Dynamics Domains of Antartica

Page 1



Swadheet Chaturvedi Daniel Kiss

DYNAMIC DOMAINS OF ANTARCTICA

ARCHITECTURAL ASSOCIATION SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE

LANDSCAPE URBANISM MArch 2019-2020


DYNAMIC DOMAINS Swadheet Chaturvedi Daniel Kiss

DIRECTORS

Acknowledgements

Alfredo Ramirez Eduardo Rico

We would like to take this opportunity to thank our tutors Alfredo, Clara, Eduardo as it would not have been possible to construct this project without their expertise and guidance, which helped us shape our thought and transformed our perspective on a variety of subjects.

STUDIO MASTER Clara Oloriz Sanjuan

HISTORY AND THEORY Clara Oloriz Sanjuan Teresa Stoppani

TECHNICAL TUTOR Gustavo Romanillos Claudio Campanille

ARCHITECTURAL ASSOCIATION SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE

LANDSCAPE URBANISM MArch

2019-2020

We are grateful for this opportunity that was given to us by Giulia Foscari through Polar Lab, and were always inspired to take our research to newer heights by her wisdom and mentorship. We also thank Federica Zambeletti for not just her valuable input to the project but also for being a ceaseless source of ideas. We appreciate all the external jurors, fellow researchers at the British Antarctic Survey (BAS) and New Economics Foundation (NEF), who helped us build our narrative throughout the duration of our project. And lastly, we express huge gratitude towards our technical tutors, fellow classmates, friends and family for their constant support.



What is Dynamic Domains? Dynamic Domains was developed at AA Landscape Urbanism within the context of the project of Antarctica 200. Conceived to shed light on a continent that lies in the dark six months per year, Antarctica 200 is a cross-disciplinary project directed by Giulia Foscari. Working closely with a group of global experts from the fields of architecture, engineering, science, glaciology, international law, anthropology, fashion technology, literature and art, Antarctica 200 aims to shift the collective attention South and to unveil the unique traits of the continent laboratory. The research agenda aims to assess Antarctica’s indisputable role in the global ecosystem, understand the conflicting and fragile geopolitical implications of the Antarctic Treaty and its experimental governance model, and document the evolution of Antarctic architecture to challenge the state of the arts and bring to the foreground prototypes for inhabitation in the extreme.

The academic platform of Antarctica 200 is the Polar Lab, a network of research clusters distributed around the globe in countries which have an intense history with Antarctica. Though apparently counterintuitive for a territory that defies national claims, the Polar Lab encourages the uncensoring of unique narratives and study cases otherwise concealed in regional archives and local intelligence. To date, the Polar Lab hubs are run within the following organizations: Architectural Association School of Architecture (UK), Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile (CL), Ness (AR), Escola da Cidade (BR), Hong Kong University (HK). The result of this collaboration, Dynamic Domains, analyses the existing models of human management of this fragile ecosystem with a focus on the marine environment and the fishing of Antarctic Krill (Euphausia superba).


Spatiotemporal scales An important aspect of interpreting this project is to understand and represent the various spatial scales at which it has an influence on, and how the same spatial scales influence the intricacies of the project itself. Thereby in order to keep track of the varying scales, tools of visual representation has been used. Following are the four scales at which the layers of the project are distributed: Local Scale; Geographical/ National Scale; Continental Scale and Global Scale.

DIAGRAM 01. / SPATIOTEMPORAL SCALES

Variability within the above mentioned spatial scales of research allows us to link global relations with intricate specifications, such as the planetary processes from the smallest of diatomic species like Phytoplankton, to another keystone species like the Krill which has an influence on global systems, even if they are rather small organisms. Whereas temporality assists the research through including activities which are regulated daily such as the fishing management or metabolic processes which goes on for months, seasons, years or maybe even decades.


FIG. 01 / SPATIAL SCALES Four main scale in spatial extent that the it is being addressed throughout the scope of the research


Abstract Although ‘The Environmental Protocol’ of 1998 bans “any activity relating to mineral resources, other than scientific research” and conventions such as CCAMLR have since 1982 been active in trying to safeguard and conserving Antarctic marine life, industrial fishing of Antarctic Krill is extremely widespread especially around the Antarctic Peninsula. With the global value krill oil set at 204.4m USD in 2015, significant growth is expected due to increased awareness of the health benefits of fish oils, and global revenues are expected to nearly double by 2021. Therefore, through the case of Krill fisheries, the scope of this research is to understand the geopolitics of managing the global commons of Antarctic Marine. This would be done by mapping out the gradient change of primary productivity of fishing activity and marine ecosystem in space and time to better understand the consequences of industrial processes on their immediate natural systems. The objective is to devise a management tool which shall consider the variations in ecosystem due to planetary processes and regulate the fishing industry in sync with such variations through creation of dynamic boundaries. The last part of the research would be to test the flexibility of this tool by visualising its adaptability on different planetary systems to link IPCC’s socio-economic scenarios with emission models and therefore predict the most sensitive systems of our planet’s near future.


01.

HUMAN EMERGENCE IN ANTARCTICA

01.1. 01.2. 01.3. 01.4. 01.5. 01.6.

ANTARCTICA AS A GLOBAL COMMON THE HEROIC ERA RESOURCE EXTRACTION LEGAL BOUNDARIES TERRITORIAL CHRONOLOGY REFERENCES

02.

LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK

02.1. 02.2. 02.3. 02.4. 02.5. 0.2.6.

ANTARCTIC TREATY SYSTEM SCIENTIFIC HUMAN ACTIVITIES ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ASPA: AN APPARATUS TO TERRITORIALIZE REFERENCES

03.

PLANETARY PROCESSES

03.1. 03.2. 03.3. 03.4.

GEOMORPHOLOGY OF ANTARCTICA PULSATING ANTARCTICA PLANETARY METABOLISM REFERENCES

04.

ANTARCTIC KRILL AND ITS EXTRACTION

04.1. 04.2. 04.3. 04.4. 04.5. 04.6. 04.7.

ANTARCTIC KRILL GLOBAL KRILL FISHING INDUSTRY KRILL FISHING VESSEL CATALOGUE FLOATING INDUSTRY CONCENTRATION OF KRILL FISHERIES DEPLETION RISK OF PREDATOR SPECIES REFERENCES

05.

NORWEGIAN KRILL INDUSTRY

05.1. 05.2. 05.3. 05.4.

AKER BIOMARINE: CORPORATE STRUCTURE KRILL FISHING INDUSTRY TECHNICAL REPORT: GEOSPATIAL MODELLING REFERENCES

12 14 16 18 20 22

26 30 32 34 38 48

52 54 56 58

62 64 66 68 70 72 74

78 80 84 86


06.

DYNAMIC OCEAN MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS

06.1. 06.2. 06.3. 06.4. 06.5.

INADEQUACIES OF CURRENT STATIC MANAGEMENT COMPLEXITY OF DYNAMIC MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS SPECTRUM OF DYNAMISM CASE STUDIES REFERENCES

07.

PROPOSAL OF DYNAMIC DOMAINS

07.1. 07.2. 07.3. 07.4. 07.5. 07.6.

BOUNDARIES OF DYNAMIC DOMAINS PRODUCTIVE DOMAINS DYNAMIC ISOCHRONAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT INTERVENING THE GLOBAL NETWORK TECHNICAL REPORT: DATA PROCESSING REFERENCES

08.

MANAGING GLOBAL COMMONS

08.1. 08.2. 08.3. 08.4. 08.5.

CURRENT ADMINISTRATIVE BOUNDARIES IDENTIFYING DYNAMIC DOMAINS DYNAMIC GLOBAL SYSTEM PROSPECTS OF DYNAMIC DOMAINS REFERENCES EPILOGUE

09.

APPENDIX

09.1. 09.2. 09.3. 09.4.

TABLE OF DIAGRAMS TABLE OF FIGURES TABLE OF MAPS BIBLIOGRAPHY

90 92 93 94 100

104 106 112 118 120 122

126 128 132 134 138 140

144 145 146 150


FIG. 1. / ROSS ICE SHELF, ANTARCTICA source: NASA/GSFC

One of the major reasons for humans to have ever emerged in the Antarctic waters was to fish and extract marine resources. Little did they know there existed an endless white mass at the other edge of the world.


01.

HUMAN EMERGENCE IN ANTARCTICA

01.1. 01.2. 01.3. 01.4. 01.5. 01.6.

ANTARCTICA AS A GLOBAL COMMON THE HEROIC ERA RESOURCE EXTRACTION LEGAL BOUNDARIES TERRITORIAL CHRONOLOGY REFERENCES


HUMAN EMERGENCE IN ANTARCTICA

01.1.

ANTARCTICA AS A GLOBAL COMMON What is a global common? The global common refers to resource domains or areas that lie outside of the political reach of any one nation state, thus the international law identifies four global commons namely: The High Seas, Atmosphere, Antarctica and Outer Space. 1 But the broader question then arises that who owns the resources within such domains, or who has the right to regulate the same? Elinor Ostrom argues that a healthy management system of resources is one where the beneficiaries are in proximity to the resource itself. She is a thorough supporter of “bottom up” approach to issues related to resource extraction, a domain where government involvement has not always been positive. She believes that it is a natural phenomenon where an external set of people impose their economical/ political influence to gain an advantage over resources is the real tragedy. 2 Therefore it can be argued that attaching the values of ecological resources originating out of a common pool should directly benefit the stakeholders instead of commercially draining the commons.

Antarctica’s case: Antarctica is a unique example of how a terrestrial global common is managed by the international community. It is rather a lab experiment of human geopolitics as it is the only continent without any indigenous human population to have ever existed. Theoretically, it has been allowed to evolve as a territory dedicated to the cause of science and scientific community. From Antarctica’s perspective, Madrid protocol was established in 1991 and came into force in 1998.3 This ‘Environmental Protocol’ disallowed any nation state to extract resources for personal benefits in any shape or form. However, recent history proved that even though terrestrial Antarctica is relatively safe from resource extraction, the marine environment in the Antarctic territory is completely the opposite. Fisheries continue to exist even though it is regulated by certain frameworks in place. But it is often noted that any sort of resource extraction beyond national territory is not beneficial for private organisations 4 and therefore is often funded by the states, so as to allow certain fishing companies to deploy not only in the Antarctic Marine but extract in the global commons in general. It is evident that environmental protocol does not align with the marine fisheries that exist in the Antarctic Marine and hence is in contradiction with itself.

1 2020, https://www.unenvironment.org/delc/GlobalCommons/ tabid/54404. 2 “The Tragedy Of The Commons”, Science 162, no. 3859 (1968): 1243-1248, doi:10.1126/science.162.3859.1243. 3 “Environmental Protocol | Antarctic Treaty”, Ats.Aq, 2020, https://www.ats.aq/e/protocol.html. 4 Enric Sala et al., “The Economics Of Fishing The High Seas”, Science Advances 4, no. 6 (2018), doi:10.1126/sciadv.aat2504.

OUTER SPACE


HIGH SEAS

DIAGRAM. 02 / THE FOUR GLOBAL COMMONS

ATMOSPHERE ANTARCTICA


HUMAN EMERGENCE IN ANTARCTICA

01.2.

THE HEROIC ERA

FIG. 03 / POLHEIM CAMP: “HOME AT THE POLE” Robert Falcon Scott (at left) and companions at Polheim, South Pole, 18 January 1911

FIG. 02 / SHACKLETON’S ENDURANCE photography by: James Francis Hurley, (1915), Gelatine dry plate, Henley Collection, National Maritime Museum from Greenwich, UK

The age of Antarctic Exploration started with the discovery of Antarctica in the 1820s including the heroic adventures of Shackleton.5 It got over until after the first world war ended. This age of human discovery and exploration went through phases of whaling and sealing6 followed by race towards the south pole. The Sixth International Geographical Congress’s advocated for exploration of Antarctica led to the passing of a resolution to do so, and thus initiated the Heroic Era through the expeditions by scientists and explorers from Australia, France, Britain, Germany, Belgium, Sweden, Norway, Scotland and Japan. HMS Challenger became the first ship to cross the Antarctic Circle in 1874, verifying the existence of Antarctica through their discovery of continental rocks on the ocean floor.7

Race to the South Pole Even after difficulties faced by multiple international expeditions to Antarctica, the race to the South Pole did not stop. In 1911,8 while Scott’s British Antarctic Expedition and Amundsen’s South Pole Expedition were in direct race with each other, Amundsen managed to reach 35 days before Scott on 13 December 1911. However Scott’s expedition was never completed since his team perished due to extreme cold and lack of supplies to keep up their health. Their bodies were discovered in November of the same year. 9 The inherent instinct of human nature to be curious has what has led to millenniums of trade, migration and exploration. It was obvious that the only continent left to be discovered would be up for grabs. Therefore the race to the South-Pole was a natural consequence. However the untameable conditions of Antarctica made it rather complex for it to be territorialized in any shape or form. Extraction of marine resources was the next best option available.

5 “UKAHT - The Heroic Era”, Ukaht.Org, 2020, https://www.ukaht. org/learn/the-heroic-era/. 6 Coming Antarctica, “Coming Back From The Brink: The Fur Seals Of Antarctica”, Oceanwide-Expeditions.Com, 2020, https:// oceanwide-expeditions.com/blog/coming-back-from-the-brink-thefur-seals-of-antarctica. 7 ibid. 8 ibid. 9 ibid.


FIG. 04 / DISCOVERY AND EXPLORATION Maps and charts from U.S. Naval Antarctic Expedition 1946-1947, also known as Operation Highjump


HUMAN EMERGENCE IN ANTARCTICA

01.3.

RESOURCE EXTRACTION Historically humans entered the Antarctic System mainly to fish and extract marine resources.10 This practice continues till date even after introducing protocols and treaties in place to protect the Antarctic system from resource exploitation (which will be further discussed).

Sealing

FIG. 06 / AN INQUISITIVE PENGUIN BECAME A RADIO OPERATOR’S PET ON THE ISLAND IN 1955. Photography by International Newsreel, Nat Geo Image Collection

FIG. 05 / A WHALING SHIP FOLLOWS IN THE TRACKS OF THE S.S. HEKTORIA The Wilkins-Hearst Expedition ship by the island in 1929., Photography by International Newsreel, Nat Geo Image Collection

The United States and Great Britain hunted the Antarctic fur seal during through the 18th and 19th centuries. Extensive hunting pressure resulted in the fur seal coming to the brink of extinction by 1920s.11 By then, other nations started encroaching into the territory too, and most of them were forced to switch.

10 Coming Antarctica, “Coming Back From The Brink: The Fur Seals Of Antarctica”, Oceanwide-Expeditions.Com, 2020, https:// oceanwide-expeditions.com/blog/coming-back-from-the-brink-thefur-seals-of-antarctica. 11 ibid.


Whaling They switched to extensive whaling and even established infrastructure to process the whales. Consequently, the global count of whales fell from 300,000 to 2000. Therefore it can be argued that the idea of Antarctica being pristine may not be entirely true after all.12

Infrastructure

Photography by International Newsreel, Nat Geo Image Collection

FIG. 10 / A VIEW OF THE SURFACE OF THE WATER IN DECEPTION ISLAND HARBOR, COVERED WITH BIRDS. Photography by International Newsreel, Nat Geo Image Collection

FIG. 09 / FOLLOWING ITS CAPTURE, A WHALE IS HAULED TO THE FLENSING PLATFORM ON DECEPTION ISLAND IN 1929.

