Draft Policy Brief

Marine and Coastal Priorities for the World Summit on Sustainable Development

The analysis and policy suggestions put forward in this document are those of individuals working in major marine and coastal NGOs in South Africa and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organisations themselves.

Executive Summary

Chapter 17 of Agenda 21 focuses on the protection of marine and coastal areas and their resources. It recognises the need to view the marine environment as an integrated whole that requires integrated management. For example, protecting a specific fish species cannot occur without an assessment of its place in the broader ocean environment so that issues such as land- or ship- based sources of pollution; fishing or mining activities in the area; and climate change effects, must be considered in any management approach. Yet Agenda 21 also recognised that fisheries around the world were facing ‘mounting problems,’ including ‘overfishing, unauthorized incursions by foreign fleets, ecosystem degradation, overcapitalisation and excessive fleet sizes …’.

Some ten years later, global fisheries resources remain in crisis. Many fish stocks have collapsed as a result of overfishing, and the collective environmental impacts of marine pollution, new fishing technologies, harmful catching methods and overcapacity now threaten marine ecosystems across the world’s oceans. Yet as global fish stocks have declined, consumer demand for fish products has increased. One of the reasons for this is that more than half the world’s population lives within 60 km of the shoreline, with a substantial portion depending on coastal environments for their livelihoods and basic food needs. Increasing pressure to exploit fisheries resources could devastate Southern Hemisphere fish stocks that have not been exploited to the extent of those in the North. Unless immediate, collective steps are taken to sustainably manage global fisheries resources, their collapse is a near certainty.

There are currently a multitude of international legal instruments concerned with the management of oceans and coastal areas that have been developed under the auspices of the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention. However, most of these are sector-specific. This sectoral approach and the great number of international and regional fora created by these different legal instruments has resulted in ineffective governance and prejudices the ability of developing countries to participate fully in international marine governance. Thus we recommend the initiation of a process to consolidate and rationalise the legal and institutional framework for ocean and coastal governance. From a South African perspective, the three key marine issue-areas that require attention under such a process are: marine living resources (fisheries; seabirds; marine mammals); marine non-living resources (minerals and mining); and, pollution (land-based; ballast; plastics and oil). This process must be based on ecosystem management principles which:

• are consistent with the integrated and shared nature of the environment and with the internationally accepted integrated coastal zone management approach;
• are essential to improving the quality and productivity of coastal and marine areas;
• will enable those nations and communities who have the closest relationship with these areas to participate more effectively in their governance;
• will reduce the inefficiencies, conflict and duplications of effort associated with having different organisations managing different aspects of the same ecosystem, which is especially onerous for developing country states.

We believe that the South African Government as the Summit host, an African country with jurisdiction over a marine area that is twice the size of South Africa itself and that spans the meeting point of two great ocean systems and, as a leader in articulating the concerns of the Developing World, must ensure that these issues appear on the WSSD Agenda and are courageously dealt with at the Summit itself.

Introduction

As individuals working in non-governmental organisations based in South Africa and concerned with marine and coastal issues across the region and the globe, we have come together to present this policy brief to the South African Government and other stakeholders so as to underscore our belief that international marine and coastal governance issues must be placed squarely on the substantive agenda of the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD).

This view is supported in the United Nations Secretary General’s Review of Agenda 21, which states that,

Collectively, we agree with this assessment and believe that the WSSD presents a unique opportunity – an opportunity to generate global agreement on the need to develop a comprehensive set of legally binding, equitable and sustainable marine and coastal governance regimes that can ensure the future well-being of the planet’s ocean resources for all of humankind.

We have therefore identified three (3) key marine and coastal issue-areas, namely: marine living resources (fisheries; seabirds; marine mammals); marine non-living resources (minerals and mining); and, pollution (land-based; ballast; plastics and oil). We believe that the South African Government, as the Summit host, an African country with a coastline that spans the meeting point of two great ocean systems, and a leader in articulating the concerns of the Developing World, must ensure that these issues appear on the WSSD Agenda and are courageously dealt with at the Summit itself.

