南海专属经济区与发展中沿岸国粮食安全

James Kraska
{"title":"南海专属经济区与发展中沿岸国粮食安全","authors":"James Kraska","doi":"10.4337/9781786437532.00014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The human right to food security is the lost dimension of the maritime boundary disagreements in the South China Sea. The rationale for establishment of the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) has profound implications for the maritime disputes in the South China Sea. The EEZ was created to ensure that coastal subsistence fishing communities had access to offshore fish stocks adjacent to their coast. Yet China’s encroachment on its neighbor’s EEZs directly undermines the central purpose for creation of the zone. Whether China actually has lawful title to any of the insular features in the Paracel Islands and Spratly Islands is irrelevant to the question of sovereign rights over the resources in the region. As none of the features generate a 200-mile EEZ, the coastal states of the South China Sea may assert sovereign rights and jurisdiction from their normal baselines running along the coast of the mainland and the major islands supporting human habitation or an economic life of their own. Consequently, the southern-most reach of Chinese territory is the southern tip of Hainan Island. Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia, Brunei, and the Philippines enjoy the large EEZs throughout the South China Sea. This legal analysis is the only conclusion that supports the purpose of the zone, which is to protect rights of subsistence fishing for coastal populations. China’s distant water fishing activities, which stretch some 1,200 km from Hainan Island, unlawfully impair subsistence fishing by the South China Sea states. Although this analysis was written well before the 2016 Philippine–China Arbitration under Annex VII of UNCLOS, it is entirely congruent with the holding in the case. It remains to be seen whether China will ever curtail its gross violations of the international law of the sea.","PeriodicalId":109213,"journal":{"name":"Building a Normative Order in the South China Sea","volume":"31 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Exclusive Economic Zone and food security for developing coastal states in the South China Sea\",\"authors\":\"James Kraska\",\"doi\":\"10.4337/9781786437532.00014\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The human right to food security is the lost dimension of the maritime boundary disagreements in the South China Sea. The rationale for establishment of the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) has profound implications for the maritime disputes in the South China Sea. The EEZ was created to ensure that coastal subsistence fishing communities had access to offshore fish stocks adjacent to their coast. Yet China’s encroachment on its neighbor’s EEZs directly undermines the central purpose for creation of the zone. Whether China actually has lawful title to any of the insular features in the Paracel Islands and Spratly Islands is irrelevant to the question of sovereign rights over the resources in the region. As none of the features generate a 200-mile EEZ, the coastal states of the South China Sea may assert sovereign rights and jurisdiction from their normal baselines running along the coast of the mainland and the major islands supporting human habitation or an economic life of their own. Consequently, the southern-most reach of Chinese territory is the southern tip of Hainan Island. Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia, Brunei, and the Philippines enjoy the large EEZs throughout the South China Sea. This legal analysis is the only conclusion that supports the purpose of the zone, which is to protect rights of subsistence fishing for coastal populations. China’s distant water fishing activities, which stretch some 1,200 km from Hainan Island, unlawfully impair subsistence fishing by the South China Sea states. Although this analysis was written well before the 2016 Philippine–China Arbitration under Annex VII of UNCLOS, it is entirely congruent with the holding in the case. It remains to be seen whether China will ever curtail its gross violations of the international law of the sea.\",\"PeriodicalId\":109213,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Building a Normative Order in the South China Sea\",\"volume\":\"31 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-02-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Building a Normative Order in the South China Sea\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786437532.00014\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Building a Normative Order in the South China Sea","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786437532.00014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

粮食安全人权是南海海洋边界争议中缺失的维度。《联合国海洋法公约》确立专属经济区的理论依据对南海海洋争端具有深远影响。设立专属经济区是为了确保沿海自给渔业社区能够获得与其海岸相邻的近海鱼类资源。然而,中国对邻国专属经济区的侵犯直接破坏了设立专属经济区的核心目的。中国对西沙群岛和南沙群岛岛礁是否拥有合法所有权,与该地区资源主权问题无关。由于这些岛礁都不构成200海里专属经济区,南海沿岸国可以在其沿大陆海岸和支持人类居住或经济生活的主要岛屿的正常基线上主张主权权利和管辖权。因此,中国领土的最南端是海南岛的南端。越南、马来西亚、印度尼西亚、文莱和菲律宾在整个南中国海享有大片的专属经济区。这一法律分析是支持该区域的目的的唯一结论,该目的是保护沿海居民的自给捕鱼权利。中国的远洋捕鱼活动从海南岛延伸约1200公里,非法损害了南海国家的自给性渔业。虽然这一分析早在2016年根据《联合国海洋法公约》附件七进行的菲律宾-菲律宾-中国仲裁案之前就已完成,但它与本案的裁决完全一致。中国是否会减少其严重违反国际海洋法的行为,还有待观察。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Exclusive Economic Zone and food security for developing coastal states in the South China Sea
The human right to food security is the lost dimension of the maritime boundary disagreements in the South China Sea. The rationale for establishment of the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) has profound implications for the maritime disputes in the South China Sea. The EEZ was created to ensure that coastal subsistence fishing communities had access to offshore fish stocks adjacent to their coast. Yet China’s encroachment on its neighbor’s EEZs directly undermines the central purpose for creation of the zone. Whether China actually has lawful title to any of the insular features in the Paracel Islands and Spratly Islands is irrelevant to the question of sovereign rights over the resources in the region. As none of the features generate a 200-mile EEZ, the coastal states of the South China Sea may assert sovereign rights and jurisdiction from their normal baselines running along the coast of the mainland and the major islands supporting human habitation or an economic life of their own. Consequently, the southern-most reach of Chinese territory is the southern tip of Hainan Island. Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia, Brunei, and the Philippines enjoy the large EEZs throughout the South China Sea. This legal analysis is the only conclusion that supports the purpose of the zone, which is to protect rights of subsistence fishing for coastal populations. China’s distant water fishing activities, which stretch some 1,200 km from Hainan Island, unlawfully impair subsistence fishing by the South China Sea states. Although this analysis was written well before the 2016 Philippine–China Arbitration under Annex VII of UNCLOS, it is entirely congruent with the holding in the case. It remains to be seen whether China will ever curtail its gross violations of the international law of the sea.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信