Once Deception Island was discovered, the island was a host to one of the most extensive sealing operations. After sealing the island saw infrastructure, that were raised to process whales. However due to better tracking technology and big enough vessels to process the whales on board, these infrastructures became redundant and still continue to exist at Deception Island as ‘Historical Sites’.13

12 “Effects Of Sealing And Whaling In Antarctica”, Coolantarctica. Com, 2020, https://www.coolantarctica.com/Antarctica%20fact%20 file/science/threats_sealing_whaling.php 13 “Wildlife Is Thriving On This Eerie Polar Volcano”, Nationalgeographic.Com, 2020, https://www.nationalgeographic.com/ photography/proof/2018/march/deception-island-antarctica-expedition-exploration/.


HUMAN EMERGENCE IN ANTARCTICA

01.4.

LEGAL BOUNDARIES Traditionally it has been accepted that everything 60° Southwards is a part of the Antarctic System including the marine. Coincidentally, this human conceived way to locate a certain geolocation through ‘coordinate system’ also aligns with the natural geophysical boundaries which separates Antarctic ecosystem from the rest of planetary systems.

Geopolitics related to Antarctica

FIG. 11 / POSTAGE STAMP Ervine Metzl , 1958, Chicago, USA

Initially the following seven nations laid claim to Antarctica: Argentina, Australia, Chile, France, New Zealand, Norway and the United Kingdom. Whilst the United States and the USSR reserved rights to claim in future.14 But several of these claims were at dispute with each other as a result of which after the Second War, these disputes were argued upon at the International Court of Justice (ICJ). However post war developments led to a brief era of cold war which led to uncertainty over various claims. At the same time, the international geophysical year created a pivotal moment which allowed the scientific community to reintroduce Antarctica to the international community and for the future of governance of Antarctica.15

Operation Deep Freeze Operation deep freeze materialized as a consequence to the International Geophysical Year in 1957-58. It was a combined effort among 40 nations to conduct planetary studies including both the poles. As a result, countries like the United States, New Zealand, France, Japan, Norway, United Kingdom, Chile, Argentina and U.S.S.R decided to go to the South Pole.19

The Continent for Science The pivotal role of science in the ATS has been characterized by several writers as the lifeblood or gel of the political regime, for example Klaus states: ‘Antarctic science is the key to international credibility both for a nation within the Antarctic Treaty System and for the Antarctic Treaty within the broader international community of science;20 Therefore it can be concluded that today Science has become a territorial apparatus for nations and global forces to maintain their presence through it by establishing research facilities and bases.

Eventually due to multifacet geopolitical reasons, an ATS (Antarctic Treaty System) was established in 1962 as governing framework of Antarctica.16 The Antarctic Treaty was signed in Washington on 1. December 1959 by the twelve countries whose scientists had been active in and around Antarctica during the International Geophysical Year of 1957-58.17 It entered into force in 196118 and has since been acceded to by many other nations.

LEGEND AUSTRALIA ARGENTINA CHILE FRANCE NEW ZEALAND NORWAY UNITED KINGDOM

14 Aant Elzinga, “Antarctica: The Construction Of A Continent By And For Science”, 2020. 15 Klaus Dodds, Alan D Hemmings and Peder Roberts, Handbook On The Politics Of Antarctica, n.d., 217-231. 16 “01. Antarctic Treaty, Done At Washington December 1, 1959. - United States Department Of State”, United States Department Of State, 2020, https://www.state.gov/antarctic-treaty/. 17 Colin P. Summerhayes, “International Collaboration In Antarctica: The International Polar Years, The International Geophysical Year, And The Scientific Committee On Antarctic Research”, Polar Record 44, no. 4 (2008): 321-334, doi:10.1017/ s0032247408007468. 18 ibid. 16.

19 Naval Archives, “February 1, 1955: Task Force 43 Commissioned To Plan And Execute Operation Deepfreeze”, Naval History Blog, 2020, https://www.navalhistory.org/2013/02/01/february-1-1955-task-force43-commissioned-to-plan-and-execute-operation-deepfreeze. 20 Klaus Dodds, Alan D Hemmings and Peder Roberts, Handbook On The Politics Of Antarctica, 2017, 107-110


MAP 01. / TERRITORIAL CLAIMS ON LEE CONFORMAL PROJECTION by Swadheet Chaturvedi and Daniel Kiss, in collaboration with Polar Lab


HUMAN EMERGENCE IN ANTARCTICA

LEGEND ANTARCTIC TREATY CONSULTATIVE MEETING SPECIAL ANTARCTIC TREATY CONSULTATIVE MEETING DIPLOMATIC CONFERENCE MEETING OF EXPERTS ATS RATIFIED ATS ENTERS INTO FORCE CONVENTIONS PROTOCOLS

01.5.

TERRITORIAL CHRONOLOGY Significant events of Antarctic History After almost a century of explorers trying to find this mysterious land in the south, and after finally spotting it, a few countries started claiming its slice of the cake, starting with the united kingdom in 1908, followed by New Zealand, France, Norway, Australia, Chile and Argentina. Consequently, countries started establishing bases and facilities in suitable locations. The more quirky aspect of the establishment of these bases, was the opening of post offices at each base. Stamps are a form of currency and if a nation were to issue stamps for one of its territories, it further strengthens that territorial claim. By the 1950s, the territories of Antarctica looked like described in the Lee Conformal Projection (see MAP 01.), with a dispute in the claims between UK, Argentina and Chile. USA and USSR were pretty late in the race, so they conveniently reserved the rights to claim in future.

Cold war This was also the time when the world was divided geopolitically with tensions between the USA and USSR, thereby putting the discussion about Antarctica under severe jeopardy. The territories were disputed, there was a lack of organisation and communication between all the stakeholders.

International Geophysical Year 1957-58 Amongst all this, the scientific community took the responsibility for the first time to act as a common platform for scientific representative from these countries in order to allow important discussions, specifically related to Antarctica. And thus the International Geophysical Year was conducted in the year 1957-1958, which gave rise to the Antarctic Treaty System.

Antarctic Treaty System 1959-61 ATS was established as the main governing framework for Antarctica in 1959 and the first meeting was held in 1961.

CCAMLR 1980-82 Also known as the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources, it was established to regulate the Antarctic Marine and manage it. It was established initially to regulate the increasing krill fisheries in the Antarctic waters.21

Madrid Protocol 1991-98 Also known as the Environmental Protocol, it was put in place to disallow any kind of resource extraction from within the Antarctic system.22

21 “About CCAMLR | CCAMLR”, Ccamlr.Org, 2020, https://www. ccamlr.org/en/organisation 22 “Environmental Protocol | Antarctic Treaty”, Ats.Aq, 2020, https://www.ats.aq/e/protocol.html.


DIAGRAM 03. / TIMELINE OF THE ANTARCTIC TREATY SYSTEM by: Daniel Kiss in collaboration with Polar Lab


HUMAN EMERGENCE IN ANTARCTICA

01.6.

REFERENCES “01. Antarctic Treaty, Done At Washington December 1, 1959. United States Department Of State”. United States Department Of State, 2020. https://www.state.gov/ antarctic-treaty/. 2020. https://www.unenvironment.org/delc/GlobalCommons/ tabid/54404. “About CCAMLR | CCAMLR”. Ccamlr.Org, 2020. https://www.ccamlr. org/en/organisation. Antarctica, Coming. “Coming Back From The Brink: The Fur Seals Of Antarctica”. Oceanwide-Expeditions.Com, 2020. https:// oceanwide-expeditions.com/blog/coming-back-from-thebrink-the-fur-seals-of-antarctica. Archives, Naval. “February 1, 1955: Task Force 43 Commissioned To Plan And Execute Operation Deepfreeze”. Naval History Blog, 2020. https://www.navalhistory.org/2013/02/01/ february-1-1955-task-force-43-commissioned-to-plan-andexecute-operation-deepfreeze. Dodds, Klaus, Alan D Hemmings, and Peder Roberts. Handbook On The Politics Of Antarctica, n.d. Dodds, Klaus, Alan D Hemmings, and Peder Roberts. Handbook On The Politics Of Antarctica, 2017. “Effects Of Sealing And Whaling In Antarctica”. Coolantarctica. Com, 2020. https://www.coolantarctica.com/Antarctica%20 fact%20file/science/threats_sealing_whaling.php. Elzinga, Aant. “Antarctica: The Construction Of A Continent By And For Science”, 2020. “Environmental Protocol | Antarctic Treaty”. Ats.Aq, 2020. https:// www.ats.aq/e/protocol.html. “Environmental Protocol | Antarctic Treaty”. Ats.Aq, 2020. https:// www.ats.aq/e/protocol.html. Sala, Enric, Juan Mayorga, Christopher Costello, David Kroodsma, Maria L. D. Palomares, Daniel Pauly, U. Rashid Sumaila, and Dirk Zeller. “The Economics Of Fishing The High Seas”. Science Advances 4, no. 6 (2018). doi:10.1126/sciadv.aat2504. Summerhayes, Colin P. “International Collaboration In Antarctica: The International Polar Years, The International Geophysical Year, And The Scientific Committee On Antarctic Research”. Polar Record 44, no. 4 (2008): 321-334. doi:10.1017/s0032247408007468. “The Tragedy Of The Commons”. Science 162, no. 3859 (1968): 1243-1248. doi:10.1126/science.162.3859.1243. “UKAHT - The Heroic Era”. Ukaht.Org, 2020. https://www.ukaht. org/learn/the-heroic-era/. “Wildlife Is Thriving On This Eerie Polar Volcano”. Nationalgeographic.Com, 2020. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/ photography/proof/2018/march/deception-island-antarctica-expedition-exploration/. “The Fight To Own Antarctica | Financial Times”. Ft.Com, 2020. https://www.ft.com/content/ 2fab8e58-59b4-11e8-b8b2-d6ceb45fa9d0.



FIG. 11. / SEA ICE BREAKING AWAY IN ROSS SEA, ANTARCTICA source: NASA/GSFC

If we peel back the complexity of the present-day Antarctic Treaty system through its branches and instruments, we find a complex network of institutions and nations with diverse interests and varying levels of power.


02. 02.1. 02.2. 02.3. 02.4. 02.5. 0.2.6.

LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK ANTARCTIC TREATY SYSTEM SCIENTIFIC HUMAN ACTIVITIES ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ASPA: AN APPARATUS TO TERRITORIALIZE REFERENCES


MAP 02. / ANTARCTIC TREATY MEMBERS ON LEE CONFORMAL PROJECTION by: Swadheet Chaturvedi and Daniel Kiss in collaboration with Polar Lab


LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK

ANTARCTIC TREATY SYSTEM 02.1.1.

Treaty members At the centre of this system of soft governance is the Antarctic Treaty, tying together 53 nations of 29 Consultative members and other Non-consultative members, and advisory organizations.1 The original 12 signatories of the Antarctic Treaty System (ATS) and 15 other consultative nations hold the veto to decide on any matter related to Antarctica. Rest of the other non-consultative members can just be a part of the discussion, therefore it is evident that the future is controlled by the most powerful geopolitical forces.2 It is important to keep in mind that the Antarctic Treaty System is based on diplomatic consensus3 – a system based on a lack of disagreement rather than agreement. Transparency and sharing of information is integral. Given the diversity of interests represented by a multitude of bodies, it is inherently fragile. This is a consequence of the fact that after all, there is no jurisdiction when it comes to Antarctica, therefore technically no party is ever answerable to any governing organization. It is usually more of a gentlemen’s agreement when it comes to collaboration and communication between nations.

FIG. 12. / SIGNATURE OF THE ANTARCTIC TREATY SIgned by Ambassador Herman Phleger, 1 December 1959 in Washington, D.C., United States, Conference on Antarctica, 15 Oct. - 1 Dec. 1959

02.1.

1 “01. Antarctic Treaty, Done At Washington December 1, 1959. - United States Department Of State”, United States Department Of State, 2020, https://www.state.gov/antarctic-treaty/. 2 “The Antarctic Treaty Explained - British Antarctic Survey”, Bas. Ac.Uk, 2020, https://www.bas.ac.uk/about/antarctica/the-antarctic-treaty/the-antarctic-treaty-explained/. 3 ibid.


LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK

02.1.2.

Legislative framework

FIG. 13. / THE FIRST MEETING ON ANTARCTIC TREATY COUNTRIES 1 July 1961, Antarctica New Zealand Pictorial Collection

If we scrutinize the structure of this governance, a clear imbalance of power emerges when we examine how nation-states are represented in these instrumental meetings. Consultative countries have powers to appoint representatives to key meetings, whereas Non-consultative countries only have the power to observe.4 They also possess no representative power in Council of Managers of National Antarctic Program (COMNAP), one of two main advisory organizations to both the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting (ATCM) and Committee for Environmental Protection (CEP).5 The difference of representational power is a key motivation for nation states to elevate their status into a consultative one through the procedures of the Treaty. Under the Antarctic Treaty there are also Conventions on specific environmental aspects – like the CCAMLR, which outlines the Convention on Conservation of Marine Living Resources, or ACAP which outlines conservation on Albatrosses. These conventions formulates their own sub-structure of committees and secretariats primarily from the scientific community or otherwise.6 Within the advisory organizations, COMNAP and Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research (SCAR) are also composed of actors with diverse interests, who are consulted by the CEP. The growing industry of Antarctic tourism for example is represented by the International Association of Antarctica Tour Operators (IAATO).7 These entities bring forth other non-state perspectives into the political discussions of the ATS.

4 RUTH W. GRANT and ROBERT O. KEOHANE, “Accountability And Abuses Of Power In World Politics”, American Political Science Review 99, no. 1 (2005): 29-43, doi:10.1017/s0003055405051476. 5 ibid. 6 ibid. 7 Klaus Dodds, Alan Hemmings and Peder Roberts, “Handbook On The Politics Of Antarctica”, 2017, 426, doi:10.4337/9781784717681.


DIAGRAM 03. / LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK by Jane Ling in collaboration with Polar Lab


DIAGRAM 03. / HUMAN PRESENCE IN 1980 by Daniel Kiss and Swadheet Chaturvedi


SCIENTIFIC HUMAN ACTIVITIES Origins of human activities As mentioned previously, humans emerged in the Antarctic systems for marine resources and started extensive sealing to an extent that fur seals were on the verge of extinction. After which they had to switch to commercial whaling which went on for a few decades as well. One of the first infrastructural developments in the sub-antarctic regions was to cater to commercial whaling and fishing on a very large scale. The remains of the Norwegian stations still exist in the Whaler’s Bay.1 After facing severe geopolitical tensions in the first half of the 20th century, science was given the priority as a proxy to enter into any conversation related to Antarctica as far as global stakeholders are concerned. And thus Antarctica saw a phase of multiple nations establishing their bases and research facilities in Antarctica. Even though they were distributed throughout the continent, the map clearly suggests that in the 1960s, most of the facilities were concentrated on the peninsula which could be due to multiple reasons, such as ease of accessibility, proximity from South America, stable weather conditions and so on. Raising a Church in one of the settlements is indicative of how communities start building up a sense of belonging to a settlement/base in Antarctica. It is rather confirming that the settlement is there to stay.

1 “UKAHT - Whalers Bay”, Ukaht.Org, 2020, https://www.ukaht. org/discover/other-historic-sites/whalers-bay/.

FIG. 15. / NUCLEAR POWER PLANT ON OBSERVATION HILL CIRCA 1965 United States Antarctic Program, Antarctic Photo Library

02.2.