There are a multitude of international legal instruments concerned with the management of oceans and coastal areas, mostly concerned with sectoral issues such as fishing, marine pollution or the protection of specific species. This sectoral approach and the great number of international and regional fora created by the different legal instruments results in ineffective governance and prejudices the ability of developing countries to participate fully in the governance of marine issues. It is essential that a process of consolidating and rationalising the legal and institutional framework for ocean and coastal governance be commenced. This reform process must be based on an ecosystem management approach. In other words, the issues that arise in connection with a single coastal and marine ecosystem must be dealt with in a holistic manner, as far as possible under a single legal instrument.

Such an approach:

• is consistent with the integrated and shared nature of the environment and with the internationally accepted integrated coastal area management approach;
• is essential to improving the quality and productivity of coastal and marine areas;
• will enable those nations and communities who have the closest relationship with these areas to participate more effectively in their governance;
• will reduce the inefficiencies, conflict and duplications of effort associated with having different organisations managing different aspects of the same ecosystem which is especially onerous for developing country states.

1. MARINE LIVING RESOURCES

1.1. Fishery Resources

In 1992, Agenda 21’s, para 17.72 recognised that fisheries around the world were facing ‘mounting problems’, including ‘overfishing, unauthorized incursions by foreign fleets, ecosystem degradation, overcapitalisation and excessive fleet sizes …’. By 1994, the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) had estimated that all seventeen (17) of the world’s major fishing areas had either reached or exceeded their natural limits and that nine (9) of these areas were in serious decline.

Some ten years later, global fisheries resources remain in crisis. Many fish stocks have collapsed as a result of overfishing and the collective environmental impacts of overcapacity, marine pollution, new fishing technologies, harmful catching methods, and illegal, unreported or unregulated (IUU) fishing now threaten marine ecosystems (particularly seabirds and marine mammals) across the world’s oceans.

Yet as global fish stocks have declined, consumer demand for fish products has increased. It is estimated that this decade alone, the global trade in fisheries products will rise by up to 40%. This increasing pressure to further exploit fisheries resources could have devastating effects on Southern Hemisphere fisheries stocks which have as yet not been overexploited to the extent of those in the North. Unless immediate, collective steps are taken to put measures into place that sustainably manage global fisheries resources, predicting the collapse of the world’s marine resources in the near future will not be an unpredictable uncertainty, but a forgone conclusion.

1.1.1. Environmental Impacts

Fish form part of the complex ecosystems and webs of life that run across the world’s oceans. They know of no negotiated boundaries or international borders. Apart from an existence value in their own right, the integrity of the ocean’s ecosystems depends on sufficient fish stocks to maintain these webs. As we more often than not have little idea of the complexity of these linkages, the precautionary principle as well as ecosystem management approaches must be applied to fisheries management. Allocations and Total Allowable Catch limits (TAC’s) must be scientifically determined – not peddled in accordance with economic or political interests.

1.1.2. Economic Impacts

South Africa’s own fisheries are structured such that a few players benefit greatly and access and ownership is denied to many. This reflects the situation globally where a few rich, Northern fishing companies dominate the exploitation of the world’s fisheries resources. This requires a fundamental restructuring so as to achieve a more equitable situation, secure employment opportunities, as well as to ensure that the livelihoods of small-scale and subsistence fishers is not threatened.

If no real global effort is made to sustainably manage global and local fisheries and control IUU fishing, this vital protein source may simply be unavailable to future generations of humankind, and development and employment opportunities in this sector may simply not exist.

1.1.3. Social Impacts

The abovementioned economic impacts have grave social consequences – unemployment in large centres, loss of livelihoods in rural communities, and, for many in the developing world, loss of food security.

