Helga Law Journal - 01.01.2021, Blaðsíða 74

Helga Guðmundsdóttir
77
Helga Law Journal Vol. 1, 2021
76
Final Act in the Tragedy of the Commons
Will using compulsory conciliation to solve the
North East Atlantic Mackerel Dispute result in a
happier ending?*

Helga Guðmundsdóttir
Associate at Clifford Chance LLP (Brussels) and lecturer at the United Nations-
mandated University for Peace
Contents
1. Introduction
2. Management of Shared Fish Stocks
2.1. The 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
2.1.1. General Rights and Obligations of Coastal States with regard to
the Maintenance of Living Resources
2.2. The 1995 Fish Stocks Agreement
3. The Mackerel Dispute
3.1. The Emergence of the Mackerel Dispute
3.2. The Implications of the Failure to Resolve the Mackerel Dispute
4. Settlement of Fisheries Disputes
4.1. Dispute Settlement under the Convention
4.2. Compulsory Conciliation
4.3. Recourse to Conciliation in the Mackerel Dispute
5. Conclusion

Keywords:
Dispute resolution; compulsory conciliation; mackerel dispute; fisheries
management; law of the sea.

Abstract:
This article suggests that parties to protracted fisheries disputes make use of the
tools already available in the law of the sea framework, before resorting to other
general tools of coercion and – more importantly – before playing out the tragedy
of the commons by irreversibly overexploiting the stock. Specifically, the use of
the procedure of compulsory conciliation should be introduced to each coastal
State’s radar as a potential tool to resolve current and future fisheries disputes. It

* This article has been approved for publication by the academic editors following peer-review in
accordance with the journal’s editorial guidelines.
These conclusions demonstrate that there are ways to strengthen maritime
claims as coastlines retreat, which do not involve costly shoreline defences. The
effects of coastal changes differ depending on the legal basis for each claim and
are, in the case of acquiescence, dependent on a form of permission from the
international community. In fact, widespread acquiescence to threatened maritime
limits might eradicate the need for legal reform or revised interpretation of
UNCLOS. This does not entail a general solution but the flexibility to afford
stability to instances or regions where severe loss of entitlements is imminent.
Furthermore, this option has the benefit of being available now, de lege lata.