FIG. 14. / CHAPEL OF THE SNOWS, MCMURDO STATION Ross Island, Antarctica, November 1962

LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK


LEGEND CCAMLR MPA ASPA ASMA


LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK

ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT Management of environmental assets Through the introduction of the Committee for Environmental Protection, as a part of the Madrid Protocol in 1991, it manifested its own territories in Antarctica in the name of CCAMLR, Antarctic Specially Protected Area (ASPA), Antarctic Specially Managed Area (ASMA) & Antarctic Conservation Biogeographic Regions (ACBR).These organisations spread their presence further at the turn of the century. CCAMLR or the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources was established in 1982. As per the CCAMLR website, it states that the purpose of establishing CCAMLR was a consequence of rising interest in the commercial extraction of Antarctic Krill.2 And thus CCAMLR was divided into 3 sectors: 48; 58; 88 to regulate and limit krill fishing. Each sector has its own limit of amount of resources to be extracted, as set by CCAMLR.3 CCAMLR headquarters is based in Hobart, Australia where annual meetings are held to discuss, implement or update new decisions that are to do with the marine waters of Antarctica.21 “Members of the Commission currently include 25 States and the European Union. The Status of the Convention is maintained by the Depositary, Australia.”4

DIAGRAM 04. / ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT IN 1990 by Daniel Kiss and Swadheet Chaturvedi

02.3.

2 “UKAHT - Whalers Bay”, Ukaht.Org, 2020, https://www.ukaht. org/discover/other-historic-sites/whalers-bay/. 3 “About CCAMLR | CCAMLR”, Ccamlr.Org, 2020, https://www. ccamlr.org/en/organisation. 4 “Members | CCAMLR”, Ccamlr.Org, 2020, https://www.ccamlr. org/en/organisation/members



LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 02.4.1.

The following section tries to explain how current model or protection systems are in favour of enclosing small patches ocean/terrestrial areas. In the case of Antarctica, it is usually done in the name of research, biology, glaciology, tourism, history and aesthetics.5

Annex V to Madrid Protocol: Any area within Antarctica can be deemed as an ASPA to protect the following values: scientific, environmental, wilderness, historic, aesthetic or a combination of any of these values. Further an area where certain human activities are to be conducted can be deemed as ASMA, in order to better assist the activity and to avoid possible conflicts between relevant stakeholders.6

ASPA and ASMA Antarctic Specially Protected Areas(ASPAs) & Antarctic Specially Managed Areas (ASMAs) are meant to protect specific locations for its scientific, historical, aesthetic, ecological values or to manage them within different national orders respectively.

DIAGRAM 05. / DISTRIBUTION OF ANTARCTIC SPECIALLY PROTECTED AREAS by Daniel Kiss

02.4.

5 “Area Protection And Management / Monuments | Antarctic Treaty”, Ats.Aq, 2020, https://www.ats.aq/e/protected.html. 6 Annex V To The Protocol On Environmental Protection To The Antarctic Treaty (repr., [London]: Stationery Office, 2006).


LEGEND PROPOSED MPA CCAMLR MPA ASPA ASMA


LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK

The Marine Protected Area (MPA) are meant to protect massive portions of Antarctic sea/oceans in order to create no resource extraction zone in any shape or form. A marine protected area was established in Ross sea in 2016, while another MPA was proposed in the Weddell Sea. However it has been consistently rejected in the previous 8 CCAMLR meetings at Hobart, Australia.7 Environmental groups and activists have consistently suggested that Norway, China & Russia had a role to play in rejecting this plan.8

MAP 06. / ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT IN 2020 by Daniel Kiss and Swaheet Chaturvedi

02.4.2.

7 Graham Readfearn, “Antarctic Marine Park: Conservationists Frustrated After Protection Bid Fails For Eighth Time”, The Guardian, 2020, https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/nov/02/ antarctic-marine-park-conservationists-frustrated-after-protection-bid-fails-for-eight-time. 8 Matthew Taylor, “Antarctic’s Future In Doubt After Plan For World’s Biggest Marine Reserve Is Blocked”, The Guardian, 2020, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/nov/02/plan-create-worlds-biggest-nature-reserve-antarctic-rejected.


CRITIQUE

02.5. 02.5.1.

ASPA: AN APPARATUS TO TERRITORIALIZE Antarctic Specially Protected Areas One of the most interesting aspects of this method of protection is that, once a patch is designated as a Protected Area, the controlling member holds the right to permit to enter the area, therefore, one would need to have a permission granted by the country to enter into a particular ASPA.9 Clearly, the following diagrams (show the distribution of this apparatus of territorialisation by country. Therefore it is obvious that ASPA has become an apparatus for territorialisation by the international community in the name of science. Further, there is an absurd distortion in how these ASPAs actually are related to human activities when the true purpose of their existence is to ‘protect’. We use Justin D Shaw’s article on how Antarctica’s protected areas are inadequate as it is explained in the following section.

9 “Environmental Protocol | Antarctic Treaty”, Ats.Aq, 2020, https://www.ats.aq/e/protocol.html.


DIAGRAM 04. / EVOLUTION OF ANTARCTIC SPECIALLY PROTECTED AREAS by Daniel Kiss


MAP 07. / PROTECTED AREAS AROUND MCMURDO DRY VALLEY by Daniel Kiss

CRITIQUE


MAP 08. / PROTECTED AREAS ALONG THE ANTARCTIC PENINSULA by Daniel Kiss


CRITIQUE

02.5.2.

Scattered distribution of ASPA-s 55 ASPAs on ice-free areas are in effect for their biodiversity values. 18 ASPAs (not considered here) conserve other values, such as historic sites or geologically important features, that are of concern to the ATS.10 Mean protected area of each ACBR is 1.1%. Combining total percentage protection with a protection equality metric, as previously recommended but not implemented globally, provides an integrated protection metric by which Antarctica is ranked in the lowest quartile of countries large enough to assess, placed 69th (out of 84), between Mali and Kazakhstan.11

Protected areas at risk of invasion ASPAs to tourist landing sites and scientific activity (i.e., established scientific facilities) are 289 km (range: 0 km to 2406 km) and 64 km (range: 0 km to 832 km).12 The mean risk index of establishment of non-indigenous species for ASPAs is 12% (standard error ±5%), significantly higher (by 24 times) than the mean risk for a randomly selected set of ice-free locations.

Natural reserve? Globally, 13% of terrestrial areas are protected.13 By comparison, only 1.5% of ice-free terrestrial Antarctica (0.005% of the total continental area) is formally protected for the purposes of biodiversity conservation. Two of the ASPAs at high risk of invasion already support non-indigenous species.14

MAP 09. / AXONOMETRIC VIEW OF MANAGEMENT BOUNDARIES AROUND THE PENINSULA by Daniel Kiss

For a context like that of Antarctica where historically no humans have ever existed, it should not be the toughest objective to adequately protect Antarctica. But clearly this straightforward objective is not being achieved by the current model of multiple nations collaborating in the name of research as tools of their existence over there.

10 Annex V To The Protocol On Environmental Protection To The Antarctic Treaty (repr., [London]: Stationery Office, 2006). 11 ibid. 12 ibid. 13 ibid. 14 J ustine D. Shaw et al., “Antarctica’S Protected Areas Are Inadequate, Unrepresentative, And At Risk”, Plos Biology 12, no. 6 (2014), doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1001888




CRITIQUE

Case of Deception Island

02.5.3.

Deception island is located in the Antarctic Peninsula and is a unique Antarctic island with important natural, scientific, historic, educational and aesthetic values. Over the years, different parts of the island have been given legal protection under the Antarctic Treaty following piecemeal proposals. In 2000, an integrated strategy for the management of activities there was agreed by Argentina, Chile, Norway, Spain and the UK.15 This strategy recommended an island-wide approach. Deception Island would be proposed as an Antarctic Specially Managed Area (ASMA) comprising a matrix of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas (ASPAs)16 and further zones in which activities would be subject to a code of conduct.

Protected in particular for scientific research, which includes long-term colonisation studies and ground temperature measurements.

ASPA 140 A While ASPA 140 is protected primarily for its outstanding environmental values (specifically its biological diversity) it is also protected for its scientific values (for terrestrial biology, zoology, geomorphology and geology). While 140 A Contains a particularly wide diversity of species.

ASPA 145 A&B Values protected under original designation included the diversity of benthic fauna on two different kinds of sea bottom substrates. The original research about the ecological process of recolonization after volcanic eruption needed protection from the risk of undue interference.

ASPA 140 B It is distinct from other areas due to the geothermally-heated ground in some parts of the island which create habitats of great ecological importance unique to the Antarctic Peninsula region.

MAP 11. / ASPA-S AROUND DECEPTION ISLAND by Swadheet Chaturvedi

The above mentioned excerpt from Pablo Tejedo’s analysis of scientific research published from the bases of Deception Island is representative of how national interests have shaped political tools of territorialisation islands in an otherwise internationally accepted definition of Global Commons, that is Antarctica.

ASPA 140 K

MAP 10. / VIEW OF DECEPTION ISLAND by Swadheet Chaturvedi

“Scientists from a large number of countries have performed research on Deception Island, although the scientific articles were dominated by the nations with a strong interest in Antarctica, i.e. consultative and non-consultative parties to the Antarctic Treaty. Four of the six nations that form the Deception island Management Group (Spain, USA, UK and Argentina) have produced most of this work. These nations are also notable for their collaborations and links with other countries, showing active research interests in the area. The other two members of the management group, Chile and Norway, have mainly historic interests on the island. Spain is the most productive and collaborative nation, with the highest centrality, serving as a bridge between nations that do not collaborate directly. The establishment of Gabriel de Castilla Station (which has been used very summer since 1988) has contributed significantly to the output of Spanish scientific research.” 17

15 “Environmental Protocol | Antarctic Treaty”, Ats.Aq, 2020, https://www.ats.aq/e/protocol.html. 16 “Environmental Protocol | Antarctic Treaty”, Ats.Aq, 2020, https://www.ats.aq/e/protocol.html. 17 Pablo Tejedo et al., “Analysis Of Published Scientific Research From Deception Island, South Shetland Islands”, Antarctic Science 27, no. 2 (2014): 134-149, doi:10.1017/s0954102014000455.


CRITIQUE

02.5.4.

Antarctica as a barometer of climate change Weakening ocean system

Human management and its consequences As seen from the analysis done in Justine D. Shaw’s research of inadequacies in protected areas of Antarctica, the current methods of managing Antarctica is clearly inefficient as it has some direct and indirect consequences. It is evident through the fact that the mean distance of a Specially Protected Area to a Research Facility is 64km and Tourist landing site is 289 km. This ironically allows a very high risk letting Non-indigenous species invade the otherwise “protected” spaces of Antarctica.

DIAGRAM 06. / STATISTICS: PROXIMITY TO INFRASCTRUCTURE by Swadheet Chaturvedi

DIAGRAM 05. / STATISTICS: NUMBER OF ASPA PER COUNTRY by Swadheet Chaturvedi

MAP 12. / INADEQUATE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT ON A DYNAMIC CONTINENT by Daniel Kiss

Global warming is not only warming up the lands, but it has also started to warm up the global oceans, which were typically responsible for having a cooling effect on the macroclimate. Now there is more warm ocean water encroaching into the convergence, which otherwise would keep Antarctica’s ecosystem isolated. As a consequence, not only the circumpolar currently shrinking, but also the sea-ice extent is depleting.18 This excessive global warming is responsible for calving much of the Thwaites causing continental and possibly global consequences. This process is only going to accelerate, unless the current human activities are managed in sync with such natural processes.

18 Hamish D Pritchard, Extensive Dynamic Thinning On The Margins Of The Greenland And Antarctic Ice Sheets (repr., London, Eng., 2009), 971-975.



LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK

02.6.

REFERENCES “01. Antarctic Treaty, Done At Washington December 1, 1959. United States Department Of State”. United States Department Of State, 2020. https://www.state.gov/ antarctic-treaty/. “Area Protection And Management / Monuments | Antarctic Treaty”. Ats.Aq, 2020. https://www.ats.aq/e/protected.html. Annex V To The Protocol On Environmental Protection To The Antarctic Treaty. Reprint, [London]: Stationery Office, 2006. Dodds, Klaus, Alan Hemmings, and Peder Roberts. “Handbook On The Politics Of Antarctica”, 2017, 426. doi:10.4337/9781784717681. “Members | CCAMLR”. Ccamlr.Org, 2020. https://www.ccamlr.org/ en/organisation/members. Readfearn, Graham. “Antarctic Marine Park: Conservationists Frustrated After Protection Bid Fails For Eighth Time”. The Guardian, 2020. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/nov/02/antarctic-marine-park-conservationists-frustrated-after-protection-bid-fails-for-eight-time. Shaw, Justine D., Aleks Terauds, Martin J. Riddle, Hugh P. Possingham, and Steven L. Chown. “Antarctica’S Protected Areas Are Inadequate, Unrepresentative, And At Risk”. Plos Biology 12, no. 6 (2014): e1001888. doi:10.1371/journal. pbio.1001888.GRANT, RUTH W., and ROBERT O. KEOHANE. “Accountability And Abuses Of Power In World Politics”. American Political Science Review 99, no. 1 (2005): 29-43. doi:10.1017/ s0003055405051476. Taylor, Matthew. “Antarctic’s Future In Doubt After Plan For World’s Biggest Marine Reserve Is Blocked”. The Guardian, 2020. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/nov/02/ plan-create-worlds-biggest-nature-reserve-antarctic-rejected. Tejedo, Pablo, Berta Gutiérrez, Luis R. Pertierra, and Javier Benayas. “Analysis Of Published Scientific Research From Deception Island, South Shetland Islands”. Antarctic Science 27, no. 2 (2014): 134-149. doi:10.1017/s0954102014000455. “The Antarctic Treaty Explained - British Antarctic Survey”. Bas. Ac.Uk, 2020. https://www.bas.ac.uk/about/antarctica/ the-antarctic-treaty/the-antarctic-treaty-explained/. “UKAHT - Whalers Bay”. Ukaht.Org, 2020. https://www.ukaht.org/ discover/other-historic-sites/whalers-bay/. Pritchard, Hamish D. Extensive Dynamic Thinning On The Margins Of The Greenland And Antarctic Ice Sheets. Reprint, London, Eng., 2009. Brooks, Shaun T., Julia Jabour, John van den Hoff, and Dana M. Bergstrom. “Our Footprint On Antarctica Competes With Nature For Rare Ice-Free Land”. Nature Sustainability 2, no. 3 (2019): 185-190. doi:10.1038/s41893-019-0237-y. Howkins, Adrian. “Melting Empires? Climate Change And Politics In Antarctica Since The International Geophysical Year”. Osiris 26, no. 1 (2011): 180-197. doi:10.1086/661271. Martin, Jonathan Andrew. “Do Antarctic Specially Protected Areas Provide Further Entrenchment Of A Sovereign Claim?”. Ir.Canterbury.Ac.Nz, 2020. https://ir.canterbury.ac.nz/ handle/10092/13835.



FIG. 16. / PHYTOPLANKTON BLOOM ALONG THE PRINCESS ASTRID COAST, ANTARCTICA source: NASA

Antarctica is a dynamic continent, constantly pulsating by changing its sea ice extent throughout the year whilst most of its metabolic processes are dynamic in space and time both. Therefore it is important to include such processes into account if one is to regulate any resources from such a sensitive yet dynamic system.


03.

PLANETARY PROCESSES

03.1. 03.2. 03.3. 03.4.

GEOMORPHOLOGY OF ANTARCTICA PULSATING ANTARCTICA PLANETARY METABOLISM REFERENCES


PLANETARY PROCESSES

03.1.

GEOMORPHOLOGY OF ANTARCTICA Antarctic Convergence It is interesting to mention that there are several natural boundaries which distinguishes the polar environment from the surroundings. The convergence line, shown on the map refers to a threshold, where cold, northward-flowing Antarctic waters meet the relatively warmer waters of the subantarctic. This natural boundary is responsible in keeping the ecosystem of Antarctica pristine through millions of years by isolating its processes from that of the rest of the world. Meanwhile we take the 60° south as the polar circle which is important in geopolitical sense.

