Measuring the performance of Antarctic Treaty decision-making.

Agreements reached at the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meetings (ATCMs) are among the primary means for addressing Antarctic conservation and environmental protection issues. However, according to contemporary scholars, Antarctic Treaty decision-making is becoming increasingly unresponsive to the rising environmental challenges in the region. We assessed the performance of Antarctic Treaty decision-making by measuring the rate and diversity of decision-making over the last 6 decades. To measure the rate, we counted the number of inputs and outputs of ATCMs and calculated the time taken for legally binding outputs to enter into force. To measure diversity, we calculated the range of topics addressed by the inputs and outputs of ATCMs. The average number of agreements reached per ATCM increased from 1961 to 2022. Although the diversity of Antarctic topics discussed at ATCMs remained consistently high, the diversity of topics on which legally binding agreements were adopted declined significantly. Antarctic issues-including those of highest priority-are now almost entirely dealt with through nonbinding, soft-law agreements. It is plausible that this move away from binding decisions reflects a dynamic governance institution evolving to respond to new pressures. However, we suggest that the change reveals a concerning shift in decision-making behavior and performance, unique to the treaty's history. Soft law is beneficial in some cases, but its overuse diminishes accountability and transparency, significantly reducing the parties' abilities to understand and measure their performance, including the outcomes and impacts of decisions. Although the rate and diversity of ATCM inputs and outputs provide only a partial view of decision-making performance, the exploration of these metrics provides a foundation for asking essential questions about the impacts of Antarctic Treaty governance on the region's environmental protection and conservation.

Medida del desempeño de las decisiones del Tratado Antártico Resumen Los acuerdos logrados en las Reuniones Consultivas del Tratado Antártico (RCTA) son uno de los principales medios para abordar las cuestiones de conservación y protección ambiental de la Antártida. Sin embargo, según los académicos contemporáneos, la toma de decisiones del Tratado Antártico es cada vez menos receptiva a los crecientes retos ambientales de la región. Evaluamos el rendimiento de las decisiones del Tratado Antártico con la medida del ritmo y la diversidad de la toma de decisiones en las últimas seis décadas. Para medir el ritmo, contamos el número de entradas y salidas de las RCTA y calculamos el tiempo que tardan en entrar en vigor los resultados con vinculación jurídica. Para medir la diversidad, calculamos la gama de temas abordados por las entradas y salidas de las RCTA. El número medio de acuerdos alcanzados por cada RCTA aumentó de 1961 a 2022. Sin embargo, mientras que la diversidad de temas antárticos debatidos en las RCTA se mantuvo constantemente alta, la diversidad de temas sobre los que se adoptaron acuerdos con vinculación jurídica disminuyó significativamente. Las cuestiones antárticas ­incluidas las de máxima prioridad­ se abordan ahora casi en su totalidad mediante acuerdos no vinculantes y de derecho indicativo. Es plausible que este alejamiento de las decisiones vinculantes refleje una institución de gestión dinámica que evoluciona para responder a nuevas presiones. Sin embargo, sugerimos que el cambio revela una modificación preocupante en el comportamiento y los resultados de la toma de decisiones, único en la historia del tratado. El derecho indicativo es benéfico en algunos casos, pero su uso excesivo disminuye la responsabilidad y la transparencia, lo que reduce significativamente la capacidad de las partes para comprender y medir su rendimiento, incluidos los resultados y los impactos de las decisiones. Aunque la tasa y la diversidad de las entradas y salidas de las RCTA sólo proporcionan una visión parcial del rendimiento de la toma de decisiones, la exploración de estas métricas proporciona una base para plantear preguntas esenciales sobre los impactos de la gestión del Tratado Antártico para la protección y conservación ambiental de la región.

How the COVID-19 pandemic signaled the demise of Antarctic exceptionalism.

This paper explores how the COVID-19 pandemic affected science and tourism activities and their governance in the Antarctic and Southern Ocean. The pandemic reduced the ability of Antarctic Treaty Parties to make decisions on policy issues and placed a considerable burden on researchers. Tourism was effectively suspended during the 2020-2021 Antarctic season and heavily reduced in 2021-2022 but rebounded to record levels in 2022-2023. The pandemic stimulated reflection on practices to facilitate dialog, especially through online events. Opportunities arose to integrate innovations developed during the pandemic more permanently into Antarctic practices, in relation to open science, reducing operational greenhouse gas footprints and barriers of access to Antarctic research and facilitating data sharing. However, as well as the long-term impacts arising directly from the pandemic, an assemblage of major geopolitical drivers are also in play and, combined, these signal a considerable weakening of Antarctic exceptionalism in the early Anthropocene.

Taming a 'fuzzy beast'? Stakeholder perspectives on Antarctic science-policy knowledge exchange practices in New Zealand.

Antarctic environmental change is accelerating with significant regional and global consequences making it critically important for Antarctic research knowledge to inform relevant policymaking forums. A key challenge is maximising the utility of evidence in decision-making, to which scholars have responded by shifting away from linear science-policy arrangements towards co-production alternatives. As an Antarctic Treaty Consultative Party (ATCP), New Zealand (NZ) is responsible for facilitating knowledge exchange (KE) among Antarctic science and policy actors at national and international levels. However, at present, we have few metrics for assessing the success of science-policy dialogues. Furthermore, studies on the Antarctic science-policy interface have so far primarily focused on the international perspective. This paper is the first to examine domestic stakeholder perspectives regarding Antarctic KE using NZ as a case study. We report on the findings of two workshops involving over 60 NZ Antarctic stakeholders in 2021 that aimed to explore the various elements of NZ's Antarctic science-policy interface and identify barriers or drivers for success, including future opportunities. Our results indicate that there is a desire to shift away from the current linear approach towards a more collaborative model. To achieve this, stakeholders share an understanding that KE practices need to become more equitable, inclusive and diverse, and that the policy community needs to play a more proactive and leading role. Described as a 'fuzzy beast', the NZ Antarctic science-policy interface is complex. This study contributes to our understanding of Antarctic KE practices by offering new guidance on several key elements that should be considered in any attempts to understand or improve future KE practices in NZ or within the domestic settings of other ATCPs interested in fostering science-policy success.