My other research involvements span a range of interests, including riverine and marine fisheries, seagrass and coral reef ecosystems, moths, plants, dugongs, turtles, crocodiles, waterbirds, otters, bats, population ecology, eco-hydrology, bioacoustics and sensory ecology, social and environmental history, conservation policy, and the application of Bayesian statistical methods in ecological research.
Krishnaswamy, J. Positive and neutral effects of forest cover on dry-season stream flow in Costa Rica identified from Bayesian regression models with informative prior distributions. Hydrological Processes, In Press.
Kelkar, N. The resource of tradition: changing identities and conservation conflicts in Gangetic fisheries. In: Srinivasan, U. Orient BlackSwan, India. Foraging and feeding ecology of Platanista : an integrative review. Mammal Review, 48 3 : Jumani, S. Fish community responses to stream flow alterations and habitat modifications by small hydropower projects in the Western Ghats biodiversity hotspot, India.
Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems, 28 4 : Dey, S. On the rehabilitation of a hand-reared smooth-coated otter Lutrogale perspicillata in Bihar, India. Atkore, V. River Research and Applications, 33, In: Hiremath, A. Khanal, G. Irrigation demands aggravate fishing threats to river dolphins in Nepal. Biological Conservation, B, A summary analysis of the ecological impacts of the National Waterways Bill Deshpande, K.
Acoustic identification of Otomops wroughtoni and other free-tailed bat species Chiroptera: Molossidae from India. Acta Chiropterologica, 17, How do fruit bat seed shadows benefit agroforestry? Insights from local perceptions in Kerala, India. Biotropica, 47, Lal Mohan, R. Ganges River Dolphin. In: Johnsingh, A. Mammals of South Asia—Vol. While persuasion and international discourse can influence perception of state self-interest, the principle of state self-interest predicts that the absence of self-interest based rewards and penalties will reduce the likelihood of compliance.
It has been suggested that the international legal framework is based on four fundamental principles:. At the foundation of this framework is an expectation of good faith and no trumping. States make international rules through two recognized and legitimate processes involving either explicit or implicit consent. Explicit consent is expressed though positively adopting an international obligation, generally through ratifying a treaty.
Implicit consent is expressed through state practice coupled with opino juris , making customary international law Bratspies As a rule, it is considered that states have a propensity to comply with treaty obligations, because the negotiation process generates an expectation of compliance. It is thought that rules that are considered fair, in both legitimacy and equity, are more likely to achieve compliance. Rules are considered legitimate when they are developed in accordance with the international legal framework, and involve no trumping Parker Perception of merit can be influenced through clarity of the rule and developing understanding of purpose and objectives of the rule through the international discourse and domestic interest groups.
The managerial model of compliance places a heavy emphasis on using dispute settlement mechanisms to clarify any ambiguity in treaty language. This model correctly recognizes that when treaties are negotiated the language deliberately adopted provides room for a range of reasonable interpretations Chayes and Chayes The principle of perceived merit predicts that the absence of a legitimate rule making process and outcomes reduces the likelihood of compliance.
Managerial theory concluded that "wilful flouting of legal obligations" infrequently caused non-compliance. This theory identified lack of capacity of states, and the necessary time lapse between agreeing to a new behaviour and developing the domestic framework to deliver on those obligations, as two of the three reasons for non-compliance Chayes and Chayes This theory identified that the real objective of environmental treaties is not only to affect state behaviour but also to regulate the activities of its nationals.
Fulfilling these obligations usually requires "detailed administrative regulations and vigorous enforcement efforts". Irrespective of political will this involves technical capacity, appropriate bureaucracy and financial resources Chayes and Chayes The importance of ensuring all states have the capacity to comply has been recognized in contemporary multilateral fisheries agreements.
The forms of assistance particularized by this article include "financial assistance, assistance relating to human resource development, technical assistance, transfer of technology, including through joint venture arrangements, and advisory and consultative services". This assistance was to be directed at improving conservation and management of fish stocks through "collection, reporting, verification, exchange and analysis of fisheries data" UNFSA Art.