Glacial Dynamics Ice flows in Antarctica, as it behaves like a fluid with hyper slow temporality. Due to which the geophysical conditions of Antarctica are dynamic too. The following excerpt from a text describes in depth the case of the fastest glacier in the southern continent which moves at a velocity of almost 4km/year.1 Thwaites Glacier, which is located in the West Antarctica can potentially contribute a sea level rise of up to 1 m if lost completely.2 In light of the above mentioned planetary metabolisms, it is fair to say that nothing in Antarctica’s system is ever static, even though it might seem to be abnormally calm from its pristine imagery that the layman perceives.

Glaciology The Antarctic is also an important barometer for how climate change is impacting our planet. Scientists can read Antarctic ice cores like a record going back for hundreds of thousands of years, comparing levels of carbon dioxide in atmosphere from the past 800.000 years with today’s measurements.

Grounding line The grounding line of the Antarctic Ice Sheet is that part where the glaciers exporting the ice down the continent loose contact to the ground and become a floating ice shelf. This is a dynamic line which keeps shifting as warm water on the sea bed within the convergence comes in contact with it thereby calving it.

Coastline

MAP 13. / SECTION VIEW OF THWAITES GLACIER by Daniel Kiss

Antarctica does not have a permanent coastline, however, it is generally considered to be the outer boundary of Permafrost, in the form of ice shelves of continental glaciers, which is 17,968 km long. However, over a long period of time, even this line is dynamic for obvious reasons.

1 Iryna Chatila, “Andrew Thompson”, Web.Gps.Caltech.Edu, 2019, http://web.gps.caltech.edu/~andrewt/research/acc.html. 2 B. R. Parizek et al., “Dynamic (In)Stability Of Thwaites Glacier, West Antarctica”, Journal Of Geophysical Research: Earth Surface 118, no. 2 (2013): 638-655, doi:10.1002/jgrf.20044.


THWAITES GLACIER, WEST ANTARCTIC SHEET

ICE VELOCITY

SUBGLACIAL STREAMS


PLANETARY PROCESSES

03.2.

PULSATING ANTARCTICA Ice velocity If we depict the ice velocity of the whole continent, we can see the flow similar to that of a drainage system, but much more slower. It’s clear that the highest altitude of the plateau is where it is most stable, but the ice shelves move the fastest towards the ocean around the floating ice shelves.3 In the darkest regions, the ice velocity goes as high as up to 4 km/year.

Sea Ice Due to the above mentioned phenomenon, it is evident that the extent of Antarctica is a rather dynamic boundary, as it’s sea ice extent shifts monthly according to the season as shown in the catalogue of images. Thereby one can truly think of it as a pulsating geography which shifts its boundaries constantly. It can be said that while regulating resources from a common, we time and again as a society have forgotten to consider such dynamics and planetary metabolic processes.

LEGEND CHLOROPHYLL CONCENTRATION SEA ICE

3 H D Pritchard and R G Bingham, “Exploration Glaciology: Radar And Antarctic Ice”, Physics Education 42, no. 5 (2007): 442-456, doi:10.1088/0031-9120/42/5/001.


MAP 14. / SHIFTING SEA ICE AROUND ANTARCTICA by Daniel Kiss


PLANETARY PROCESSES

03.3. 03.3.1.

03.3.2.

PLANETARY METABOLISM Phytoplankton plays a huge role in absorption of atmospheric carbon. Almost 60% of atmospheric carbon is absorbed in the Southern Ocean solely due to extensive presence of Phytoplankton, and therefore the Southern Ocean is often called as our planet’s carbon sink.4 This process of carbon absorption also refers to carbon sequestration, after which the dead phytoplankton drops to the seabed and accumulates. This accumulation over thousands of years contributes to the formation of fossil fuels and therefore the phenomenon is known as ‘Bio-Pump’.5 However, obviously these stalks of fossil fuels have been burnt recently by the humans, reversing the Bio-Pump and therefore resulting in excessive carbon concentrations in the atmosphere.6 Further, excessive atmospheric carbon infuses with the ocean and acidifies it. This harmful process disrupts the processes of marine ecosystem and severely disrupts the life cycle of Phytoplankton as the right conditions for them to flourish are compromised.7

Antarctic trophic web

DIAGRAM 08. / ROLE OF CARBON IN ANTARCTICA’S METABOLISM by Swadheet Chaturvedi and Daniel Kiss

DIAGRAM 07. / TROPHIC WEB OF ANTARCTICA by Swadheet Chaturvedi and Daniel Kiss

As seen in the figure, Phytoplankton is at the base of all the marine trophic webs and specifically in the Antarctic system. The hierarchy is structured on a very delicate framework and therefore any disruption in the ecosystem’s metabolic processes disturbs this chain severely and poses major threats.

LEGEND PHYTOPLANKTON DEAD PHYTOPLANKTON ICE VELOCITY

4 “What Are Phytoplankton?”, Earthobservatory.Nasa.Gov, 2020, https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/Phytoplankton/page2. php. 5 “Carbon Sinks”, Coolantarctica.Com, 2020, https://www. coolantarctica.com/Antarctica%20fact%20file/science/carbon_ sinks.php. 6 Stacy L. Deppeler and Andrew T. Davidson, “Southern Ocean Phytoplankton In A Changing Climate”, Frontiers In Marine Science 4 (2017), doi:10.3389/fmars.2017.00040. 7 ibid.

BIOPUMP REVERSAL


CARBON SEQUESTERED

EXCESS OF CO2 + H2O H2CO3 (CARBONIC ACID OXIDIZED FE (NUTRIENT FOR PHYTOPLANKTON

BIOPUMP


PLANETARY PROCESSES

03.4.

REFERENCES Armstrong, Sue, Robert Lockhart, RB Woodward, Sonia Ritter, Catherine W, Colleen Wallis, and Paul Tuff. “Licence To Krill Greenpeace International”. Greenpeace International, 2019. https://www.greenpeace.org/international/publication/15255/licence-to-krill-antarctic-krill-report/. “Carbon Sinks”. Coolantarctica.Com, 2020. https://www. coolantarctica.com/Antarctica%20fact%20file/science/ carbon_sinks.php. Chatila, Iryna. “Andrew Thompson”. Web.Gps.Caltech.Edu, 2019. http://web.gps.caltech.edu/~andrewt/research/acc.html. Deppeler, Stacy L., and Andrew T. Davidson. “Southern Ocean Phytoplankton In A Changing Climate”. Frontiers In Marine Science 4 (2017). doi:10.3389/fmars.2017.00040. Parizek, B. R., K. Christianson, S. Anandakrishnan, R. B. Alley, R. T. Walker, R. A. Edwards, and D. S. Wolfe et al. “Dynamic (In) Stability Of Thwaites Glacier, West Antarctica”. Journal Of Geophysical Research: Earth Surface 118, no. 2 (2013): 638-655. doi:10.1002/jgrf.20044. Pritchard, H D, and R G Bingham. “Exploration Glaciology: Radar And Antarctic Ice”. Physics Education 42, no. 5 (2007): 442-456. doi:10.1088/0031-9120/42/5/001. “What Are Phytoplankton?”. Earthobservatory.Nasa.Gov, 2020. https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/Phytoplankton/page2.php. Kim, Hyewon, Hugh W. Ducklow, Doris Abele, Eduardo M. Ruiz Barlett, Anita G. J. Buma, Michael P. Meredith, Patrick D. Rozema, Oscar M. Schofield, Hugh J. Venables, and Irene R. Schloss. “Correction To ‘Inter-Decadal Variability Of Phytoplankton Biomass Along The Coastal West Antarctic Peninsula’”. Philosophical Transactions Of The Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical And Engineering Sciences 376, no. 2130 (2018): 20180170. doi:10.1098/rsta.2018.0170. Rignot, E., J. Mouginot, and B. Scheuchl. “Ice Flow Of The Antarctic Ice Sheet”. Science 333, no. 6048 (2011): 1427-1430. doi:10.1126/science.1208336. Schofield, Oscar, Michael Brown, Josh Kohut, Schuyler Nardelli, Grace Saba, Nicole Waite, and Hugh Ducklow. “Changes In The Upper Ocean Mixed Layer And Phytoplankton Productivity Along The West Antarctic Peninsula”. Philosophical Transactions Of The Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical And Engineering Sciences 376, no. 2122 (2018): 20170173. doi:10.1098/rsta.2017.0173. Docquier, David, David Pollard, and Frank Pattyn. “Thwaites Glacier Grounding-Line Retreat: Influence Of Width And Buttressing Parameterizations”. Journal Of Glaciology 60, no. 220 (2014): 305-313. doi:10.3189/2014jog13j117.



The Krill fishing activity is facilitated by a global network crossing continents and oceans. This chapter tries to unfold this network which allows the krill industry to exist.


04.

ANTARCTIC KRILL AND ITS EXTRACTION

04.1. 04.2. 04.3. 04.4. 04.5. 04.6. 04.7.

ANTARCTIC KRILL GLOBAL KRILL FISHING INDUSTRY KRILL FISHING VESSEL CATALOGUE FLOATING INDUSTRY CONCENTRATION OF KRILL FISHERIES DEPLETION RISK OF PREDATOR SPECIES REFERENCES


DIAGRAM 09. / KRILL IN THE ANTARCTIC TROPHIC WEB by Swadheet Chaturvedi and Daniel Kiss

ANTARCTIC KRILL AND ITS EXTRACTION

04.1.

ANTARCTIC KRILL 04.1.1.

04.1.2

Antarctic krill directly grazes upon the phytoplankton which is allowed to breed due to various nutrients dissolved into the ocean through the sea ice continuously dissolving into the marine. Whilst it itself is a keystone species, as predators like whales, seals and Penguins depend directly on the Krill for their dietary requirements.1 It can be agreed upon that the Antarctic trophic cascade rests upon this keystone species. The lifespan of Antarctic Krill is about 10 years spending most of their days in deep ocean trying to avoid predators. They swim up to the surface of the marine at nights to feed upon the phytoplankton. Besides, the species plays a massive role in absorbing huge amounts of carbon emissions and greenhouse gasses and thus plays a pivotal role in the natural process of sequestering carbon. Unnervingly, recent results suggested that there has been an 80% decrease of krill biomass stocks since the 1970s.2 This loss can be attributed to global warming as this results in ice cover loss. This loss reduces the primary food source for Antarctic Krill in the form of Phytoplankton.3

Winter Condition: The young ones take shelter under the sea ice during winters and at the same time also graze upon the phytoplankton that is attached underneath the sea ice. Therefore, sea ice plays a major role in providing the right conditions for juvenile Krill to mature.4 Spring Condition: As the sea ice melts, it dissolves important nutrients into the ocean resulting in algae blooms created by massive phytoplankton outbursts. Thereafter the Krill accumulates in these spots to feed on the phytoplankton.5 Summer Condition: During summers, female krill travel to the deep ocean to reproduce, after which they hatch, and drop towards the seabed but the larvae soon start swimming up and moving towards the continental shelf. This loop continues all over again as the winter starts.6

FIG. 18. / ANTARCTIC KRILL

Life cycle of krill The Antarctic Krill has its own routinely behaviour according to different seasons and therefore moves in time and space as a species according to various productive processes.

1 Sue Armstrong et al., “Licence To Krill - Greenpeace International”, Greenpeace International, 2019, https://www. greenpeace.org/international/publication/15255/licence-to-krillantarctic-krill-report/. 2 “Krill | National Geographic”, Nationalgeographic.Com, 2020, https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/invertebrates/ group/krill/ 3 ibid.

4 STEPHEN NICOL, “Krill, Currents, And Sea Ice: Euphausia Superba And Its Changing Environment”, Bioscience 56, no. 2 (2006): 117, doi:10.1641/0006-3568(2006)056[0111:kcasie]2.0.co;2. 5 ibid. 6 ibid.


DIAGRAM 10. / KRILL BEHAVIOR SCHEMATICS by Swadheet Chaturvedi

DIAGRAM 10A

DIAGRAM 10B

DIAGRAM 10C


MAP. 15. / GATEWAYS OF ANTARCTIC KRILL FISHERIES by Daniel Kiss


MAP 16. / KRILL FISHING NATIONS by Swadheet Chaturvedi

ANTARCTIC KRILL AND ITS EXTRACTION

04.2.

GLOBAL KRILL FISHING INDUSTRY 04.2.1.

Krill fishing nations All of Antarctic Krill fishing activities are conducted by companies and organisations of mainly five nations which are: Norway, China, South Korea, Chile and Ukraine.7 It is an important information to note that all of these countries are permanent members within the Antarctic Treaty System and hence have the power to vote in the meetings to do with related matters.

04.2.2.

As revealed from vessel tracking, some of the following details were revealed, such as: most of the krill fishing happens in the peninsula due to multiple accessibility advantages along with stable sea conditions with no sea ice presence throughout the year, there are significant gateways from where krill fishing activities are facilitated in the Antarctic waters. These gateways are as follows: Cape Town (South Africa), Montevideo (Uruguay), Punta Arenas (Chile) and South Georgia (British Islands). These gateways act as portals to the entry to Antarctic waters specifically for krill fishing activities.

7 “Statistical Bulletin | CCAMLR”, Ccamlr.Org, 2020, https://www. ccamlr.org/en/publications/statistical-bulletin.


ANTARCTIC KRILL AND ITS EXTRACTION

04.3.

KRILL FISHING VESSEL CATALOGUE 04.3.1.

In order to fish Antarctic Krill, Fishing Trawlers are used where huge vessels have trawls attached to them. The catalogue of all the krill vessel deployed in Antarctic waters is shown, and is evident how these massive floating industries hover around a specific location to extract the krill. These vessels are often as long as a 100 meters whilst the trawl is sometimes even bigger than the vessel itself. 8

FIG. 20. / AKER BIOMARINE’S BIGGEST KRILL SHIP, HERE FISHING ALONG THE ANTARCTIC CONTINENT Erwin Vermeulen, Sea Sepherd

FIG. 19. / ANTARCTIC ENDURANCE

A Norwegian vessel like Saga Sea has been functional since more than last 40 years and is still one of the most extensively used krill fishing vessels. However more recently, Antarctic Endurance is the latest state of the art vessel developed by Aker Biomarine (Norwegian Krill Fishing Company), and is as long as 140m and has fish hold capacity if more than 7000 tons.9

8 “List Of Authorised Vessels | CCAMLR”, Ccamlr.Org, 2020, https:// www.ccamlr.org/en/compliance/authorised-vessels-0. 9 Klaus Dodds, Alan Hemmings and Peder Roberts, “Handbook On The Politics Of Antarctica”, 2017, 426, doi:10.4337/9781784717681.


DIAGRAM 11. / CATALOGUE OF OF ANTARCTIC KRILL FISHING VESSELS by Daniel Kiss


ANTARCTIC KRILL AND ITS EXTRACTION

04.4.

FIG. 21 / AKER BIOMARINE MOTHERSHIP, “SAGA SEA”, HERE FISHING ALONG THE COAST OF ANTARCTICA Aker Biomarine

04.4.1.

