Briefing Paper-UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation

Topic B: The Question of Listing Antarctica as a World Heritage Site Stephanie Triefus Macquarie University

Background
During the Second World War, European leaders met at the Conference of Allied Ministers of Education to look for ways to reconstruct their systems of education post-war. This meeting bred the idea of an organisation that would embody a culture of peace through education and intellectual and cultural solidarity, with the aim of preventing another world war. According to its website, UNESCOs mission is to contribute to the building of peace, the eradication of poverty, sustainable development and intercultural dialogue through education, the sciences, culture, communication and information. Since the 1950s, UNESCO has morphed into a widely respected international organisation that does essential work in promoting education and cultural awareness. Through the World Heritage List, UNESCO aims to preserve the worlds natural and cultural wonders so that future generations can benefit from them and the world can be educated about their significance. Every two years UNESCO has a General Conference of representatives from all the member states, with each country having one vote regardless of size or power. Non-member states and NGOs have observer status. The General Conference discusses UNESCOs budget, determines its policies and main lines of work and makes recommendations on issues such as listing Antarctica as a World Heritage Site. UNESCO does not have the power to make legally binding decisions unless they are in the form of a convention and ratified by a certain number of States Parties.

AMUNC 2011

UNESCO - Topic B

Conservation of Antarctica
Apart from tourism and a small fishing industry, Antarctica has been used almost exclusively for scientific and exploratory purposes since it was first sited in 1820. The first agreement to be made concerning the fate of Antarctica was the Antarctic Treaty of 1959, with 12 signatories: Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Chile, France, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, South Africa, Soviet Union, United Kingdom and United States. Since 1959, the number of parties to the Treaty has grown to 46, with 28 consultative (voting) members and 18 acceding. This is an important treaty in the conservation of Antarctica as it states that it is to be used for peaceful purposes only, and weapons testing and military operations are strictly forbidden. Free exchange of scientific information gained from Antarctica is encouraged, and the parties to the Treaty may inspect any facility or equipment and have free access to any area. The Treaty does not recognise nor dispute territorial claims to Antarctica, but no new claims may be made while the Treaty is in force. Any disputes will be settled peacefully either by the parties concerned or the International Court of Justice, with the ultimate aim of the Treaty being to ensure Antarctica remains peaceful and does not cause international dispute.

Source: Australian Antarctic Division Data Centre, http://images.aad.gov.au/img.py/16d3.jpg?width=1024

AMUNC 2011

UNESCO - Topic B

Other agreements in the Antarctic Treaty System include Agreed Measures for the Conservation of Antarctic Flora and Fauna (1964), The Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Seals (1972), The Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (1980), The Convention on the Regulation of Antarctic Mineral Resource Activities (1988 never entered into force), and The Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty (1991). The 1988 mining regulation never reached the requisite number of ratifications because Australia and France protested against mining in Antarctica, instead calling for it to become a World Park where mining would be forbidden. The subsequent 1991 Protocol on Environmental Protection (the Madrid Protocol) was a triumphant step in conserving Antarcticas fragile environment, putting a ban on mining until its review in 2048. The protocol has been ratified by 27 parties and signed by a further 16.

Antarcticas natural and cultural heritage

Due to its harsh and inhospitable conditions, Antarctica remains the last pristine environment on earth and has no indigenous population. It is covered by 90% of the worlds ice, which amounts to 70% of the worlds fresh water, and if this ice cap melted sea levels would rise by approximately 60 metres. Research conducted on microbial life in Antarctica is contributing to the search for life in outer space, as deep under the ice the conditions are somewhat similar to Jupiters moon Europa. Despite the flora and faunas resistance to harsh conditions, Antarcticas ecosystem is remarkably fragile and damaged mosses and lichens can take years to regrow. The marine animals such as penguins, seals and whales rely on large quantities of phytoplankton to survive, and strict fishing regulations have been put in place to protect this food source. Human history in Antarctica is relatively short, however there is a rich culture of exploration and scientific research. Australia has designated several areas in its Antarctic Territory as protected heritage sites, and Macquarie, Heard and McDonald Island are on the World Heritage List. The Australian Antarctic Division describes the Antarctic cultural legacy as including portable artefacts, buildings, sites, monuments and shipwrecks; documentary evidence such as letters, diaries and administrative documents; oral and written histories.

AMUNC 2011

UNESCO - Topic B

In 2007 this cruise ship hit submerged ice and sank. All passengers were rescued. The Antarctic and Southern Ocean Coalition is considering a Polar Code that will restrict the use of heavy fuel oil, effectively banning large cruise ships. Soource: Getty Images, MSNBC http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34399680/ns/world_news-world_environment/t/antarctic-nations-plan-tough-shipping-controls/

The Common Heritage Principle

Some people argue that Antarctica should become common heritage in much the same way as has been proposed for the ocean floor and outer space. Under such an arrangement, property rights are held equally between all countries and no sovereign claims can be made on the area. The worlds common heritage is said to be held in trust for future generations, and it is protected from exploitation. This concept is different from the World Heritage List in that Listed areas remain under the sovereignty of their nation. Although the Antarctic Treaty System protects Antarctica from exploitation by stipulating it only be used for peace and science, it still puts control in the hands of the few nations rather than the world as a whole. Developing nations are supportive of the common heritage principle as it stops developed nations and their corporations exploiting resources where developing nations dont have the means to do the same. One alternative to the current ATS is placing Antarctica in trusteeship with the United Nations, as mandated under Chapter XII of the UN Charter. This chapter is aimed at states detached by enemy states after the Second World War and other territories struggling with their administration, so the wording is not ideal for Antarctica. Instead of placing Antarctica in trusteeship under these rules, inspiration could be taken from Chapter XII to devise a covenant specific to Antarctica.

