important ASEAN milestones as an opportunity to project national concerns and core interests in the context of ASEAN regional integration and consolidation. It must seize the opportunity to promote regional ocean governance as a core regional interest for the AEC, projecting a core interest of the Philippines.)
AEC Vision 2025 – a sectoral contribution of the Philippines to
maritime connectivity and ocean governance
by Alberto A. Encomienda, balikBalangay
Introduction – A Philippines core national interest and an ASEAN core regional interest
This article hopes to contribute to the continuing narrative on ASEAN economic/political integration and consolidation, and a “caring and sharing” community-building under the ASEAN Community Vision 2025. At this juncture, the core national interests of the Philippines as a millennial archipelagic State must already be introduced to the regional and international context through an independent foreign policy that is ASEAN-centered and oriented towards the wider Central Indo-Pacific region, as suggested under AEC Vision 2025 (at paragraph 8.7). In the ASEAN community-building narrative, the Philippines must project its core interests especially in transitioning from an archipelago and maritime nation to an archipelagic State created under the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) ...
maritime connectivity and ocean governance
by Alberto A. Encomienda, balikBalangay
Introduction – A Philippines core national interest and an ASEAN core regional interest
This article hopes to contribute to the continuing narrative on ASEAN economic/political integration and consolidation, and a “caring and sharing” community-building under the ASEAN Community Vision 2025. At this juncture, the core national interests of the Philippines as a millennial archipelagic State must already be introduced to the regional and international context through an independent foreign policy that is ASEAN-centered and oriented towards the wider Central Indo-Pacific region, as suggested under AEC Vision 2025 (at paragraph 8.7). In the ASEAN community-building narrative, the Philippines must project its core interests especially in transitioning from an archipelago and maritime nation to an archipelagic State created under the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) ...
#ASEAN@50_PH(2)
Defining a Rules-based Freedom of Navigation Regime for the
South China Sea, after The Hague PCA arbitral ruling
by Alberto A. Encomienda, balikBalangay
The South China Sea maritime setting and disputes situation . . . a preface and introduction
Freedom of navigation is a non-issue in the context of the maritime jurisdictional disputes situation in the South China Sea. However, it needs to be accorded special treatment in that context because, although interjected by non-regional countries, it has assumed an aggravating role in the disputes situation; and heightened the regional disputes narrative and political tension. The subject and direction of this paper on freedom of navigation in the South China Sea straddles what are termed geo-political and geo-economic aspects of the South China Sea disputes situation, in light of the 12 July 2016 arbitral ruling of The Hague Permanent Court of Arbitration (The Hague PCA). The term geo-political carries sovereignty implications, while geo-economic implies sovereign rights. In both sovereignty and sovereign rights aspects, however, the dispute situation is colored by legal definitions in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) of what otherwise are scientific classification of marine geological features. Interpreting the UNCLOS characterizations of the marine geological features of the Spratlys archipelago subject of the unilateral compulsory arbitration case brought by the Philippines against China, is the principal issue adjudicated by The Hague PCA under Annex VII of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) . . .
Defining a Rules-based Freedom of Navigation Regime for the
South China Sea, after The Hague PCA arbitral ruling
by Alberto A. Encomienda, balikBalangay
The South China Sea maritime setting and disputes situation . . . a preface and introduction
Freedom of navigation is a non-issue in the context of the maritime jurisdictional disputes situation in the South China Sea. However, it needs to be accorded special treatment in that context because, although interjected by non-regional countries, it has assumed an aggravating role in the disputes situation; and heightened the regional disputes narrative and political tension. The subject and direction of this paper on freedom of navigation in the South China Sea straddles what are termed geo-political and geo-economic aspects of the South China Sea disputes situation, in light of the 12 July 2016 arbitral ruling of The Hague Permanent Court of Arbitration (The Hague PCA). The term geo-political carries sovereignty implications, while geo-economic implies sovereign rights. In both sovereignty and sovereign rights aspects, however, the dispute situation is colored by legal definitions in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) of what otherwise are scientific classification of marine geological features. Interpreting the UNCLOS characterizations of the marine geological features of the Spratlys archipelago subject of the unilateral compulsory arbitration case brought by the Philippines against China, is the principal issue adjudicated by The Hague PCA under Annex VII of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) . . .