The principle of capacity predicts that in the absence of the commitment by developed states to assist developing states, compliance with sophisticated regulatory regimes will be unattainable and therefore will reduce the likelihood of compliance. The mare liberum doctrine has been an international norm since the seventeenth century  , recognized as a jus cogen "in the interests of all mankind" Anand At a time when coastal states only exercised jurisdiction over a small territorial sea, usually 3 nm, this principle justified nationals of all states freely exploiting the resources of the high seas.
The concept of free or open access to exploit exhaustible resources frequently attracts the label "tragedy of the commons" and Garrett Hardin wrote in the late s: "Ruin is the destination towards which all men rush, each pursuing his own interest in a society which believes in the freedom of the commons. Freedom in a common brings ruin to all. After the Second World War fishing vessels of developed states commenced fishing areas of high seas bordering the territorial seas of developing states, and through significant technological advancements these vessels became more effective harvesters Bratspies , Sydnes Whether it was the inconsistency of state practice or the realisation that fisheries were not an inexhaustible resource Anand , Hewison , Carr and Scheiber , the United Nations was prompted to convene the conference on the law of the sea UNCLOS I in an attempt to settle and codify the rules.
Thirty-seven states ratified this convention and it remains in force to the extent it is not superseded by the United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea LOSC. The language of the Convention purported to apply to all states, despite ratification by only 37 states. All state parties were obliged to adopt, or cooperate with others in adopting, measures necessary for the conservation of high-seas resources Art.
The LOSC also provided that where nationals from two or more parties fished the same stocks, and agreed to adopt conservation measures, new entrants to the fishery who were parties to the Convention were obliged to adopt the measures. Failure to comply with this obligation provided a basis for commencing binding dispute settlement procedures Art. UNCLOS I addressed cooperation for the purposes of conservation of high-seas resources but it failed to resolve the area that could be subject to coastal state jurisdiction.
In a second United Nations conference on the law of the sea was convened to resolve this issue, however agreement was not reached. The Convention was to prevail over the Convention and future agreements were required to be compatible with "the effective execution of the object and purpose" Art. The Convention  provides a framework for regulating fisheries, using the setting of a total allowable catch for maximum sustainable yield Art.
The binding dispute resolution mechanisms Part XV together with the duty on each state to "fulfil in good faith the obligations" Art. While the Convention delivered a detailed governance framework for fisheries resources within the exclusive economic zones and the territorial seas articulating state rights and obligations McLaughlin , little attention was given to governance arrangements for the high seas Brownlie The foundation for legal order remained with the flag state, which retains basic exclusive jurisdiction over the activities of its vessels on the high seas Shaw In effect the LOSC repeated the right of all states to fish on the high seas, subject to specified obligations and the duty of cooperation from the Convention Edeson leaving a distinct tension between freedom to exploit and the need to conserve Ardia This approach is understandable, given that at that time 99 percent of all fish harvested was taken within nm of the coast.
But, fishing fleets have now developed high-seas fisheries beyond exclusive economic zones Juda and the international community has once again been required to address management of the commons. Governance architecture for regional fisheries organizations reflects two broad levels of cooperation, primary and secondary. Contemporary fisheries management governance regimes are designed to achieve effective fisheries management, which requires constraining fishing activity to levels that achieve sustainable yield and requires two fundamental decisions, namely how much fish can be taken and by whom.
The decision-making body is responsible for agreeing on conservation and management measures necessary to achieve long-term sustainability and setting a total allowable catch or levels of fishing effort as required UNFSA Art. The decision-making body is normally supported by advice from committees or working groups on scientific, compliance and other technical matters Sydnes WCPT Art. These regional fisheries management arrangements authorize the decision-making body to adopt conservation and management measures that are relatively sophisticated from a regulatory perspective Applebaum and Amos Measures involve: establishing a vessel register to record the vessels authorized to fish in the Convention Area e.