1.1.4. Developing Global Governance through WSSD

In order to avoid these negative environmental, economic and social impacts, we recommend that government participants at the WSSD commit themselves to, inter alia,

(i) DEVELOPING A LEGALLY BINDING HIGH SEAS CONVENTION TO GOVERN FISHING VESSEL CONDUCT ON THE HIGH SEAS. Governments must look to their territorial waters as well as to the sustainable management of fisheries in international waters. To this end, the WSSD must be viewed as an opportunity for the development of a legally binding High Seas Protocol that deals with issues such as by-catch rates and waste, the protection of endangered species, and the restoration and preservation of marine habitats. It must also provide for strict definitions of gear types and when, where and how they can be used; inhibit the export of overcapacity to Southern countries; monitoring, control and surveillance of distant-water fleets; and the ability to enforce international laws and prohibit continued fishing should these laws be in any way violated. Furthermore, those regarding distant-water fleets fishing the High Seas are to be effectively dealt with. Useful points of departure for the development of such policies are the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fishing and the International Plan of Action on vessels fishing in foreign or international waters must be held to at least the same standards of conduct required of them in domestic waters. Finally, strict rules on convenience reflagging must immediately be developed and put into effect if the real concerns Illegal, Unregulated and Unreported Fishing.

(ii) PROVIDING FOR TRANSPARENCY ON GOVERNMENT SUBSIDISATION OF THE FISHING INDUSTRY. The global extent of government subsidies to the fishing sector is as yet unclear. Lack of access to this kind of information, as well as intransigence on the part of both governments and corporations to furnish it, does not help in attempts to paint a clearer picture of this activity. Much greater transparency, particularly by Northern governments is required if this issue is to be fully understood and effectively dealt with.

(iii) ADOPTING THE PRECAUTIONARY APPROACH TO ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT AS PIVOTAL TO MARINE FISHERIES MANAGEMENT. Single-species management approaches cannot work in the long term. Each species forms part of larger marine and terrestrial ecosystems, and it is within these contexts that the targeting of a specific species for commercial use must be evaluated. The burden of proof must be placed squarely on the shoulders of the fishing industry and government decision makers, who must conclusively show, through multidisciplinary analysis and assessment that the exploitation of a fishery will not undermine the long-term economic, ecological or social contexts in which they operate.

(iv) DEVOTING MORE RESOURCES TO MONITORING, CONTROL AND SURVEILLANCE (MCS) OF DEVELOPING COUNTRY FISHERIES. Unpatrolled developing country waters are seen as easy pickings for distant water fleets that know the chances of being challenged by a naval or coast guard vessel are minimal. This opens these waters to illegal and unregulated fishing. Southern countries must begin to work together to pool MCS resources. Northern countries must be strongly encouraged to facilitate MCS activities, particularly where vessels carrying their flags have been implicated in illegal fisheries.

(v) COMPELLING MULTILATERAL AND BILATERAL LENDERS TO REEVALUATE CURRENT FISHERIES POLICIES. They must begin to work with non-governmental and community organisations, artisanal and subsistence fishers so as to understand how best to manage fishery resources to serve the primary nutritional needs of the poorest of the poor first. This, again, must be worked out in a context that holds the sustainable use of these resources as primary and ensures the conservation and management of all ecosystems and habitats that are impacted by such fisheries.

In addition, and in order to establish credibility on this issue in the international arena, South Africa must immediately take action domestically on the following issues:

• South Africa must, as a matter of urgency ratify the Abidjan and Nairobi Conventions which would begin to standardise coastal management practices on Africa’s East and West coasts;
• South Africa must immediately ratify the Agreement for the Implementation of the Provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 relating to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks (UNIA), and the United Nations Agreement to promote Compliance with International Conservation and Management Measures by Fishing Vessels on the High Seas (Compliance Agreement);
• South Africa must implement the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fishing and the FAO International Plan of Action on IUU Fishing;