AMUNC 2011

UNESCO - Topic B

Key Issues to Consider

World Heritage Criteria and compliance with the Antarctic Treaty System
The World Heritage Convention was adopted by the General Conference of UNESCO in 1972. The Operational Guidelines document that accompanies the Convention states: The cultural and natural heritage is among the priceless and irreplaceable assets, not only of each nation, but of humanity as a whole. The loss, through deterioration or disappearance, of any of these most prized assets constitutes an impoverishment of the heritage of all the peoples of the world. Parts of that heritage, because of their exceptional qualities, can be considered to be of outstanding universal value and as such worthy of special protection against the dangers which increasingly threaten them. Though Antarctica is clearly a priceless and irreplaceable asset that is worthy of special protection, there are some technical barriers to it being World Heritage Listed. One is that a sovereign, governing body is needed to nominate it for consideration. Since Antarctica has no government, a special exception would have to be made and potentially all parties to the treaty would have to agree. Furthermore, for an area to be nominated it must be a signatory to the World Heritage Convention and Antarctica does not have the power to sign Conventions. Antarctica quite easily satisfies all four of the natural World Heritage criteria (only one must be met). They are: vii. to contain superlative natural phenomena or areas of exceptional natural beauty and aesthetic importance;

viii. to be outstanding examples representing major stages of earth's history, including the record of life, significant on-going geological processes in the development of landforms, or significant geomorphic or physiographic features;

ix. to be outstanding examples representing significant on-going ecological and biological processes in the evolution and development of terrestrial, fresh water, coastal and marine ecosystems and communities of plants and animals;

x. to contain the most important and significant natural habitats for in-situ conservation of biological diversity, including those containing threatened species of outstanding universal value from the point of view of science or conservation.

AMUNC 2011

UNESCO - Topic B

Benefits of World Heritage listing

The main benefit of World Heritage Listing is access to the World Heritage Fund on a needs basis. States Parties contribute money to this fund compulsorily and voluntarily, and public and private donations also contribute. Listing puts the natural or cultural wonders of the area in the public eye and may increase its desirability as a tourist destination. A subsidiary list is World Heritage in Danger, a list of sites that are in danger of being damaged or disappearing due to armed conflict and war, earthquakes and other natural disasters, pollution, poaching, uncontrolled urbanization and unchecked tourist development. World Heritage in Danger listing allows the World Heritage Committee to allocate immediate assistance from the World Heritage Fund and alerts the public to the situation, hopefully encouraging increased conservation efforts.

Adelie penguins. Photo: Australian Antarctic Division, http://www.antarctica.gov.au/media/news/2010/new-antarctic-conservation-lawsadopted

As the Treaty stands, only about a quarter of the worlds nations are signatories, and of those only 27 can vote. In order to put the welfare of Antarctica in the hands of the world, either a new system would have to be devised or every nation would have to become a voting signatory. World Heritage Listing would be a way of putting world focus on Antarctica and its conservation without the slow, painful process of changing the existing order.

AMUNC 2011

UNESCO - Topic B

Focus questions
How can the parties to the Antarctic Treaty work with the World Heritage Committee to find a working model for the listing of Antarctica? Is it in the interests of States Parties and countries with territorial claims to list Antarctica? Once an area is World Heritage Listed, the State it resides in must submit periodic reports on the state of conservation and preservation methods put in place. Who would research and submit this report? Whose responsibility would it be to ensure Antarctica was being properly looked after?

Conclusion
Listing Antarctica would be one more step on the way to recognising Antarctica as belonging to humanity rather than any group of nations. It would bring the plight of the continent further into the public eye, and foster a culture of common responsibility for keeping the environment pristine. On the other hand, unless ownership of Antarctica is actually transferred to the world as a whole, would World Heritage Listing actually change anything? To answer the question of listing Antarctica as a World Heritage Site, delegates will have to investigate their countrys domestic and foreign policies to find out where their interests lie and just how much World Heritage means to them.

Resources
Key Documents
Text of the World Heritage Convention: http://whc.unesco.org/archive/convention-en.pdf Operational Guidelines for the implementation of the World Heritage Convention: http://whc.unesco.org/archive/opguide08-en.pdf US National Science Foundation, text of the Antarctic Treaty: http://www.nsf.gov/od/opp/antarct/anttrty.jsp Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty (The Madrid Protocol): http://www.antarctica.gov.au/antarctic-law-and-treaty/the-madrid-protocol Charter of the United Nations, Chapter XII: http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/chapter12.shtml

AMUNC 2011

UNESCO - Topic B

Websites
UNESCO World Heritage Centre: http://whc.unesco.org/en/nominations Atlantic Treaty System website: http://www.ats.aq/e/ats.htm World Heritage in Danger: http://whc.unesco.org/en/158/ Australian Antarctic Territory website: http://www.antarctica.gov.au/environment/antarcticas-cultural-heritage

News Articles
Greens pushing for Australia to look into nominating Antarctica: http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/10/11/2710767.htm http://www.greensmps.org.au/content/media-release/antarctica-world-heritage-listing Greenpeace, How we saved Antarctica: http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/about/history/how-we-saved-antarctica/ http://archive.greenpeace.org/comms/98/antarctic/report/background.html National Science Foundation, connection between Lake Vostok and Europa: http://www.nsf.gov/od/lpa/news/02/lvostok.htm

Journal articles:
Ellen S. Tenenbaum, (19901991), World Park in Antarctica: The Common Heritage of Mankind, Virginia Environmental Law Journal. [HeinOnline] Bernard P. Herber (1991) The Common Heritage Principle: Antarctica and the Developing Nations, The American Journal of Economics and Sociology Vol. 50, No. 4 [JSTOR]