The objective of these modern organizations is to effectively regulate the individual fishers harvesting the fisheries resources.
The Turtles vs Shrimp Dilemma: Conservation in Conflict [Book]
Therefore, when ratifying fisheries agreements, states are undertaking to regulate the activities of their nationals, with "detailed administrative regulations and vigorous enforcement efforts" Chayes and Chayes Despite the creation of exclusive economic zones and the efforts of regional fisheries organizations, depletion of global fish stocks has continued Vigneron The state of world fisheries has been labelled "one of the most urgent resource problems facing the international community today" Carr and Scheiber It has been estimated that "two thirds of the fish stocks in the oceans are in urgent need of management" FAO With this outcome the effectiveness of the current governance architecture is being challenged.
A key cause of this failure is the activity of non party states. For instance, the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources CCAMLR  has implemented a catch limit for Patagonian toothfish, but now estimates that more toothfish is taken each year by vessels engaging in illegal, unreported or unregulated activities IUU fishing , than that taken by authorized vessels.
Flags of convenience  have been identified as primarily responsible for this IUU fishing . Flags of convenience either run vessel registers that require no genuine link between the vessel owner and the flag state and consequently the flag state is unable to exercise effective control over the vessel, or the flag state does not have the legislative or administrative processes necessary to exercise effective control over its vessels Polick Regional fisheries management organizations have struggled with states that have failed to subscribe to the collective management model.
Where conservation measures have been implemented to limit the fish harvested, fishing by non-parties has not only thwarted the efforts of those organizations, but has resulted in the non-party vessels benefitting from the reduction of fishing effort in the area Franckx Non-parties fall into two categories, states who cannot become parties due to lack of capacity, and states that choose not to participate "because they seek to avoid the obligations" Rayfuse The UNFSA sought to address "problems of unregulated fishing, over-capitalization, excessive fleet size, vessel reflagging to escape controls, insufficiently reflective gear, unreliable databases and lack of sufficient co-operation between States" Moran The agreement emphasizes collective management to deliver effective fisheries management.
The Pacta tertiis rule provides that treaty obligations bind only those states that have consented to be bound. It has been suggested that theoretically the UNFSA obligations are unlikely to develop into customary international law, because the rules are too "technical and concrete" Franckx to be appropriately developed as customary international law.
The Appellate Body interpreted the term in light of the acknowledgements made by the international community through bilateral and multilateral forums. In the recently concluded International Plan of Action to prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing IPOA-IUU FAO it is recorded that states who are not members of regional fisheries management organizations "are not discharged from their obligation to cooperate" with those organizations. States are to "give effect to their duty to cooperate by agreeing to apply the conservation and management measures established by that regional fisheries management organization, or by adopting measures consistent with those conservation and management measures, and should ensure that vessels entitled to fly their flag do not undermine such measures" Art.
That was in regard to the Chile-European Community case concerning the conservation and sustainable exploitation of swordfish stocks in the South-Eastern Pacific Ocean. The dispute was resolved prior to any determination by the Tribunal. Despite the apparent limits under international law of the ability to bind non-parties, and without clarifying the duty through the LOSC mechanisms, members of regional fisheries management organizations have been tempted to consider fishing by non-parties as illegal Chaves  rather than unregulated by the organization.
As a consequence they have begun to develop compliance measures based upon this conviction. To strengthen the effectiveness of regional fisheries management organizations, modern agreements include provisions requiring member states to take measures to deter non-compliant fishing activities by non-cooperating states.
The Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean WCPT obliges all members to "take measures consistent with the Convention, the Agreement and international law to deter the activities of vessels flying the flags of non-parties to this Convention which undermine the effectiveness of conservation and management measures" e. WCPT, Art. Fisheries-related state-imposed trade measures primarily include import prohibitions, flag state certification schemes, and port state landing prohibitions.