FLOATING INDUSTRY Aker Biomarine claims to have developed the most sustainable way of extracting and processing of krill. They call it ‘Ecoharvesting’ wherein, the krill is captured in the huge trawls, after which they are sent to the vessel through a pressurised hose pipe.10 Once the krill is transferred to the vessel, it has to be processed immediately as krill is a perishable item. It has a tendency of self destructing its nutrient value by secreting a specific compound when captured along with large stocks of the species. Therefore krill is processed into various batches on board according to the product that is to be made out of those batches.11 Norway is a global leader in terms of aquaculture industry and its related technologies and was able to develop mechanisms for extracting up to 800 tons per vessel in a day through the continuous pumping method. This allows krill to be processed on board as it has to be processed immediately else it can be perished. This also enhances the market value of the product.12

10 Aker BioMarine, “Innovation From Within”, Akerbiomarine.Com, 2020, https://www.akerbiomarine.com/innovation-from-within-. 11 Our Method, “Our Exclusive Eco-Harvesting Method”, AKER Biomarine, 2020, https://video.akerbiomarine.com/our-exclusive-eco-harvesting-method. 12 Klaus Dodds, Alan Hemmings and Peder Roberts, “Handbook On The Politics Of Antarctica”, 2017, 426, doi:10.4337/9781784717681


Owner / Operator: Aker Biomarine

Fishing Season: 01/12 - 30/11

Authorized areas 48.1 / 48.2 / 48.3 / 48.4

Crew count: 59

Gross Tonnage: 486 T

Carrying Capacity: 2438 T

Fish hold capacity: 2858 m3

Fishing gear: Midwater Otter Trawl

DIAGRAM 12. / KRILL EXTRACTION PROCESS by Daniel Kiss

Saga Sea callsign: LNSK IMO: 7390416


ANTARCTIC KRILL AND ITS EXTRACTION

CHINA

04.5.

DIAGRAM 13. / KRILL CATCH HISTORY by Swadheet Chaturvedi, Source: CCAMLR

04.5.1.

UKRAINE

CONCENTRATION OF KRILL FISHERIES Krill biomass is one of the highest of any species globally. Antarctic Krill is also abundantly present in Antarctic waters.13 However, threat to their biomass might not be the biggest issue related to Krill Fishing activities in Antarctica. If we look at the catch history of krill fishing for the last 40 years, it is evident that almost all of it was solely fished in the CCAMLR sector 48, whereas it is allowed to fish in the other sectors as well. If the catch history of Sector 48 is further looked into detail, it appears that more than half of that is further concentrated into sector 48.1.14 Therefore it is obvious that almost all of Antarctic Krill fishing activity is rather focused into a very specific locations which has some severe implications. Most importantly, this puts the local ecosystem under severe stress since the ecosystem is already a sensitive one, and is coupled with a human activity for Krill fishing.15

CHILE

13 “FAO Fisheries & Aquaculture - Aquatic Species”, Fao.Org, 2020, http://www.fao.org/fishery/species/3393/en. 14 “Statistical Bulletin | CCAMLR”, Ccamlr.Org, 2020, https://www. ccamlr.org/en/publications/statistical-bulletin. 15 Matthew Taylor, “Decline In Krill Threatens Antarctic Wildlife, From Whales To Penguins”, The Guardian, 2020, https://www.theguardian. com/environment/2018/feb/14/decline-in-krill-threatens-antarcticwildlife-from-whales-to-penguins.


KOREA

DIAGRAM 11. / KRILL FISHING PATTERNS ALONG THE PENINSULA BY COUNTRIES by Daniel Kiss and Swadheet Chaturvedi

NORWAY



ANTARCTIC KRILL AND ITS EXTRACTION

04.6.1.

DEPLETION RISK OF PREDATOR SPECIES Several research studies show that the biomass of major predator species is going to decrease under different IPCC model of RCP 4.5;16 However, it is even more interesting to see that the risk of decrease of biomass increases severely in some locations when climate change is coupled with krill fishing. This is a threat since the locations where the biomass is predicted to decrease the most overlaps exactly with krill fishing activities of the 11 vessels that has been listed.17

Inadequate regulation of resources Our position is that this threat to a very sensitive ecosystem is not because of the act of krill fishing itself, instead it arises from how such activities are managed and regulated. Can such dynamic processes be managed within these static man-made boundaries, or do we need a dynamic mechanism in order to solve such a crisis? These static boundaries try to freeze a system which never ceases to move.

MAP 18. / DEPLETION RISK OF PREDATOR COLONIES DUE FISHING COUPLED WITH CLIMATE CHANGE by Swadheet Chaturvedi and Daniel Kiss

04.6.

16 Matthew Taylor, “Decline In Krill Threatens Antarctic Wildlife, From Whales To Penguins”, The Guardian, 2020, https://www. theguardian.com/environment/2018/feb/14/decline-in-krill-threatens-antarctic-wildlife-from-whales-to-penguins. 17 Emily S. Klein et al., “Impacts Of Rising Sea Temperature On Krill Increase Risks For Predators In The Scotia Sea”, PLOS ONE 13, no. 1 (2018): e0191011, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0191011.


ANTARCTIC KRILL AND ITS EXTRACTION

04.7.

REFERENCES Armstrong, Sue, Robert Lockhart, RB Woodward, Sonia Ritter, Catherine W, Colleen Wallis, and Paul Tuff. “Licence To Krill Greenpeace International”. Greenpeace International, 2019. https://www.greenpeace.org/international/publication/15255/licence-to-krill-antarctic-krill-report/. BioMarine, Aker. “Innovation From Within”. Akerbiomarine.Com, 2020. https://www.akerbiomarine.com/innovation-from-within-. Method, Our. “Our Exclusive Eco-Harvesting Method”. AKER Biomarine, 2020. https://video.akerbiomarine.com/ our-exclusive-eco-harvesting-method. Dodds, Klaus, Alan Hemmings, and Peder Roberts. “Handbook On The Politics Of Antarctica”, 2017, 426. doi:10.4337/9781784717681. “FAO Fisheries & Aquaculture - Aquatic Species”. Fao.Org, 2020. http://www.fao.org/fishery/species/3393/en. Taylor, Matthew. “Decline In Krill Threatens Antarctic Wildlife, From Whales To Penguins”. The Guardian, 2020. https:// www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/feb/14/ decline-in-krill-threatens-antarctic-wildlife-from-whales-topenguins. Klein, Emily S., Simeon L. Hill, Jefferson T. Hinke, Tony Phillips, and George M. Watters. “Impacts Of Rising Sea Temperature On Krill Increase Risks For Predators In The Scotia Sea”. PLOS ONE 13, no. 1 (2018): e0191011. doi:10.1371/journal. pone.0191011. “Krill | National Geographic”. Nationalgeographic.Com, 2020. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/invertebrates/group/krill/. “List Of Authorised Vessels | CCAMLR”. Ccamlr.Org, 2020. https:// www.ccamlr.org/en/compliance/authorised-vessels-0. NICOL, STEPHEN. “Krill, Currents, And Sea Ice: Euphausia Superba And Its Changing Environment”. Bioscience 56, no. 2 (2006): 117. doi:10.1641/0006-3568(2006)056[0111:kcasie]2.0.co;2. “Statistical Bulletin | CCAMLR”. Ccamlr.Org, 2020. https://www. ccamlr.org/en/publications/statistical-bulletin. Siegel, Volker, Christian S. Reiss, Kimberly S. Dietrich, Matilda Haraldsson, and Gerhard Rohardt. “Distribution And Abundance Of Antarctic Krill (Euphausia Superba) Along The Antarctic Peninsula”. Deep Sea Research Part I: Oceanographic Research Papers 77 (2013): 63-74. doi:10.1016/j. dsr.2013.02.005. Thorpe, S.E., E.J. Murphy, and J.L. Watkins. “Circumpolar Connections Between Antarctic Krill (Euphausia Superba Dana) Populations: Investigating The Roles Of Ocean And Sea Ice Transport”. Deep Sea Research Part I: Oceanographic Research Papers 54, no. 5 (2007): 792-810. doi:10.1016/j. dsr.2007.01.008.



FIG 22. / SPRING ON THE ANTARCTIC PENINSULA source: NASA

As mentioned previously, there are five krill fishing nations: Norway, China, South Korea, Ukraine and Chile. Out of these countries, Norway is the leading nation in terms of the amount of krill extracted from Antarctic waters with the CCAMLR dataset claiming that more than 160 thousands tonnes of krill was caught in 2018 by Norway alone.1 So the idea was to map the Norwegian Krill industry and its activities around the globe and is discussed in the chapter.

1 Klaus Dodds, Alan Hemmings and Peder Roberts, “Handbook On The Politics Of Antarctica”, 2017, 426, doi:10.4337/9781784717681.


05.

NORWEGIAN KRILL INDUSTRY

05.1. 05.2. 05.3. 05.4.

AKER BIOMARINE: CORPORATE STRUCTURE KRILL FISHING INDUSTRY TECHNICAL REPORT: GEOSPATIAL MODELLING REFERENCES


MAP 19. / GLOBAL MAP OF AKER BIOMARINE’S ORGANIZATIONS AND SUBSIDIARIES by Daniel Kiss and Swadheet Chaturvedi


NORWEGIAN KRILL INDUSTRY

05.1.

AKER BIOMARINE: CORPORATE STRUCTURE 05.1.1.

Organisational overview The biggest and most profitable krill fishing company, Aker Biomarine is a Norwegian company and is a subsidiary of Aker Solutions, which is one of the biggest energy production companies of Norway and is listed on the Oslo Stock Exchange. Historically, Aker Solutions has been one of the oldest marine related infrastructure developing companies in Norway.1 However due to a massive reorganisation of the corporate structure facilitated by the Norwegian government, Aker was bought by a fishing company of USA owned by a Norwegian fisherman who shifted to the United States in 1979.2 This corporate reorganisation ended up in the formation of multiple subsidiaries wherein 30% of shares were bought through the Norwegian government.3 The expertise of fishing introduced by an American company to a Norwegian Ship making company laid the foundation of Aker Biomarine. Aker Biomarine being the most active krill fishing company in the Antarctic waters has the highest catch as well. The company claims to have developed the most sophisticated and sustainable technique of extracting krill known as ‘Ecoharvesting’ which was explained previously in chapter 04.4.

1 Marit ASA, “History / About Aker - Aker ASA”, Eng.Akerasa.Com, 2020, https://eng.akerasa.com/About-Aker/History 2 “Seattle Firms Merge Into Norway’s Aker | The Seattle Times”, Archive.Seattletimes.Com, 2020, https://archive.seattletimes.com/ archive/?date=19961002&slug=2352169. 3 Emily S. Klein et al., “Impacts Of Rising Sea Temperature On Krill Increase Risks For Predators In The Scotia Sea”, PLOS ONE 13, no. 1 (2018): e0191011, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0191011.


DIAGRAM 14. / AKER BIOMARINE PRODUCTS by Daniel Kiss and Swadheet Chaturvedi

NORWEGIAN KRILL INDUSTRY

05.2. 05.2.1.

KRILL FISHING INDUSTRY Global footprint of krill products At the first stage krill is exploited from the 48.1 and 48.2 statistical zones mostly by the 11 authorized vessels. Aker Biomarine deploys three vessels which continuously operate and transport krill raw material to Montevideo, Uruguay for further distribution from their logistical hub.4

DIAGRAM 15. / CHAIN OF KRILL INDUSTRY by: Daniel Kiss and Swadheet Chaturvedi

05.2.2.

Products of Aker Biomarine Aker BIomarine produces 3 types of products out of the Antarctic Krill that they capture, and they are listed as follows: Superba Krill: Supplements for humans made out of krill oil which is high in Omega 3. The company claims that 80% of mankind is omega 3 deficient. After the krill is processed on board, these purple nets are further produced in Houston, USA from where it is distributed globally (Americas, Europe & Asia). Qrill Pet: This product is meant to be used as a pet food as the name suggests. Qrill Aqua: Lastly, the product whose global network was investigated is used as an aquaculture feed. The feed has scientifically proven to increase both the yield and the growth of Salmon by 3 times in a typical Salmon Aquaculture Farming.5

LEGEND DISTRIBUTION DIRECTIONS KRILL FISHING ROUTES FAO STATISTICAL ZONES AND CCAMLR SEA ICE

4 Aker BioMarine, “Operations”, Akerbiomarine.Com, 2020, https://www.akerbiomarine.com/operations 5 Aker BioMarine, “Our Products”, Akerbiomarine.Com, 2020, https://www.akerbiomarine.com/our-products.


MAP 20. / AKER BIOMARINE’S KRILL INDUSTRY FROM ANTARCTIC POINT OF VIEW by Daniel Kiss and Swadheet Chaturvedi


MAP 21. / GLOBAL MAP OF AKER BIOMARINE’S KRIL L INDUSTRY by Daniel Kiss and Swadheet Chaturvedi

DIAGRAM 13. / CHAIN OF KRILL INDUSTRY by: Daniel Kiss and Swadheet Chaturvedi


NORWEGIAN KRILL INDUSTRY

As mentioned previously, the krill is processed on the vessel and sorted into various batches to go to different locations according to the product that is to be made out of it. All batches go to Montevideo (Uruguay) as it is the primary logistical hub. Krill that is to be used for human supplements (Superba Krill) is sent to Houston where it is further processed and distributed to the market from Houston. However, Krill to be produced for Aquaculture feed is directly sold as a raw ingredient to a Danish Company called Biomar.6 Biomar produces Aquaculture feed using Qrill Aqua as an ingredient and further sells to a Salmon farming company called Salmar, which is based in multiple countries like: Denmark, Norway, Vietnam, Japan and so on.78 The Scottish subsidiary of Salmar known as Scottish Sea Farms introduces the Aquaculture feed into their Salmon Pens located in Scotland. Finally, Scottish Seafarms sells their farmed salmon to Marks and Spencer’s under a made up name called ‘Scottish Lochmuir’.9 Therefore, the salmon that ends up in the stores of Marks & Spencer’s shelves across United Kingdom has footprint on not only Antarctic waters but its metabolic processes as well.

6 Aker BioMarine, “Download The Annual Report From Aker Biomarine”, Akerbiomarine.Com, 2020, https://www.akerbiomarine. com/download-annual-report. 7 Undercurrent News, “Aker Biomarine: New Study Shows Krill Is The Most Effective Growth Enhancer For Shrimp”, Undercurrent News, 2020, https://www.undercurrentnews.com/2019/09/20/aker-biomarine-new-study-shows-krill-is-the-most-effective-growth-enhancerfor-shrimp/. 8 “Scottish Sea Farms - Our Locations | Scottish Sea Farms”, Scottish Sea Farms, 2020, https://www.scottishseafarms.com/about/ our-locations/. 9 Amy Oliver, “Lochmuir Salmon? It Doesn’t Exist: How Supermarkets Invent Places And Farms To Trick Shoppers Into Buying Premium Food”, Mail Online, 2020, https://www.dailymail. co.uk/news/article-2100863/Revealed-How-supermarkets-inventplaces-farms-trick-shoppers-buying-goods.html.


TECHNICAL REPORT

05.3.

TECHNICAL REPORT:

GEOSPATIAL MODELLING FRAMEWORK SOFTWARE USED: ARCGIS, EXCEL, RHINO 6 + GRASSHOPPER + @IT + HUMAN + LUNCHBOX

05.4.1.

The purpose The idea is to expand the limits of geospatial mapping using geolocated datasets imported and processed in Rhino + Grasshopper. The project of Dynamic Domains has several scales in spatial and temporal sense, from a small scale in the Antarctic Peninsula to global relations around the interconnected world. The aim is to build a workflow in which we are able to switch between different spatial scale but representing data driven information accordingly. Mapmaking in general requires the use of appropriate projection (coordinate system), however, our intention is to develop a technique which gives a certain flexibility of scales in resolution and space.

05.4.2.

