{"title":"结论","authors":"C. Goodman","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780192896841.003.0008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This Chapter draws on the cumulative effect of the research and analysis in the book in order to address the overall enquiry concerning the nature and extent of coastal State jurisdiction over living resources in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) under the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC). First, it proposes a general statement or ‘jurisdictional test’ regarding the nature of coastal State jurisdiction over the living resources of the EEZ. It suggests that this jurisdiction is flexible but functional, consisting of a broad discretion exercisable within functional limits that are determined on the basis of reasonableness and by reference to the balance of rights and interests reflected in the EEZ regime. Second, it outlines some more thematic conclusions about the extent of coastal State jurisdiction, considering the effect that State practice has had on the interpretation or development of relevant aspects of the LOSC, and the extent to which it justifies assertions that the ‘creeping jurisdiction’ of coastal States will upset the balance of rights and interests established in the LOSC. The Chapter concludes the book with some brief reflections on the critical importance of striking the right balance between the rights and duties of coastal States and other States in the EEZ, in order to maintain the sui generis regime established in the LOSC and effectively and innovatively address the current and future challenges of international fisheries governance.","PeriodicalId":310785,"journal":{"name":"Coastal State Jurisdiction over Living Resources in the Exclusive Economic Zone","volume":"94 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Conclusion\",\"authors\":\"C. Goodman\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/oso/9780192896841.003.0008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This Chapter draws on the cumulative effect of the research and analysis in the book in order to address the overall enquiry concerning the nature and extent of coastal State jurisdiction over living resources in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) under the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC). First, it proposes a general statement or ‘jurisdictional test’ regarding the nature of coastal State jurisdiction over the living resources of the EEZ. It suggests that this jurisdiction is flexible but functional, consisting of a broad discretion exercisable within functional limits that are determined on the basis of reasonableness and by reference to the balance of rights and interests reflected in the EEZ regime. Second, it outlines some more thematic conclusions about the extent of coastal State jurisdiction, considering the effect that State practice has had on the interpretation or development of relevant aspects of the LOSC, and the extent to which it justifies assertions that the ‘creeping jurisdiction’ of coastal States will upset the balance of rights and interests established in the LOSC. The Chapter concludes the book with some brief reflections on the critical importance of striking the right balance between the rights and duties of coastal States and other States in the EEZ, in order to maintain the sui generis regime established in the LOSC and effectively and innovatively address the current and future challenges of international fisheries governance.\",\"PeriodicalId\":310785,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Coastal State Jurisdiction over Living Resources in the Exclusive Economic Zone\",\"volume\":\"94 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Coastal State Jurisdiction over Living Resources in the Exclusive Economic Zone\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192896841.003.0008\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Coastal State Jurisdiction over Living Resources in the Exclusive Economic Zone","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192896841.003.0008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
This Chapter draws on the cumulative effect of the research and analysis in the book in order to address the overall enquiry concerning the nature and extent of coastal State jurisdiction over living resources in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) under the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC). First, it proposes a general statement or ‘jurisdictional test’ regarding the nature of coastal State jurisdiction over the living resources of the EEZ. It suggests that this jurisdiction is flexible but functional, consisting of a broad discretion exercisable within functional limits that are determined on the basis of reasonableness and by reference to the balance of rights and interests reflected in the EEZ regime. Second, it outlines some more thematic conclusions about the extent of coastal State jurisdiction, considering the effect that State practice has had on the interpretation or development of relevant aspects of the LOSC, and the extent to which it justifies assertions that the ‘creeping jurisdiction’ of coastal States will upset the balance of rights and interests established in the LOSC. The Chapter concludes the book with some brief reflections on the critical importance of striking the right balance between the rights and duties of coastal States and other States in the EEZ, in order to maintain the sui generis regime established in the LOSC and effectively and innovatively address the current and future challenges of international fisheries governance.