Importation prohibitions are a blanket approach by which the importing state declares that specific fish from a specific country will not be imported. Flag state certification schemes have been adopted by a number of regional fisheries management organizations as a means of establishing the total harvest; member states require the flag state to declare from where the fish has been taken prior to import. Port state landing prohibitions are implemented on a vessel-by-vessel basis; here port states exercise their exclusive jurisdiction to control vessel activities while in their internal waters.
This assumption was challenged in the EC-Chile dispute, but was not resolved. Port state measures were introduced to fisheries management in with the adoption of the Convention for the Prohibition of Fishing with Long Drift-nets in the South Pacific. This Convention provided for member states to restrict access to ports and port facilities where vessels had been involved in drift-net fishing Lobach It is yet to be resolved whether port state measures and import bans are consistent with international law.
While Greenpeace has asked governments to stop the use of flags of convenience by closing their ports, closing their markets, and prohibiting their nationals from owning or operating flag of convenience vessels,  developing states claim these measures are discriminatory Upton and Vitalis These measures have the potential to significantly affect developing states because the "flow of international fisheries trade is from developing countries to industrial countries" McDorman The World Trade Organization had members as of April The majority of these members are also parties to the LOSC.
The WTO obligations on members significantly limit the lawful actions that can be taken by states to encourage non-party compliance with regional fisheries management organizations Upton and Vitalis Regional fisheries organizations are currently promoting trade sanctions to obtain compliance from non-parties but these measures are yet to receive scrutiny or endorsement from the WTO Kelly Signatories to the General Agreements on Tariffs and Trade GATT have adopted a multilateral trade system to "reduce and eliminate international trade barriers and [which] strives to provide equal access to foreign markets".
The WTO was established to implement the agreed trade policies and it is the WTO that provides the dispute resolution mechanisms to resolve conflict between members Owen Historically, broad principles of customary international law have not been applied by the WTO to disputes.
Recently commentators have suggested, "the broad principles of customary international law, such as human rights norms and the precautionary principle, are universal norms superior to negotiated trade norms and therefore should be applied by WTO dispute panels" Kelly It has also been suggested that the customary international rule of sustainable development should be reflected in the WTO system. The object of sustainable development may be defined as to "consider the needs of present and future generations; accept limits on the use and exploitation of natural resources for environmental protection reasons; apply equity in the allocation of rights and obligations; and to integrate all aspects of environment and development" Dailey GATT contains three foundation principles: "most favoured nation treatment, national treatment and the prohibition of quantitative restrictions on trade".
Any restraint on trade by one member of the GATT against another provides a basis for commencing dispute resolution procedures available only to WTO Owen When considering trade measures employed by members of regional fisheries management organizations to deter fishing by non-parties, there are relevant GATT rules GATT, Art.
No distinction is to be made on the basis of flag of vessel, place of origin, departure, entry, exit or destination, or on any circumstances relating to the ownership of goods, of vessels or of other means of transport GATT, Art. Goods are considered to be in transit when the passage across such territory is only a portion of a complete journey GATT, Art. This transit obligation is relevant when considering the legitimacy of coastal states using port closures and landing prohibitions to deter the fishing activities of non-parties. GATT has made some provision for "green exceptions" Polick to these rules.
Article XX provides an exception where the trade measures are implemented in a manner that does not constitute a means of arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination and are not disguised restrictions on international trade; and the measures are "necessary to protect human, animal or plant life or health" or where measures relate to the "conservation of exhaustible natural resources" and are "made effective in conjunction with restrictions on domestic production or consumption" GATT, Art.
XX b and g. The use of import bans to support regional fisheries management organizations commenced with the endorsement of the imposition of measures in the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas ICCAT. These measures were to have effect from 4 August against Belize and Honduras and from 1 January against Panama.
This recommendation was implemented by the United States and Japan, although the United States had never imported bluefin tuna from these states. On 28 December Panama became a contracting party to ICCAT and at the Commission meeting it was recommended that member states lift the import prohibition on Panama in recognition of their new status.