Scales in space and time Therefore, we ended up developing an apparatus in Grasshopper in which any geolocated information is projected onto the Globe itself. This approach gives the ability to use the same technical and representational methodology for processing geolocated data either it covers the whole Earth or just a local environment. Furthermore, our aim is to turn our maps into dynamic cartographies, since the project is associated with dynamic ocean management aligned with oceanographic and climatic processes. This tool is not only aims representative cartographic purpose which jumps in spatial scales, but it has several layers in temporal scales as well, therefore we worked out a computational methodology to process multitemporal data sources. Lastly, our intention is to incorporate certain motion graphics techniques in order to put our cartographic results into animations that helps to deliver the idea in visual sense.

05.4.2.

Sources of data We use different data sources mostly derived from GIS related format. In general we use ESRI shapefiles of countries outline and administrative boundaries (e.g.: FAO fishing zones, Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ) etc.) For environmental data we collect remote sensing derived content for several oceanographic datasets (e.g.: chlorophyll concentration, sea ice concentration etc.). Some of the data is combined or completely inherited from observational surveys, for example the shipborne surveyed bathyimetry or other local airborne orthophotos.

Types of data ESRI Shapefiles are mostly polygons and pointcouds. Raster data can be utilized by its own as GeoTIFF or otherwise we use ASCII grid for translating the raster data to a pointcloud for further processing in Rhino + Grasshopper.


05.4.3. Workflow of projecting onto the globe

DIAGRAM 15A DATA SOURCE

DIAGRAM 15B TARGET 90˚ 0,0

180˚

-90˚ PROJECTED ONTO THE GLOBE R: 90˚ GEOLOCATED DATA

WGS84 PROJECTION UNITS: DECIMAL DEGREES EXTENT: -180˚, 90˚, 180˚, -90˚

DATA (2D) DIAGRAM 16A ESRI SHAPEFILE

DIAGRAM 16B EXCEL TABLE

VALUE

LON

DIAGRAM 16C ASCII GRID

LAT

UALISATION (3D)

LUSTRATOR

We use three major methods to import geospatial data. Using the @IT plugin in Grasshopper allows us to import ESRI shapefile (derived from ArcGIS) as polygons, polylines or points. (see diagram 15A) This keeps the attribute table so metadata can be visualised accordingly. Importing complex 3 dimensional pointcloud data can be sorted as a list of points from excel with longitude and latitude information (see diagram 15B) or as a grid data using a plugin which turns the ASCII grid to terrain model (see diagram 15C). Here it is important to mention the resolution of the source data which dictates the spatial accuracy of the dataset.

Data processing and adjustments

WGS84 PROJECTION POLYGON, POLYLINE, POINT INHERETED ATTRIBUTE TABLE

LIST OF POINTS WITH X AND Y INFORMATION

ASCII GRID DATA AS DIGITAL TERRAIN MODEL

ENTS

NG (3D)

Importing data (2d)

Importing raw geospatial data followed by data processing if necessary. This includes simplifying the polygons according to the scale. With regards to the grid based datasets, we take the given value field and modify them in accordance the result we want to get. (e.g. chlorophyll concentration).

Projecting onto the Globe (3D)

DIAGRAM 17A VISUALIZATION 1

DIAGRAM 17B VISUALIZATION 2

DIAGRAM 17C PROJECTING

Using “map to surface” component we project the certain data from the extent of WGS85 units onto the Globe (see diagram 16C) which is based on the same dimensions. Only curves may be used, therefore other format of geometry has to be turned to polygon. Point based data can be visualized in circles before being projected, (see diagram16A) or with vertical lines (see diagram 16C) whereas the size of each is dictated by the dataset values. With regards to polygon based geometries it is important to be aware of its resolution (no. of control points) since the projection uses anchor points which will be projected on the sphere’s surface. Lower resolution may cause insufficient result, therefore either higher density of control points is needed or the lines need to be bended onto the sphere’s surface.

Data visualisation (3D) Once the we get the result, the 3D model can be further post-processed in Adobe Illustrator, or it can be used for further computation in grasshopper which will be discussed in later.

DIAGRAM 17 / DATA VISUALIZATION PRINCIPLES by Daniel Kiss

-180˚

90˚

DIAGRAM 16 / IVARIETY IN THE IMPORTED DATA TYPES by Daniel Kiss

NMENT

Initially the geospatial properties need to be defined in Rhino environment. We use Rhino units as decimal degrees in WGS84 (World Geodetic System) projection system, whereas its origo is placed to the XY 0,0 location in Rhino. Therefore the World extent units are equivalent to the reference system, 360° in horizontal way (longitude) and 180° in vertical way (latitude). (see diagram 14A) These boundaries constitute the surface that we project from; and the sphere (based on the radius of 90 units) makes the World that we project onto.(see diagram 14C) Therefore, any geolocated data can be wrapped onto the sphere as long as the source stays within the WGS84 format and its extent.

DIAGRAM 15. / GEOSPATIAL MODELLING AND PROJECTING ONTO THE GLOBE by Daniel Kiss

Environment


NORWEGIAN KRILL INDUSTRY

05.4.

REFERENCES ASA, Marit. “History / About Aker - Aker ASA”. Eng.Akerasa.Com, 2020. https://eng.akerasa.com/About-Aker/History. “Seattle Firms Merge Into Norway’s Aker | The Seattle Times”. Archive.Seattletimes.Com, 2020. https://archive.seattletimes.com/archive/?date=19961002&slug=2352169. BioMarine, Aker. “Operations”. Akerbiomarine.Com, 2020. https:// www.akerbiomarine.com/operations. BioMarine, Aker. “Our Products”. Akerbiomarine.Com, 2020. https://www.akerbiomarine.com/our-products. News, Undercurrent. “Aker Biomarine: New Study Shows Krill Is The Most Effective Growth Enhancer For Shrimp”. Undercurrent News, 2020. https://www.undercurrentnews. com/2019/09/20/aker-biomarine-new-study-shows-krill-isthe-most-effective-growth-enhancer-for-shrimp/. Oliver, Amy. “Lochmuir Salmon? It Doesn’t Exist: How Supermarkets Invent Places And Farms To Trick Shoppers Into Buying Premium Food”. Mail Online, 2020. https://www.dailymail. co.uk/news/article-2100863/Revealed-How-supermarketsinvent-places-farms-trick-shoppers-buying-goods.html. “Scottish Sea Farms - Our Locations | Scottish Sea Farms”. Scottish Sea Farms, 2020. https://www.scottishseafarms.com/about/ our-locations/. Ccamlr.Org, 2020. https://www.ccamlr.org/en/system/ files/00%20KRI48%202018.pdf. St.Nmfs.Noaa.Gov, 2020. https://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/Assets/ Quality-Assurance/documents/peer-review-reports/2016/2016_05_05%20Thomson%20SWFSC%20 Antarctic%20krill%20stock%20assessment%20report.pdf. Flores, H, A Atkinson, S Kawaguchi, BA Krafft, G Milinevsky, S Nicol, and C Reiss et al. “Impact Of Climate Change On Antarctic Krill”. Marine Ecology Progress Series 458 (2012): 1-19. doi:10.3354/meps09831.



FIG 23. / AMUNDSEN SEA, ANTARCTICA source: NASA/GSFC

But there is no doubt about how harmful such global activity is to the immediate surroundings of the species that is being extracted. Our position is that the issue arises from how we trap our commons in man-made static boundaries. Often layers of global networks are allowed to thrive under such regulations.


06.

DYNAMIC OCEAN MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS

06.1. 06.2. 06.3. 06.4. 06.5.

INADEQUACIES OF CURRENT STATIC MANAGEMENT COMPLEXITY OF DYNAMIC MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS SPECTRUM OF DYNAMISM CASE STUDIES REFERENCES


MAP 22. / INADEQUATE MARINE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM AROUND ANTARCTICA by Daniel Kiss and Swadheet Chaturvedi


DYNAMIC OCEAN MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS

06.1.

INADEQUACIES OF THE CURRENT STATIC MANAGEMENT Often our understanding of protection fails, due to the management of such complex ecosystems through these static boundaries, whilst also inadequate measures are taken by the global community to manage global commons as a whole. Antarctic systems are trapped within static man made boundaries as a proxy to manage resources that should be accessible to the common society whilst its should also contribute to its metabolic process. Clearly these techniques of managing common resources mock our understanding of the complex yet obvious cycles of nature alongside also showing how out of sync our societal mechanisms are from these natural processes that inherently dictate every aspect of our lives. Therefore, we urgently need to device more dynamic versions of managing the global commons, if we are to extract resources from them without really harming the delicate balance of processes.


DYNAMIC OCEAN MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS

06.2.

COMPLEXITY OF DYNAMIC MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS A data stream is processed into a package for distribution with minimal processing. Input is analysed statistically to produce a dynamic datascape. Multiple types of input information is used to infer statistical relationships, which are then used to build a predictive dynamic model, merged with real-time environmental input, generating data products.1 The output from the dynamic model can be modified by stakeholder adjustments (e.g.: manager preferences, additional information on fleet dynamics, compliance considerations) to produce a final data product. Individual data types may be static or can be updated for each run of the model. To date, trade-off analysis has occurred on an informal basis by the stakeholders but could be formally included in future DOM analyses, probably at the type 4 end of the spectrum.2

A A data stream is processed into a data product for distribution with minimal data processing

B Input data are analysed statistically to produce a dynamic data product.

C Multiple data types are used to infer statistical relationships, which are then used to build a predictive dynamic model, merged with real-time environmental input, generating data products.

DIAGRAM 19. / RANGES OF COMPLEXITY IN MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS by Daniel Kiss

D The output from the dynamic model can be modified by stakeholder adjustments (e.g.: manager preferences, additional information on fleet dynamics, compliance considerations) to produce a final data product. Individual data types may be static or can be updated for each run of the model. To date, trade-off analysis has occurred on an informal basis by the stakeholders but could be formally included in future DOM analyses, probably at the type 4 end of the spectrum.

1 Rebecca Lewison et al., “Dynamic Ocean Management: Identifying The Critical Ingredients Of Dynamic Approaches To Ocean Resource Management”, Bioscience 65, no. 5 (2015): 486-498, doi:10.1093/biosci/biv018. 2 Anne Siders, Rose Stanley and Kate M. Lewis, “A Dynamic Ocean Management Proposal For The Bering Strait Region”, Marine Policy 74 (2016): 181, doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2016.09.028


Permanent marine protected areas.

06.3. Annual by-catch and fishing quota limit adjustments.

SPECTRUM OF DYNAMISM The level of dynamism in ocean management systems varies along a spectrum and is rarely either wholly static or wholly dynamic.3 If we look at the spectrum of the dynamic ocean management, it is clear that there are several steps from being static or completely dynamic, based on its temporality. Either, the management is based on static boundary, or annually assessed quota management, or seasonally changed area closures, or weekly or monthly adjusted fishery area boundaries, or being completely dynamic as implementing daily restrictions.

Seasonal Areas to be avoided (ATBAs)

DIAGRAM 20. / SPECTRUM OF DYNAMISM by Daniel Kiss

Weekly or monthly adjustment of fishery area boundaries.

24 hour vessel speed restrictions in vicinity of right whale sighting.

3 Siders, Anne, Rose Stanley, and Kate M. Lewis. 2016. “A Dynamic Ocean Management Proposal For The Bering Strait Region�. Marine Policy 74: 177-185.


CASE STUDIES

13°54'0"N

06.4.

CASE STUDIES In order to understand the various methods of dynamic management of marine resources, a few case studies were looked at for reference of how the data can be handled and further processed in order to provide the stakeholders with spatiotemporal information to harvest in the most efficient manner possible. The case studies are as follows:

13°52'0"N

06.4.1.

St. Lucia The Soufriere Marine Management system was developed primarily to protect the corals of the island of St. Lucia. However little did they know that simply enclosing patches of the coast protected the corals, and also multiplied the yield of fishermen in the fishing zones located adjacent to the protected areas. Along with other examples, it was evident that protection of a specific location protects the resources within it, and at the same time increases the fish catch for the fisheries placed next to it! Therefore clearly a balance can be stroked between protected areas and fisheries.45

13°50'0"N

KEYMAP

61°6'0"W

13°48'0"N

ST LUCIA, SOUFRIERE MPA. RELATIVE BYCATCH: WHILST THE PURPOSE WAS TO PROTECT THE ECOLOGICALLY SENSITIVE CORALS OF ST. LUCIA, IT UNEXPECTEDLY REEPED BENEFITS FOR THE FISHING ZONES WITH A MUCH HIGHER YIELD. TARGET SPECIE: NA NON-TARGET SPECIES: NA

LEGEND

LEGEND:

St lucia

Closure CLOSURE

Soufriere Marine Protected Area Fishing zones FISHING ZONES 0 0.75 1.5 Recreational/multipurpose RECREATIONAL / MULTIPURPOSE

2.25

3 Km

Soufriere Management Area SOUFRIERE MANAGEMENT AREA 13°52'0"N

SOURCE:

SCALE

UNEP-WCMC and IUCN (year), Protected Planet: [insert name of component database; The World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA)/The Global Database on Protected Areas Management Effectiveness (GD-PAME)] [On-line],

4 Callum M Roberts and Julie P Hawkins, Effects Of Marine Reserves On Adjacent Fisheries, 2001. 5 Fiona R. Gell and Callum M. Roberts, “Benefits Beyond Boundaries: The Fishery Effects Of Marine Reserves”, Trends In Ecology & Evolution 18, no. 9 (2003): 448-455, doi:10.1016/s01695347(03)00189-7. 45.0

61°2'0"W

13°54'0"N

13°50'0"N

61°4'0"W


61°6'0"W

61°4'0"W

61°2'0"W

13°54'0"N

13°54'0"N

13°54'0"N

13°52'0"N

13°52'0"N

13°52'0"N

13°50'0"N

13°50'0"N

13°50'0"N

13°48'0"N

13°48'0"N

61°4'0"W

St lucia

61°2'0"W

Soufriere Marine Protected Area 0

61°6'0"W

61°4'0"W

61°2'0"W

0.75

1.5

2.25

3 Km

MAP 23. / SOUFRIERE MARINE MANAGEMENT IN ST LUCIA by Swadheet Chaturvedi

13°48'0"N

St luc

Soufriere 0


CASE STUDIES

06.4.2. Ecocast support toolproduct is produced using a The relative bycatch:decision target catch probability

data-driven, multi-species predictive habitat modelling framework. First, Main objective of Ecocast Support tool boosted regression tree models wereDecision fit to determine the habitat preferences of the target species,inbroadbill (Xiphias gladius), and three deployed the westswordfish coast USA is to reduce by-catch 6 bycatch-sensitive speciesthe that interact with the California drift gillnet fishery and maximise catch of target species. Target (leatherback sea turtle (Dermochelys coricea), blue shark (Prionace glauca), species in this case was broadbill swordfish and California sea lion (Zalophus califonianus). Then, individual species weightthe non-target species were leatherback sea turtle, ings were set to reflect the level of bycatch and management concern for blue shark, andlayers california seaspecies lion. were then combined into a each species. Prediction for each singe surface by multiplying the layer by the species weighting, summing the layers, and then re-calculating the range of values in the final predictive Target catch probability is produced using a data-driven, surface from -1 (lowcatchpredictive & high bycatch probabilities) to 1 (high catch and multi-species habitat modelling framework. low bycatch probabilities). At the first step, boosted regression tree models were fit to determine the habitat preferences of the target Catch and bycatch probability species and three bycatch-sensitive species that This toolinteract may allow managers to better balance and with the California drift gillnetecological fishery (leathereconomic objectives by improving accessibility to valuable back sea turtle (Dermochelys coriacea), blue shark swordfish fishing areas when bycatch risk is low. (Prionace glauca), California sea lion (Zalophus califonianus). Then, individual species weightings were set to reflect the level of by-catch and management concern for each species. Prediction layers for each species were then combined into a single surface RELATIVE BYCATCH: TARGET CATCH PROBABILITY by multiplying the layer by theA species weighting, PRODUCT IS PRODUCED USING DATA-DRIVEN, MULTI-SPECIES PREDICTIVE HABITAT MODELLING summing the layers, and then re-calculating the range FRAMEWORK of values in the final predictive surface from -1 (lowTARGET SPECIE: BROADBILL SWORDFISH catch & high by-catch probabilities) to 1 (high catch and NON-TARGET SPECIES: LEATHERBACK SEA TURTLE, low by-catch probabilities).7 BLUE SHARK , CALIFORNIA SEA LION

ECOCAST: WEST-COAST USA

LEGEND

LEGEND:

Better to fishTO FISH BETTER 1.01.0 0.30.5 0.00.2 0.0

-0.2

-0.2

-0.5 -0.5 -1.0 -1.2 POORER TO FISH Poorer to fish SOURCE:

45.0

Relative Bycatch:Target Catch Probability Product (daily), EcoCast Project

6 Conservationecologylab.Com, 2020, http://www.conservationecologylab.com/uploads/1/9/7/6/19763887/ecocast_for_web.pdf. 7 Lewison, Rebecca, Alistair J. Hobday, Sara Maxwell, Elliott Hazen, Jason R. Hartog, Daniel C. Dunn, and Dana Briscoe et al. 2015. “Dynamic Ocean Management: Identifying The Critical Ingredients Of Dynamic Approaches To Ocean Resource Management”. Bioscience 65 (5): 486-498.