#ASEAN@50_PH(3)
Clarifying and adapting vessel transit regimes for an AEC 2015 and beyond –
a core regional maritime insecurity concern
Alberto A. Encomienda, balikBalangay
Introduction : Vessel transit passage regimes under the UNCLOS – an international legal framework resulting in a regional maritime conundrum
Vessel transit passage regimes under the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) are maritime security issues, and key issues and challenges, in the context of a humongous regional sea area that is the seas of ASEAN and the Central Indo-Pacific sharing “characteristic regional features” (UNCLOS Article 197). They are issues and concerns on account of a hodge-podge and jumbled politico-security, economic, and socio-cultural factors such as overlapping sovereignty/sovereign rights claims among regional countries, a competition for marine resources and energy, protection of the marine environment and biodiversity, the health and livelihood of coastal communities, and freedom of navigation. A late developing issue has to do with vessel transit passage and the conduct of marine scientific research and hydrographic surveying. These are issues exacerbated in the context of a very close geographical and marine geological quarters that vessels are operating around. Unless properly managed, vessel transit passage in the seas of ASEAN and the Central Indo-Pacific raises maritime issues and concerns with implications that straddle the three (3) pillars of AEC 2015; with defining impacts on regional integration and consolidation in regard to maritime communication. Addressing the foregoing regional non-traditional maritime security concerns, however, lacks coherence in overall legal framework and policy implementation that is appropriate to the regional situation looking to AEC 2015, and beyond. This is a hashtag concern for ASEAN Vision 2025 constructing maritime connectivity..
Clarifying and adapting vessel transit regimes for an AEC 2015 and beyond –
a core regional maritime insecurity concern
Alberto A. Encomienda, balikBalangay
Introduction : Vessel transit passage regimes under the UNCLOS – an international legal framework resulting in a regional maritime conundrum
Vessel transit passage regimes under the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) are maritime security issues, and key issues and challenges, in the context of a humongous regional sea area that is the seas of ASEAN and the Central Indo-Pacific sharing “characteristic regional features” (UNCLOS Article 197). They are issues and concerns on account of a hodge-podge and jumbled politico-security, economic, and socio-cultural factors such as overlapping sovereignty/sovereign rights claims among regional countries, a competition for marine resources and energy, protection of the marine environment and biodiversity, the health and livelihood of coastal communities, and freedom of navigation. A late developing issue has to do with vessel transit passage and the conduct of marine scientific research and hydrographic surveying. These are issues exacerbated in the context of a very close geographical and marine geological quarters that vessels are operating around. Unless properly managed, vessel transit passage in the seas of ASEAN and the Central Indo-Pacific raises maritime issues and concerns with implications that straddle the three (3) pillars of AEC 2015; with defining impacts on regional integration and consolidation in regard to maritime communication. Addressing the foregoing regional non-traditional maritime security concerns, however, lacks coherence in overall legal framework and policy implementation that is appropriate to the regional situation looking to AEC 2015, and beyond. This is a hashtag concern for ASEAN Vision 2025 constructing maritime connectivity..
ASEAN@50_PH(4)
ASEAN Vision 2025 – a proposition for rules-based cooperative regional
ocean governance essential to the ASEAN Economic Community 2015 integration
and consolidation, and maritime connectivity
Alberto A. Encomienda, balikBALANGAY
Introduction and backgrounder – The political impediment to compelled ocean governance cooperation in the South China Sea
The birth of the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) on 22 November 2015 (AEC 2015) was greeted by an intensifying maritime disputes involving certain ASEAN member countries and a regional major Power over ownership of marine geological features comprising the Spratlys archipelago. The origins of the disputes situation began in the immediate aftermath of World War II during the United Nations Conference on International Organization in San Francisco in 1945, and thus antedating the Charter of the United Nations and the United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). A simmering maritime disputes arising from the disposition of enemy-held territories during World War II later progressed into a low-intensity regional conflict situation that brought the ASEAN organization into the picture . . .
ASEAN Vision 2025 – a proposition for rules-based cooperative regional
ocean governance essential to the ASEAN Economic Community 2015 integration
and consolidation, and maritime connectivity
Alberto A. Encomienda, balikBALANGAY
Introduction and backgrounder – The political impediment to compelled ocean governance cooperation in the South China Sea
The birth of the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) on 22 November 2015 (AEC 2015) was greeted by an intensifying maritime disputes involving certain ASEAN member countries and a regional major Power over ownership of marine geological features comprising the Spratlys archipelago. The origins of the disputes situation began in the immediate aftermath of World War II during the United Nations Conference on International Organization in San Francisco in 1945, and thus antedating the Charter of the United Nations and the United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). A simmering maritime disputes arising from the disposition of enemy-held territories during World War II later progressed into a low-intensity regional conflict situation that brought the ASEAN organization into the picture . . .