• The South African Government needs to acknowledge the importance of the implementation of the FAO International Plan of Action for Sharks. This will provide a framework for the satisfactory management and conservation of shark species in Southern African waters. Sharks continue to be threatened by direct and indirect fishing pressure (finning, bycatch etc.).
• South Africa needs to affirm its position with respect to the importance of other international bodies such as CITES, CMS (Bonn Convention) etc. in the protection of shark populations. CITES is an extremely relevant body as it deals with international trade in species and/or their products. The international trade in sharks products (fins, meat, oils, cartilage, teeth, jaws etc.) is threatening a number of species (e.g. basking, whale and white sharks) and needs to be governed through CITES.
• South Africa should seriously consider introducing legislative measures to protect shark populations in our waters (e.g. basking and whale sharks).

1.2. Seabirds

Effective Ocean governance must put into place purposeful and responsive policies and programmes for the management of coastal zones and the interface between people and the sea. Governance should also provide for action at local, national, regional and global levels, particularly in the management of human activities that have an impact on the oceans resources.

In order to address global concerns around seabird conservation, international agreements must focus on their marine breeding and foraging habitats, including islands and other locations were they come ashore to breed. Issues of pollution are particularly relevant as they apply to oiling of southern African seabirds, especially the African Penguin Spheniscus demersus. Issues of governance are significant as they relate both to national legislation (e.g. revision of the South African Seabirds and Seals Protection Act) and to the involvement of southern African countries in international and regional instruments such as ACAP, AEWA (African-Eurasian Waterbird Agreement), CCAMLR, CMS (Bonn) and Wetlands (Ramsar).

1.2.1. Environmental Impacts

Seabirds play a key role in the ecological functioning of the earth’s oceans. If the balance between marine bird life, fishery resources and human interaction becomes radically disturbed, the costs in species extinction are immeasurable. South Africa is a range state for 15 of the 30 species of oceanic seabirds that are seriously at risk from being killed by longline fisheries throughout the world’s oceans. Currently it is estimated that tens of thousands of Albatrosses and Petrels are killed in South African longline fisheries alone. These species are also killed in longline fisheries in Chile, Argentina, Uruguay, Brazil, Namibia, Australia and New Zealand making this a truly international problem. The commitment made by developed and developing countries alike to promote sustainable development and biodiversity protection has resulted in the issue being addressed by some developed countries. Countries in the Southern Hemisphere and in particular developing countries are now in the process of raising the issue of conservation at the appropriate levels.

In an attempt to address these issues, a number of countries have negotiated the Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP) and consideration to ratify the Agreement is being considered by a few, including South Africa.

1.2.2. Economic Impacts

Resource exploitation through long-lining, has increased the number of fish sold on international markets, yet the South African market share in these products remains comparatively small. Legislative weaknesses and ineffective fishing practices have resulted in escalating bycatch rates. The ultimate extinction or severe reduction in numbers of albatross and petrel species has several implications that may directly affect the livelihood of fishers in South Africa and elsewhere. The most important of these is the long-term sustainability of the fishery in relation to incidental bycatch. Mounting international pressure saw a global ban on drift nets because of the incidental bycatch of non-target species. Such pressures are building against longline fishing, as reflected in the FAO-IPOA-Seabirds. The Toothfish longline fishery off South Georgia is subject to a six-month closure because due to previously documented seabird bycatch during the period now closed to fishing. More recently international environmental NGOs have called for a moratorium on the Patagonian Toothfish fishery, until such time as governments are able to deal effectively with IUU (Illegal, Unregulated and Unreported) fishing for this species and its inherent negative effects in economic terms (South Africa alone is estimated to have lost over R3 billion in revenue since 1996 as a result of IUU fishing for this species), and its associated costs to endangered seabird and marine mammal populations. Similarly, both US and Japanese-based tuna and swordfish longline fisheries are under threat of severe penalties, including closure, if they catch the highly endangered Short-tailed Albatross.