ECOC


0

75

150

300

450

MAP 24. / ECOCAST DECISION SUPPORT TOOL by Daniel Kiss

600 Km


12°W

10°W

8°W

6°W

4°W

56°N 56°N

56°N

54°N 54°N

54°N

52°N

52°N

MAP 25. / REAL TIME TARIFF INCENTIVE SYSTEM IN IRELAND by Daniel Kiss and Swadheet Chaturvedi

52°N

50°N

50°N

50°N

0

25

50

100

150 10°W

200 Km 8°W

6°W

4°W

0

25


CASE STUDIES

06.4.3.

Real time tariff incentive based management

The proposed Real Time Tariff based management system of Ireland is an innovative proposal as it provides each fishermen with 200 RTIs to spend each year. And then each of them is given a map weekly with a grid stating the RTI that is to be spent for fishing in that RTI TARIFF, REP. IRELAND 8 square for a day. The idea here is to avoid by-catch so theBYCATCH: layers ofTARGET grids isCATCH determined according to biomass of RELATIVE PROBABILITY PRODUCT IS PRODUCED USING DATA-DRIVEN, target species and theAnon target species next to it. Thus MULTI-SPECIES PREDICTIVE HABITAT MODELLING it is indeed a relevant example of a dynamic system to FRAMEWORK TARGETregulate SPECIE: BROADBILL SWORDFISH marine resources. NON-TARGET SPECIES: LEATHERBACK SEA TURTLE, BLUE SHARK , CALIFORNIA SEA LION

12°W

LEGEND

LEGEND:

Closure CLOSURE 5 RTI5 RTI 2 RTI2 RTI

56°N

0.5 RTI 0.5 RTI

0.1 RTI 0.1 RTI SOURCE:

Kraak, Sarah B.M., Dave G. Reid, and Edward A. Codling. 2014. "Exploring The RTI (Real-Time Incentive) Tariff-Based Approach To Single-Species Fisheries Management". Fisheries Research 155: 90-102.

45.0

54°N

-113.0

-80.0

52°N

SPATIAL SCALE 50°N

8 Sarah B.M. Kraak et al., “RTI (“Real-Time Incentives”) Outperforms Traditional Management In A Simulated Mixed Fishery And Cases Incorporating Protection Of Vulnerable Species And Areas”, Fisheries Research 172 (2015): 209-224, doi:10.1016/j. fishres.2015.07.014.9

10°W

8°W


DYNAMIC OCEAN MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS

06.5.

REFERENCES “Dynamic Ocean Management: Identifying The Critical Ingredients Of Dynamic Approaches To Ocean Resource Management”. Bioscience 65, no. 5 (2015): 486-498. doi:10.1093/biosci/ biv018. Conservationecologylab.Com, 2020. http://www.conservationecologylab.com/uploads/1/9/7/6/19763887/ecocast_for_web. pdf. Gell, Fiona R., and Callum M. Roberts. “Benefits Beyond Boundaries: The Fishery Effects Of Marine Reserves”. Trends In Ecology & Evolution 18, no. 9 (2003): 448-455. doi:10.1016/ s0169-5347(03)00189-7. Kraak, Sarah B.M., David G. Reid, Guillaume Bal, Amos Barkai, Edward A. Codling, Ciarán J. Kelly, and Emer Rogan. “RTI (“Real-Time Incentives”) Outperforms Traditional Management In A Simulated Mixed Fishery And Cases Incorporating Protection Of Vulnerable Species And Areas”. Fisheries Research 172 (2015): 209-224. doi:10.1016/j. fishres.2015.07.014. Lewison, Rebecca, Alistair J. Hobday, Sara Maxwell, Elliott Hazen, Jason R. Hartog, Daniel C. Dunn, and Dana Briscoe et al. Siders, Anne, Rose Stanley, and Kate M. Lewis. “A Dynamic Ocean Management Proposal For The Bering Strait Region”. Marine Policy 74 (2016): 181. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2016.09.028. Packham, Chris. “Fishing For Krill Is An Eco-Disaster: We Must Protect The Antarctic | Chris Packham”. The Guardian, 2020. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/13/ fishing-krill-eco-disaster-ocean-sanctuary-protect-antarctic. Roberts, Callum M, and Julie P Hawkins. Effects Of Marine Reserves On Adjacent Fisheries, 2001. Maxwell, Sara M., Elliott L. Hazen, Rebecca L. Lewison, Daniel C. Dunn, Helen Bailey, Steven J. Bograd, and Dana K. Briscoe et al. “Dynamic Ocean Management: Defining And Conceptualizing Real-Time Management Of The Ocean”. Marine Policy 58 (2015): 42-50. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2015.03.014.



FIG 24. / BELLINGSHAUSEN SEA, ANTARCTICA source: NASA/GSFC

Considering the inadequacies of current models of protection and management of Antarctica, it is observable that these natural processes require a dynamic approach which can address the sensitivity of productive parts but also work in align with its spatiotemporality. Therefore the following proposal has tried to understand the productivity of Antarctic System and how various species interact and make it productive, which can eventually benefit the process of resource extraction as well.


07.

PROPOSAL OF DYNAMIC DOMAINS

07.1. 07.2. 07.3. 07.4. 07.5. 07.6.

BOUNDARIES OF DYNAMIC DOMAINS PRODUCTIVE DOMAINS DYNAMIC ISOCHRONAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT INTERVENING THE GLOBAL NETWORK TECHNICAL REPORT: DATA PROCESSING REFERENCES



PROPOSAL OF DYNAMIC DOMAINS

BOUNDARIES OF DYNAMIC DOMAINS 07.1.1.

Any cartography plays a pivotal role in not only visualising the territorial agency of a particular setting but it also has the potential to map processes beyond the human agency and therefore can be used as a means to dictate human activities if the setting is rather dynamic. Hence in order to develop a cartography that serves justice to the issues, the graphical boundaries are to be taken through the naturally occurring geophysical boundaries. Antarctic system has a convergence circulation with major boundaries within it which isolates it from the other ocean systems. These boundaries are Antarctic Convergence or the Polar Front.1 Southern Ocean that surrounds Antarctica is uniquely isolated from the other oceans due to certain currents that occur between 50°-60°S such as the following: Sub-Antarctic Front, Polar Front, Antarctic Circumpolar Current and the Antarctic Slope Front.2 Such currents make Antarctica’s system isolated and therefore has ended up creating its own unique evolutionary timeline. And thus it becomes an apparatus for the construction of a dynamic cartography.

LEGEND CONTINENTAL MARGINS SEA ICE CONCENTRATION SOUTHERN OCEAN FRONTS

1 Daniele Iudicone et al., “The Global Conveyor Belt From A Southern Ocean Perspective”, Journal Of Physical Oceanography 38, no. 7 (2008): 1401-1425, doi:10.1175/2007jpo3525.1. 2 Serguei Sokolov and Stephen R. Rintoul, “On The Relationship Between Fronts Of The Antarctic Circumpolar Current And Surface Chlorophyll Concentrations In The Southern Ocean”, Journal Of Geophysical Research 112, no. 7 (2007), doi:10.1029/2006jc004072.

MAP 26. / PLANETARY PROCESSES AS AN APPARATUS FOR CARTOGRPAHIES by Daniel Kiss and Swadheet Chaturvedi

07.1.



PROPOSAL OF DYNAMIC DOMAINS

PRODUCTIVE DOMAINS

07.2.

The first part of constructing a management system for the krill fishing is to identify the no fishing zones. In order to do that, productive parts of krill movement pattern are identified, in terms of where the species reproduce and where do they eat. This identification then makes the basis of our no fishing and fishing zones.

Krill movement (Spawning areas) As mentioned previously, the krill consummate in summers after which the female krill travel towards the deep ocean to reproduce. The juvenile once hatched travel downwards before they are mature enough to travel back towards the continental shelf. Hence it goes without saying that the deep ocean has to be established as no fishing zone especially in the summers and therefore becomes the first step of creating exclusive zones for Antarctic Krill Fishing.3

MAP 27. / IDENTIFYING THE PRODUCTIVE PARTS OF THE KRILL MOVEMENT by Daniel Kiss and Swadheet Chaturvedi

07.2.1.

3 So Kawaguchi et al., “The Krill Maturity Cycle: A Conceptual Model Of The Seasonal Cycle In Antarctic Krill”, Polar Biology 30, no. 6 (2006): 689-698, doi:10.1007/s00300-006-0226-2.


PROPOSAL OF DYNAMIC DOMAINS

07.2.2.

Exclusive zones: Feeding grounds of the krill Furthermore, we know that Antarctic Krill directly feeds upon the phytoplankton produced in the marine. So the feeding grounds are another aspect of regulating the productive parts of krill cycle therefore we calculate the change in phytoplankton movement in order to use it as a data product for dynamic fishing management. We take remote sensing satellite derived (Aqua Modis) datasets of chlorophyll (chl-a) concentration. Among the various options, we use monthly composite datasets in 8 days intervals, which covers the temporality of the proposed fishing management which will be set by weeks. After data assessment, this approach allows us to identify these areas which have to be protected in order to benefit the fisheries that are to exist adjacent to the regulated feeding grounds.

Data processing

DIAGRAM 21. / SCHEMATICS OF THE DERIVATIVE CHANGE COMPUTATION by Daniel Kiss and Swadheet Chaturvedi

We Identify the excessive domains of phytoplankton, using Aqua Modis satellite data of chlorophyll concentration and we compute the derivative change between the samples. Then the data is further processed to calculate the change of the gradients in the positive direction whose values are represented in circles, making the vector-field of movement. Then, we can establish exclusive zones on the feeding grounds of krill, which change weekly and the rest of the areas can be utilized by the fisheries expecting an increase of krill biomass in sensitive zones.


18.02.2018

by Daniel Kiss and Swadheet Chaturvedi

FIG 25. / ISAMPLES OF AQUA MODIS SATELLITE DERIVED CHLOROPHYLL CONCENTRATION DATASETS source: Ocean Color

02.02.2018

MAP 28. / GRADIENT CHANGE OF CHLOROPHYLL CONCENTRATION

24.01.2018

10.02.2018



by Daniel Kiss and Swadheet Chaturvedi

MAP 29. / ESTABLISHING EXCLUSIVE ZONES IN BRANSFIELD STRAIT



PROPOSAL OF DYNAMIC DOMAINS

07.3.

Thus the idea is to establish zones of fishing using the gradient change of phytoplankton and let the fisheries exist in zones according to the density of gradient change of phytoplankton movement, which will be translated to an isochronal representation. The mechanism of isochrone construction is described as in the following segment. First step was to establish the zoning system based on the datascape we have, we call it iso-density domains, which account for outlining environmental sensitivity, derives from composite dataset of the following: predator locations, chlorophyll concentration, sea ice concentration.

Territorial zoning: Iso-density domains Iso-density domains are constructed by evaluating the given datascape and establishing a threshold which will lead to incorporate only the relevant higher values from the data. Then we formulate radial shapes that we can call isochrones. Following which, we can presume the probability of krill habitat derived from mentioned datasets. Then we construct iso-density zones in accordance with the given points and its values. Then we classify them from zones 1 and 4 which will work as a multiplier for setting the incentive based krill fishing domains. Of course these isochrones shift weekly as shown here. Using the datasets of Chlorophyll concentrations, sea ice and predator colonies as the framework for isochrone where in the density of the gradient change of chlorophyll concentration dictate the classification of the isochrone. According to the specific thresholds in the data-scape (figure), different levels of ecosystem production sensitivity has been established as follows: X1, X2, X3 & X4. Where X4 is the most sensitive isochrone to fish and would be regulated accordingly. Similarly X1 would be the least stressful isochrone to fish in.

MAP 31. / CHLOROPHYILL BASED DENSITY MAPPING: ISO-DENSITY DOMAINS WITH RESPECT TO 10.12.2018 by Daniel Kiss and Swadheet Chaturvedi

07.3.1.

MAP 30. / CHLOROPHYILL BASED DENSITY MAPPING: ISO-DENSITY DOMAINS WITH RESPECT TO 02.12.2018 by Daniel Kiss and Swadheet Chaturvedi

DYNAMIC ISOCHRONAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT


DIAGRAM 22. / ASSIGNING RADIAL SHIP FIELDS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ABSOLUTE CARRYING CAPACITY by Daniel Kiss and Swadheet Chaturvedi

PROPOSAL OF DYNAMIC DOMAINS

INCENTIVE CREDIT SYSTEM Once the data has been processed in order to create a dynamic hierarchy of krill fishing territories, the next step would be to regulate these territories through providing an incentive for the krill fishing companies. Therefore certain incentive parameters are devised through which each krill fishing vessel would be credited in real time. The parameters to do so are as follows:

Time as a Unit

MAP 32. / VESSEL BEHAVIOUR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TOOL by Daniel Kiss and Swadheet Chaturvedi

Each fishing day is considered to be base unit for the credit system and therefore each krill fishing vessel is provided with 300 units worth of fishing days assuming the average fishing days spent by a typical vessel in the Antarctic Peninsula. 300 D can be spent throughout the year by each vessel according to its real-time location and proximity to other vessels and/ or predator colonies.

Ship-field In order to translate the spatial impact a vessel might have on its ecosystem, each vessel is to be assigned with a radial field according to its absolute carrying capacity. Therefore a catalogue of krill fishing vessels has been represented with their respective radial fields. These Ship-fields when overlapped with another shipping field would cause a reduction of 1 unit from the wallet of both vessels. Therefore the concern of concentration of krill fishing vessels can be catered to.

Isochrone Overlaps Lastly, the above mentioned shipping fields overlap with the isochrone would cause a reduction of units according to the classification, for e.g.: Saga Sea fishing in X3 isochrone would have to pay 3D units and 1D in X1.