On 30 January Honduras became a member and as a result at the commission meeting it was recommended that the importation prohibition be lifted against Honduras. To date Belize still remains a non-party. The effective use of trade sanctions by the United States and Japan to encourage participation in ICCAT and the absence of WTO challenge appears to have encouraged other regional fisheries management organizations to implement these types of measures. CCAMLR scientists have divided the convention area into a number of statistical areas for which management conservation measures have been adopted in respect of toothfish fisheries.
These measures include: imposing catch limits for areas where access is subject to the jurisdiction of coastal states;  permitting exploratory fishing only,  prohibiting fishing except for scientific research;  and prohibiting fishing entirely. CCAMLR now requires contracting parties to inspect all fishing vessels that enter their ports carrying toothfish,  to determine whether the fish was taken in the Convention Area and whether the fishing activity was in accordance with the conservation and management measures.
As every landing of toothfish must be accompanied by a completed catch documentation declaration, the Commission provides for cooperating non-contracting parties to issue catch documentation forms. The catch documentation form requires masters to declare if toothfish was taken in a manner consistent with the CCAMLR conservation measures. If a non-contracting party has taken catch in the Convention area that catch will be presumed to have been taken in a manner that undermines "the effectiveness of CCAMLR conservation and management measures"  and on that basis landing is prohibited.
Recently Seychelles, Singapore, Mauritius and China have all implemented the catch documentation scheme for their ports as cooperating non-parties. But there's the rub: There's no way to tell what's been caught in a trap, trawled, or farmed. That's why labeling is essential, from the point of view of both conservationists and the U. How could anyone argue that giving more information to consumers is a bad thing? Welcome to the world of meatpackers and distributors. Kara Flynn, director of communications for the National Pork Producers Council argues that country-of-origin labeling will be bad for the American pork business, and therefore bad for American consumers.
If anything, that's un-American. The added expense of keeping records up and down the supply chain will be costly for the meat industry, and in turn costly for consumers, says Flynn. But this law is to the detriment of many different industries that employ hundreds of thousands of people in this country. There's nothing patriotic about that. Under the Farm Bill, retailers would be required to keep auditable records on where all food products came from for two years.
John VanSickle of the center. Current regulations, such as those that require health and sales documentation, would provide much of the needed information. Flynn dismissed the environmental aspect of labeling as only being a selling point for consumers in "urban areas, like San Francisco and Washington, D. But Lovera, from Public Citizen who is in fact based in Washington , defends the consumer-right-to-know aspect of the country-of-origin law: "There does seem to be a growing awareness among consumers that what gets done to your food and where it comes from matters, and so this makes them able to act with a little more information.
And would you like to know? Lovera says that wholesalers are using the global marketplace to buy food products "wherever it is the cheapest -- 3, to 10, miles away -- where there is cheap labor and weak rules. There are plenty of small farmers here who need a way to pass on to the marketplace the value that comes from growing food close to home, and this is one small way to do that.
Tim Moore from the Texas Aquaculture Association and the Texas Shrimp Farmers' Association, testifying at one of the USDA "listening sessions" held to discuss the labeling law, argued that the new rules will benefit the local producers.
Moore testified that shrimp farmers in Texas have seen profits per pound decline steadily in the last year and a half. Bullard, from Americans for Country of Origin Labeling, says that the reason groups like the National Pork Producers Council and the American Meat Institute are kicking so hard against this regulation is that it undermines meat-packer control over the supply chain: "The real issue here is that this takes market power away from the packers.
If the product is not differentiated, the packers have exclusive control over where to obtain the inventory to satisfy industry demand.
Competition cannot occur at the retail marketplace, if U. If the proponents of the labeling laws can salvage them from the appropriations attack, it will be up to domestic producers, like Texas shrimpers, to find innovative ways to convince consumers that buying American has its benefits. And even conservationists admit that the verdict is still out on whether many Americans will be willing to pay a premium to ensure, say, that they're not unwittingly eating the ghosts of sea turtles with their shrimp dinners.