It is in the interests of the fishing industry as a whole (each bird hooked is one less fish on the line), and individual longline fisheries in particular, to secure their long-term futures through the reduction of seabird bycatch - by employing effective seabird bycatch mitigation measures fishers will reduce the loss of bait to seabirds, and thus increase the economic efficiency of fishing operations.

1.2.3. Social Impacts

The Seabird conservation programme is in favour of effective resource assessment, the development of management systems and effective monitoring. Capacity building, education and training are important in raising public awareness about the potential for marine resources to redress global and local social inequities. The opportunity exists within a seabird conservation programme to train persons from previously disadvantaged coastal communities in South Africa and other coastal developing states to act as observers, thus creating new job opportunities previously not available. Apart from observer programmes within the South African EEZ in Agulhas and Benguela waters, accredited observers would be eligible for employment as international observers onboard fishing vessels in waters governed by Regional Fisheries Management Organisations.

1.2.4. Developing Global Governance through WSSD

In order to establish credibility on this issue in the international arena, South Africa must immediately take action domestically on the following issues:

• Immediate ratification of ACAP (Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels) by South Africa (expected early 2002 following parliamentary approval);
• Development of a Memorandum of Understanding for the Conservation of Southern African Breeding Seabirds between Angola, Namibia and South Africa (Workshop, February 2002, submission of Appendix II nominations to CMS 7th CoP, September 2002);
• Production and implementation of a FAO National Plan of Action for Reducing Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries (NPOA-Seabirds) (contracted to Avian Demography Unit, University of Cape Town, 2002);
• Revision of the Seabirds and Seals Protection Act 46 of 1973 (Workshop, February 2002);
• Nomination of the sub-Antarctic Prince Edward Islands to the World Heritage Convention (text produced, submission in 2002);
• Revision of the Prince Edward Islands Management Plan (workshop, January 2002);
• Extension of the Prince Edward Islands Special Nature Reserve to include territorial waters to 12 nautical miles (to be proposed to the Prince Edward Islands Management Committee)

1.3. Marine Mammals

South Africa must adopt an unequivocal anti-whaling position in international fora, favouring instead the non-consumptive use of marine mammals. South Africa must also encourage the development of non-invasive tourism practices (eco-tourism) that can not only assist in the sustainability of marine mammal species, but have desirable economic and social spin-offs for impoverished coastal communities. Recent history has shown that South Africa can benefit environmentally, economically and socially from the development of eco-tourism oriented towards marine mammals (and other marine species). To this end, South Africa must support the establishment of marine protected areas and sanctuaries in a global context so as to ensure that the opportunities offered by such eco-tourism are not undermined as a result of destructive practices along the migratory paths and across the ecosystems on which these mammals depend for their survival. South Africa, with her SADC partners must also work with smaller states being brought into this issue under questionable circumstances, to ensure that the future growth of marine mammal populations, particularly cetaceans, is assured.

1.3.1. Environmental Impacts

Whale populations are critically low for many species, while others have begun to recover - pulled back from the brink of extinction as a result of the cessation of commercial whaling. Marine mammals constitute the apex of the marine food chain. As such, the effects of ocean noise (seismic surveys, military sonar, detonations etc.) on marine mammals, as well as the detrimental effects of overfishing and illegal operations on the marine ecosystems upon which these mammals depend must receive more global attention and research

1.3.2. Economic Impacts

The economic benefits of commercial whaling have been totally replaced by other industries. Furthermore, the position of whales at the top of the food pyramid makes them an inefficient source of food in a commercial sense. However, the economic benefits of eco-tourism based on whale-watching and involving other marine mammals, has great and sustainable economic potential, particularly for coastal communities which have lost other means of income because of declines in access to marine living resources as a result of overfishing.