ASEAN@50_PH(5)
Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM), an imperative for the
health and livelihood, and disaster resilience for the
ASEAN and Central Indo-Pacific coastal communities
Alberto A. Encomienda, balikBALANGAY
Introduction: Archipelagic and Maritime Philippines, an ICZM case study and proposition for ASEAN Vision 2025
The ocean management concerns of the Philippines as an archipelagic State encompass its archipelagic and internal waters, territorial sea, exclusive economic zone and continental shelf (including a possible Extended Continental Shelf). The same situation exists for the two other archipelagic States in the Central Indo-Pacific that are adjacent to each other i.e. Indonesia and Papua New Guinea. The defining characteristic of an archipelagic State is a far greater sea area under national jurisdictions than land territory. This is on account of its maritime basepoints and baselines being designated and drawn connecting the outermost points of the outermost islands of the archipelago from which to delineate its maritime jurisdictions, under international law. The Philippines is also considered a quintessential coastal State in that its population centers are never more than a hundred kilometers from the coast. Among its marine endowments are a rich unparalleled biodiversity and hosting the larger part of the coral triangle that extends to northeastern Indonesia and Malaysia (Sabah); and counts four times the number of coral species than found in the Great Barrier Reef; among the highest in the world. One of only two double-barrier reefs in the world is in the Province of Bohol. The entire archipelago is a large marine ecosystem with such biodiversity that has become an important feeding and breeding grounds for high-value commercial fish species such as tuna (also categorized as highly migratory and straddling fish stocks), endangered marine mammals such as the Dugong or “sea cow”, the Butanding or whale shark and even the rarer mega-mouth shark, and six species of marine turtles. It would not be an overstatement to say that the Philippines archipelago is the ‘oceanarium’ of the world; and a microcosm of global marine life. This imposes on the Philippines a national burden to nurture its marine environment and resources, and furthermore take the role as the lead shepherd in ocean governance of the ASEAN and Central Indo-Pacific regional seas which are interconnected enclosed and semi-enclosed seas. Collectively these regional sea areas would best be governed effectively through region-wide cooperation which is compelled under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, UNCLOS, in particular, at Part IX thereof . . .
Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM), an imperative for the
health and livelihood, and disaster resilience for the
ASEAN and Central Indo-Pacific coastal communities
Alberto A. Encomienda, balikBALANGAY
Introduction: Archipelagic and Maritime Philippines, an ICZM case study and proposition for ASEAN Vision 2025
The ocean management concerns of the Philippines as an archipelagic State encompass its archipelagic and internal waters, territorial sea, exclusive economic zone and continental shelf (including a possible Extended Continental Shelf). The same situation exists for the two other archipelagic States in the Central Indo-Pacific that are adjacent to each other i.e. Indonesia and Papua New Guinea. The defining characteristic of an archipelagic State is a far greater sea area under national jurisdictions than land territory. This is on account of its maritime basepoints and baselines being designated and drawn connecting the outermost points of the outermost islands of the archipelago from which to delineate its maritime jurisdictions, under international law. The Philippines is also considered a quintessential coastal State in that its population centers are never more than a hundred kilometers from the coast. Among its marine endowments are a rich unparalleled biodiversity and hosting the larger part of the coral triangle that extends to northeastern Indonesia and Malaysia (Sabah); and counts four times the number of coral species than found in the Great Barrier Reef; among the highest in the world. One of only two double-barrier reefs in the world is in the Province of Bohol. The entire archipelago is a large marine ecosystem with such biodiversity that has become an important feeding and breeding grounds for high-value commercial fish species such as tuna (also categorized as highly migratory and straddling fish stocks), endangered marine mammals such as the Dugong or “sea cow”, the Butanding or whale shark and even the rarer mega-mouth shark, and six species of marine turtles. It would not be an overstatement to say that the Philippines archipelago is the ‘oceanarium’ of the world; and a microcosm of global marine life. This imposes on the Philippines a national burden to nurture its marine environment and resources, and furthermore take the role as the lead shepherd in ocean governance of the ASEAN and Central Indo-Pacific regional seas which are interconnected enclosed and semi-enclosed seas. Collectively these regional sea areas would best be governed effectively through region-wide cooperation which is compelled under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, UNCLOS, in particular, at Part IX thereof . . .