1.3.3. Social Impacts

The concept of Sustainable Coastal Livelihoods (SCL) is becoming increasingly important on the developmental agenda (especially within academic, government and international funding arenas). SCL entails poverty alleviation and improvement of the lives of (mainly poor) coastal communities through the sustainable utilisation of marine and coastal resources. This concept inherently (although perhaps not explicitly) includes the following elements:

• People-centred approaches to natural resource management;
• Sustainable utilisation of resources as opposed to exclusion from access to resources;
• Equitable access to and ‘ownership’ rights of natural resources;
• Recognition of traditional uses/rights/knowledge;
• Decentralised/local/community management of resources e.g. CBNRM Subsistence or small-scale (SMME) utilisation of resources as opposed to large-scale commercial utilisation;
• The creation of alternative livelihoods where natural resource depletion compromises traditional or entrenched livelihoods e.g. eco-tourism replacing commercial fishing

South Africa and other developing countries clearly have the potential to generate community upliftment through eco-tourism and related activities. These, in cohort with small-scale, community-oriented mariculture of indigenous species under tight legislative control, could offer new opportunities for the economic and social empowerment of coastal communities, without massive costs to the marine and coastal environment.

1.3.4. Developing Global Governance through WSSD

We therefore recommend that government participants at the WSSD commit themselves to, inter alia,

1. REJECT ALL FORMS OF WHALING. In order to promote the long-term sustainability of marine mammal populations across the world’s oceans, South Africa needs to take a proactive stance at international conventions unequivocally rejecting all forms of whaling in any of the earth’s oceans and supporting the establishment of whale sanctuaries and marine protected areas along key breeding or migratory routes. South Africa must use its status as host nation to the WSSD to underline this position, and to win the support of Southern Hemisphere States in this regard so that international fora concerned with these issues, particularly the International Whaling Commission (IWC) cannot be manipulated by those few States in favour of whaling to maintain the status quo.

In addition, and in order to establish credibility on this issue in the international arena, South Africa must immediately take action domestically to:

2. MARINE NON-LIVING RESOURCES

2.1. Environmental Impacts

The offshore mining industry is controlled by large international consortiums and corporations having a virtual free hand in the extraction of offshore mineral resources. Diamond mining and offshore gas and oil prospecting and production, for example, show scant regard for their environmental impacts. Impacts are literally completely submerged and kept out of public domain. However, there is little question that the exploitation of marine living resources has effects on marine life across marine ecosystems, often having knock-on effects in vulnerable coastal zone areas.

2.2. Economic Effects

With little attention to the real environmental costs in the cost/benefit calculations of offshore mining ventures, environmental costs are externalised, making such ventures seem more economically viable than they actually are. Internalising environmental externalities is key to any determination of the viability of offshore exploitation of marine non-living resources.

2.3. Social Effects

In strong contrast to the area of living marine resources (above), and the terrestrial mining industry where some progress has recently been made, the offshore mining industry lacks mechanisms for equitable access to resources and community participation. Negative knock-on effects from offshore mining could also devastate already vulnerable coastal communities as the living marine resources upon which they depend for their livelihoods are decimated by environmentally costly offshore mining practices.

2.4. Developing Global Governance through WSSD

We therefore recommend that government participants at the WSSD commit themselves to, inter alia,

(i) THE INITIATION OF DISCUSSIONS WITH A VIEW TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN INTERNATIONALLY BINDING AGREEMENT GOVERNING THE EXTRACTION OF OFF-SHORE NON-LIVING MARINE RESOURCES WITH PARTICULAR FOCUS ON THE CONCERNS OF DEVELOPING COUNTRY COASTAL STATES. Such an agreement must be based on an understanding of the need to internalise the costs of offshore mineral activities through the application of, inter alia, the polluter pays principle, precautionary and preventative principles of international law. The capital intensive nature of these industries excludes all but major players. Any regime created to govern such issues must also include a general commitment be made to extend the progress made in the terrestrial mining industry as regards community access and participation to the off-shore industry.