ASEAN@50_PH(6)
Focus on Regional Fisheries – a broad characteristic under ASEAN Vision 2025 straddling the three pillars of AEC 2015 (political-security, economic and socio-cultural)
Alberto A. Encomienda, Peter Flewwelling and Stuart Green
balikBALANGAY
Introduction: State of World Fisheries; a wake-up call for the regional seas of ASEAN and the Central Indo-Pacific
Exploitation of the global marine commons has led to the depletion of most major fish stocks and to a growing recognition of the need to take global and regional collective action to manage fisheries resources. Freedom to Fish, among the five customary freedoms of the high seas, is no longer an absolute right and have been qualified under UNCLOS (at Part VII, Article 127). This is to take into account a balancing of interests between coastal States and other fishing States, with direct implications on conservation and resource exploitation. Collapsed fisheries, always believed to be impossible (the sea will always provide; the bounty of the sea is inexhaustible) and thus the traditional belief behind the unbridled traditional high seas freedom to fish, was firstly grimly demonstrated in the case of the North Atlantic Cod fisheries. Overfishing, like climate change, has become a household word. On the other hand, the obvious remedy which is fisheries management, is a term that have hardly resonated at home. For starters in a catalogue of fisheries concerns, and enhance awareness . . .
Focus on Regional Fisheries – a broad characteristic under ASEAN Vision 2025 straddling the three pillars of AEC 2015 (political-security, economic and socio-cultural)
Alberto A. Encomienda, Peter Flewwelling and Stuart Green
balikBALANGAY
Introduction: State of World Fisheries; a wake-up call for the regional seas of ASEAN and the Central Indo-Pacific
Exploitation of the global marine commons has led to the depletion of most major fish stocks and to a growing recognition of the need to take global and regional collective action to manage fisheries resources. Freedom to Fish, among the five customary freedoms of the high seas, is no longer an absolute right and have been qualified under UNCLOS (at Part VII, Article 127). This is to take into account a balancing of interests between coastal States and other fishing States, with direct implications on conservation and resource exploitation. Collapsed fisheries, always believed to be impossible (the sea will always provide; the bounty of the sea is inexhaustible) and thus the traditional belief behind the unbridled traditional high seas freedom to fish, was firstly grimly demonstrated in the case of the North Atlantic Cod fisheries. Overfishing, like climate change, has become a household word. On the other hand, the obvious remedy which is fisheries management, is a term that have hardly resonated at home. For starters in a catalogue of fisheries concerns, and enhance awareness . . .
ASEAN@50_PH(7)
Institutional infrastructure for regional ocean governance and connectivity
essential to AEC 2015 integration and consolidation
Alberto A. Encomienda, balikBALANGAY
Introduction – The Philippines connection in regional ocean governance in the context of AEC 2015 integration and consolidation; a national concern and contribution to ASEAN Vision 2025
The Philippines, comparatively with other coastal States, has expansive and varied maritime jurisdictions. With unique geological attributes as an archipelagic State comprised of a very compact grouping of islands (the classic archipelagic State) in a highly strategic geographical location straddling major international shipping lanes, with extraordinary marine resources and biodiversity widely exposed to threats and risks arising from human activities, makes ocean governance concerns for the country infinitely daunting. Moreover, it is centrally situated in a large ocean space wherein the three largest archipelagic States i.e. Indonesia, Papua-New Guinea and Philippines, and a large elongated mid-ocean archipelago, Japan, are in a south-north adjacency alignment. This extended axis of mid-ocean archipelagos is the ocean rampart or bulwark of maritime Southeast and East Asia, embracing the seas of ASEAN and the Central Indo-Pacific. The sheer length and breadth of this maritime region, with its collection of mid-ocean archipelagos, makes for a virtual archipelagic continent . . .
Institutional infrastructure for regional ocean governance and connectivity
essential to AEC 2015 integration and consolidation
Alberto A. Encomienda, balikBALANGAY
Introduction – The Philippines connection in regional ocean governance in the context of AEC 2015 integration and consolidation; a national concern and contribution to ASEAN Vision 2025
The Philippines, comparatively with other coastal States, has expansive and varied maritime jurisdictions. With unique geological attributes as an archipelagic State comprised of a very compact grouping of islands (the classic archipelagic State) in a highly strategic geographical location straddling major international shipping lanes, with extraordinary marine resources and biodiversity widely exposed to threats and risks arising from human activities, makes ocean governance concerns for the country infinitely daunting. Moreover, it is centrally situated in a large ocean space wherein the three largest archipelagic States i.e. Indonesia, Papua-New Guinea and Philippines, and a large elongated mid-ocean archipelago, Japan, are in a south-north adjacency alignment. This extended axis of mid-ocean archipelagos is the ocean rampart or bulwark of maritime Southeast and East Asia, embracing the seas of ASEAN and the Central Indo-Pacific. The sheer length and breadth of this maritime region, with its collection of mid-ocean archipelagos, makes for a virtual archipelagic continent . . .