3. POLLUTION

3.1. Environmental Impacts

Marine life, especially the endangered African penguin and Cape gannet, which have breeding colonies on Atlantic Islands off the west coast of South Africa have been affected severely over the years by oil spills. Oil spills come in two forms – either the oil is spilled accidentally or oil is illegally discharged at sea from the bilges of ships. Accidental oil spills involving large tankers can be extremely devastating but the continuous oiling of birds and cumulative environmental impacts of illegal discharges of bilge along our coastline can be just as devastating over a longer period of time. Similar effects are felt across the globe along major shipping routes.

Other key sources of marine pollution derive from ballast water released from ships with the resultant introduction of alien-organisms that can have devastating effects on indigenous species of fauna and flora. Marine pollution from land-based sources is also a global problem.

3.2. Economic Impacts

Increasing maritime traffic around Africa after the temporary closure of the Suez Canal resulted in the increase of large tankers passing the Southern Cape Coast. This has resulted in a total of 346 accidental spills between 1990 and 1999, which affected the environment and in some cases drastically affected certain marine species such as the endangered African penguin. The total amount of oil spilled in accidents for this period was 1 096 thousand tons, with the largest amount of oil, 830 000 tons, being spilled in incidents involving just 10 tankers, barges and combined carriers.

Oil spills are extremely costly to deal with. The costs involved in the rehabilitation of seabirds on an ongoing basis due to the illegal discharging of bilge oil along our coastline are immense. Further, the resultant pollution from oil spills may affect tourism in areas where the oil affects coastal activities.

The introduction of alien organisms as a result of ballast water discharges can severely impact on indigenous species of fauna and flora with costly economic and social effects.

3.3. Social Impacts

Marine and coastal pollution resulting from accidents at sea, illegal discharges, land-based sources or the introduction of alien organisms can undermine the economic basis of community activities, especially in those communities dependent on marine resources for their basic livelihoods.

Marine pollution can also have negative health effects, impacting on food security for vulnerable communities as well as compromising leisure and recreational activities.

3.4. Developing Global Governance through WSSD

We therefore recommend that government participants at the WSSD commit themselves to, inter alia,

1. ENCOURAGE THE INTERNATIONAL MARITIME ORGANISATION (IMO) TO CONFRONT THE PROBLEM OF UNSEAWORTHY VESSELS THROUGH THE INTRODUCTION OF GLOBALLY APPLICABLE AND ENFORCEABLE CONTROL MECHANISMS. International effort is required to prevent situations whereby old, dangerous ‘rust-buckets’ are used to ship oil or other cargo where the cargo is more valuable than the ship. This results in a situation where the cargo is insured for its value in terms of liability, but the actual pollution risk is far higher because of the condition of the ship and dubious responsibility of ship owners.
2. THE ENTRENCHMENT OF THE POLLUTER PAYS PRINCIPLE IN INTERNATIONAL MARITIME LAW.
3. THE IMPLEMENTATION OF INTEGRATED COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT PROCEDURES ACROSS SECTORS. Bio-regional planning principles and catchment management approaches must be introduced in coastal zone management, with assistance for such implementation to developing states.

In addition, and in order to establish credibility on this issue in the international arena, South Africa must immediately take action domestically to:

• accede to the International Fund Convention (1992 Liability Convention) urgently in order to be able to cover costs of major oil spills;
• implement preventative measures to ensure that threats from both accidental spills as well as illegal discharges are reduced drastically. This could be achieved through the declaration of certain sections of the South African coastline as "particularly sensitive sea areas" through the International Maritime Organisation. South Africa must also utilise existing international maritime law to assume control of any vessel posing a pollution threat within waters under her control;
• support a revamping of the Nairobi and Abidjan Conventions so as to expand them from mere marine based pollution conventions to conventions incorporating integrated coastal management principles.