1. Agregated da > phytoplankto >sea ice (inacce >predators (buff

VESSEL: SAGA SEA WEEK 1 DAY 4 UNITS AVAILABLE: (-3) DYNAMIC ISOCHRONAL287 RESOURCE MANAGEMENT UNITS SPENT: 13 (+3)

INCENTIVES

D2

EXCHANGE RATE (DAILY) 1D =(X1) 2D =(X2) 3D =(X3) 4D =(X4)

TIME AS UNIT

EXCHANGE RATE (MONTHLY) 1D =(X1) 2D =(X2) 3D =(X3) 4D =(X4)

D

.0

0 3.

SHIP FIELDS D

4.

ISOCHRONES

INCENTIVE SYSTEM EXAMPLE

-80.0

VESSEl : SAGA SEA WEEK 1 DAY 4 UNITS AVAILABLE : 287 (-3) UNITS SPENT : 13 (+3)

-55.0

D

4.

0

-45.0

-70.0

03.12

10.12

DIAGRAM 23. / VESSEL INTERACTION PRINCIPLES by Daniel Kiss and Swadheet Chaturvedi

DECEMBER 2018

0


PROPOSAL OF DYNAMIC DOMAINS

07.3.3.

Redistribution of concentrated krill fisheries These vessel fields interact with each other and with any of the categories of domains which lead them to manage the temporal based units that have to be spent by them. Hence the intent is to maintain the catch per unit effort which is understood as harvesting effort + probability of catch . For instance, the x4 zones gives less time to catch the same amount in x1, so it’s an incentive for them to hovering around the exclusive zones but not spending too much time in there.

DIAGRAM 24. / CATALOGUE OF THE VESSELS WITH THEIR RESPECTIVE SHIP FIELDS by Daniel Kiss and Swadheet Chaturvedi

The idea is that the vessel fields interact with iso-density domains, which results in maintaining catch per unit effort along with establishing incentive credit system, which helps us define the whole approach as isochronal fishing management. Meanwhile, trawling pressure is also shown according to the harvesting efficiency and the zone sensitivity they operate in which aims to avoid concentrated fishing activity.


MAP 33. / SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION OF VESSELS by Daniel Kiss and Swadheet Chaturvedi


PROPOSAL OF DYNAMIC DOMAINS

07.4.

INTERVENING THE GLOBAL NETWORK This exchange rate system can potentially ask consumer chains to use the location of krill extraction as a label on their products and therefore create a broader awareness along with regulating the resource itself. This would let the end user know the trail of the product that leads to a specific isochrone in the Antarctica peninsula, and hence the sensitivity of the specific ecosystem from where that person might be consuming its end product. This would also give an opportunity to the krill fishing company to make a statement of how even though they might be extracting a crucial resource, they still have a role to play in protecting the productive parts of that system. Therefore, the model itself can become a tool in leveraging public opinion in promoting its further adoption across resource extraction from ecological commons, by enhancing public awareness. It will also result in intelligent marketing that shifts consumer purchasing patterns towards consumption of more sustainably obtained products in lieu of providing a spiritual value to the consumer while creating economic value for the manufacturing company by positioning their brand through a stronger moral compass.


by Swadheet Chaturvedi and Daniel Kiss

DIAGRAM 25. / CONSEQUENCE ON THE CHAIN OF THE KRILL INDUSTRY


TECHNICAL REPORT

TECHNICAL REPORT:

07.5.

DATA PROCESSING: DERIVATIVE AND ITS GRADIENT CHANGE SOFTWARE USED: ARCGIS, EXCEL, RHINO 6 + GRASSHOPPER + FIREFLY + HUMAN + GHPHYTON The purpose

DIAGRAM 23 DERIVATIVE CHANGE

-60.0

-1

24.0

-113.0 -50.0

-70.0

After we prepared the data field we apply our zoning system on it. The idea is to use the gradient change datascape to construct isochrones which are inherited from the highest density hotspots.

-80.0

-34.0

-45.0

+0.4+0.4

SAMPLE 1

SAMPLE 1

Constructing isochrones

Adjustment This approach has the flexibility to adjust the threshold which is important during decision making - allowing us to decide how much sensitivity we would like to achieve with our management tool. Cutting the lower values give an opportunity to take only those values into account which above a particular threshold. Diagram 24B-1 and B-2 explains how minor changes of setting the threshold cause significant difference in the result of formation of isochrones.

01

JAN

08.01

26

01.01

FEB

S1

S2 01.02

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018

2018

1 Chl-a, https://oceandata.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/MODIS-Aqua/ Mapped/8-Day/4km/chlor_a/2018/ 11.18

+0.4 +0.4

+0.5

+0.5

-0.2 -0.2

.60.0

-0.5

-0.5

-60.0

45.0

In grasshopper, the bitmaps are imported and resized in order to give the base of the grid. This grid will be the resolution of our datascape. We use 1x1 decimal degree resolution, which will be utilized for the projected data visualisation onto the Globe.

-90.0

-80.0

S1

S1

-60.0

The computation starts with differentiating the two samples, therefore we get the absolute value of the positive or the negative change between the samples. (diagram 23) After which we normalize the value-field between 0 and 1 in order to visualize the derivative change as shown on the diagram 24A.

11.03

S2

S2

SAMPLE 2 SAMPLE 2

Our given temporal scale is in 8 days intervals, so each and every sample has different result according to the observed data. (see on the sequence on the left)

-55.0

-0.7

-0.7

Firstly, the data is imported and prepared in ArcGIS, where the NetCDF format needs to be converted and represented as GeoTIFF. We use bitmaps as the idea is to utilize the spectrum of tones of the pixels which will drive the value of each.

0.0

-0.7

0.0

Workflow

-70.0

+0.5

1.0

Datasets are derived from remote sensing satellite datasets (Aqua Modis) as 8 days composites of near-surface chlorophyll-a concentration.1 The raw data comes in the format of NetCDF which is transformed into GeoTIFF raster using ArcGIS.

07.5.2.

+0.3

1.0

+0.5

Sources of data

+0.3

DIAGRAM 23 DERIVATIVE CHANGE

Modelling and computing a derivative gradient change mapping tool in order to use as a data product incorporating territorial zoning which is applied for dynamic fishing management.

-0.7

07.5.1.

SPATIOTEMPORAL SCALE OCT NOV

08.02


1.0 1.0

0.83 0.83

0.0 0.0

THRESHOLD THRESHOLD <<0.28 0.28 RESULT RESULT 22 22/ /81 81

THRESHOLD THRESHOLD <<0.32 0.32 RESULT RESULT 99/ /81 81

DIAGRAM 26. / SEQUENCE OF CONSTRUCTING ISOCHRONE by Daniel Kiss Swadheet Chaturvedi

0.0 0.0

0.42 0.42

0.62 0.62

0.31 0.31

0.32 0.32

0.42 0.42

0.32 0.32

0.62 0.62

0.28 0.28

0.29 0.29

0.24 0.24

0.25 0.25

0.42 0.42

0.32 0.32

0.62 0.62

THRESHOLD THRESHOLD <<0.0 0.0 RESULT RESULT 57 57/ /81 81

0.29 0.29

0.19 0.19

0.0 0.0

1.0 1.0

0.83 0.83

1.0 1.0

0.83 0.83

1.0 1.0

DIAGRAM DIAGRAM24B-2 24B-2 THRESHOLD THRESHOLDADJUSTMENT: ADJUSTMENT: HIGHER HIGHERVALUES VALUES

1.0 1.0

DIAGRAM DIAGRAM24B-1 24B-1 THRESHOLD THRESHOLDADJUSTMENT: ADJUSTMENT: LOWER LOWERVALUES VALUES

1.0 1.0

DIAGRAM DIAGRAM24A 24A GRADIENT GRADIENTCHANGE CHANGEDATASCAPE DATASCAPE


PROPOSAL OF DYNAMIC DOMAINS

06.5.

REFERENCES “Dynamic Ocean Management: Identifying The Critical Ingredients Of Dynamic Approaches To Ocean Resource Management”. Bioscience 65, no. 5 (2015): 486-498. doi:10.1093/biosci/ biv018. Conservationecologylab.Com, 2020. http://www.conservationecologylab.com/uploads/1/9/7/6/19763887/ecocast_for_web. pdf. Gell, Fiona R., and Callum M. Roberts. “Benefits Beyond Boundaries: The Fishery Effects Of Marine Reserves”. Trends In Ecology & Evolution 18, no. 9 (2003): 448-455. doi:10.1016/ s0169-5347(03)00189-7. Kraak, Sarah B.M., David G. Reid, Guillaume Bal, Amos Barkai, Edward A. Codling, Ciarán J. Kelly, and Emer Rogan. “RTI (“Real-Time Incentives”) Outperforms Traditional Management In A Simulated Mixed Fishery And Cases Incorporating Protection Of Vulnerable Species And Areas”. Fisheries Research 172 (2015): 209-224. doi:10.1016/j. fishres.2015.07.014. Lewison, Rebecca, Alistair J. Hobday, Sara Maxwell, Elliott Hazen, Jason R. Hartog, Daniel C. Dunn, and Dana Briscoe et al. Siders, Anne, Rose Stanley, and Kate M. Lewis. “A Dynamic Ocean Management Proposal For The Bering Strait Region”. Marine Policy 74 (2016): 181. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2016.09.028. Packham, Chris. “Fishing For Krill Is An Eco-Disaster: We Must Protect The Antarctic | Chris Packham”. The Guardian, 2020. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/13/ fishing-krill-eco-disaster-ocean-sanctuary-protect-antarctic. Roberts, Callum M, and Julie P Hawkins. Effects Of Marine Reserves On Adjacent Fisheries, 2001. Maxwell, Sara M., Elliott L. Hazen, Rebecca L. Lewison, Daniel C. Dunn, Helen Bailey, Steven J. Bograd, and Dana K. Briscoe et al. “Dynamic Ocean Management: Defining And Conceptualizing Real-Time Management Of The Ocean”. Marine Policy 58 (2015): 42-50. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2015.03.014.



FIG 26. / OCEAN COLOR, OCEAN BEAUTY source: NASA

It is not just the Antarctic commons that our trapped within man made static boundaries in the name of regulation and protection, but when we zoomed out on a global scale, we realized that global oceans are being static trapped as well! This chapter introduces the conversation on a global scale by testing the flexibility of tool of Dynamic Domains and its relevance on a global scale; using Net Primary Production as a proxy to predict any system’s health.


08.

MANAGING GLOBAL COMMONS

08.1. 08.2. 08.3. 08.4. 08.5.

CURRENT ADMINISTRATIVE BOUNDARIES IDENTIFYING DYNAMIC DOMAINS DYNAMIC GLOBAL SYSTEM PROSPECTS OF DYNAMIC DOMAINS REFERENCES


MANAGING GLOBAL COMMONS

08.1.

08.1.1.

CURRENT ADMINISTRATIVE BOUNDARIES OF OCEAN MANAGEMENT

The larger question of trapping dynamism of not just specific ecosystems under static man-made boundaries, but repeating that pattern on a global scale through the means of Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) Fishing zones and EEZs only puts things in perspective. FAO Fisheries & Aquaculture

Department has statistical boundaries in place as shown and is self explanatory of how our society perceives our planet. Trapping our commons globally inspired us to test the flexibility of our tool of Dynamic Domains on a planetary scale.


MAP 34. / MAN-MADE STATISTIC ZONES ALONG THE OCEANS by Daniel Kiss and Swadheet Chaturvedi

The reason behind applying our tool of Dynamic Domains is to identify the most dynamic systems on a global scale and thus identify the need to regulate them in a justified dynamic method.


MANAGING GLOBAL COMMONS

08.2.

IDENTIFYING DYNAMIC DOMAINS

08.2.1.

Ocean systems The ocean systems that facilitate most of the planetary processes and maintain the balance of multifaceted metabolic cycles are often dynamic. Some systems and processes might be less dynamic but some might be extraordinarily dynamic (as was seen in the Antarctic system). The idea therefore is to try and map the degree of dynamism so that the sensitivity of dynamism can be tracked globally.

Global Oceans are in constant motion, and deep water is always mixing itself with the surface water, especially around the Northern and Southern oceans. Seasonal sea ice production at the poles causes freshening in surface water as the heavier salt water sinks to the seabed hence makes the ocean vertically mixed.


1 National Society, “Ocean Conveyor Belt”, National Geographic Society, 2020, https://www.nationalgeographic.org/encyclopedia/ ocean-conveyor-belt/12th-grade/.

MAP 35. / GLOBAL CONVEYOR BELT by Daniel Kiss and Swadheet Chaturvedi

These upwelling systems are at the far North Atlantic or around Antarctica. This is thermohaline circulation which is also known as the ‘Ocean Conveyor Belt’, drives nutrient distribution through the global oceans and therefore also dictates their productivity levels, or in other words our planet’s health in space and time.1


MANAGING GLOBAL COMMONS

08.2.2.

Net Primary Production as proxy Net Primary Productivity (NPP) is how much carbon dioxide vegetation takes in during photosynthesis minus how much carbon dioxide the plants release during respiration (metabolising sugars and starches for energy). Therefore Net Primary Productivity (NPP) is used as a proxy to identify dynamism of global systems (just as it was done through mapping chlorophyll concentration for Krill).

NPP quantifies our ocean’s health in terms of its productivity, which facilitates not only aquatic life but has an influence on terrestrial life as well 2 NPP derives from certain parameters and data inputs that are identified as follows: Rate of Photosynthetic Carbon, Respiratory Release Autotrophic Plankton Microbes (Chlorophyll) and Environmental Drivers.

2 Thomas Malone et al., Un.Org, 2020, https://www.un.org/ depts/los/global_reporting/WOA_RPROC/Chapter_06.pdf.


3 Daniel Sigman and Mathis Hain, Mathis-Hain.Net, 2020, http:// www.mathis-hain.net/resources/Sigman_and_Hain_2012_NatureEdu.pdf

These processes circulate throughout the globe whilst mixing water at the polar systems as well. In order to visualise global dynamism, NPP datasets were taken for January (higher productivity in Southern hemisphere) and July (higher productivity in Northern hemisphere) following which the gradient change was observed between the two extreme datasets. This revealed some useful insight into global dynamism that is discussed in the following section.

MAP 36. / OCEAN PRODUCTIVITY IN DIFFERENT SEASONS by Daniel Kiss and Swadheet Chaturvedi

Through this we were able to map the health of global ocean systems which constitutes various environmental drivers of it.3 The drivers such as light, nutrients and others are influenced by oceanic and atmospheric processes. Following the solar cycle, the primary production makes the earth constantly pulsating. The El Nino along the pacific ocean is an example of the currents, or different upwelling system to the west of Africa.


MANAGING GLOBAL COMMONS

08.3.

08.3.1.

DYNAMIC GLOBAL SYSTEMS

The gradient change revealed that the polar systems are naturally the most dynamic systems that exist on the planet along with other pivotal systems distributed throughout tropical and subtropical belt. Now that the tool enables us to identify the most dynamic and therefore the most sensitive systems, resource extraction can be regulated in spatiotemporal methodology of ‘Dynamic Domains’ as seen with the case of krill fishing in the Antarctic Peninsula.

These systems require a much more dynamic regulation at their regional scale and hence present a counter argument to the rather static techniques of protection that the global community has to offer. Therefore, the product of this methodology allows us to redefine the tools we can use to regulate global oceans in the near future.


MAP 37. / GRADIENT CHANGE OF SEASONAL NPP by Daniel Kiss and Swadheet Chaturvedi

Instead of freezing 30% of our rather dynamic oceans, we suggest identifying the most dynamic systems of our oceans and regulating them in time by quantifying their productivity through modern day technological tools available. This would not only allow us to identify the sensitive hotspots of our planet but also attach incentives for the stakeholders in the process.


MANAGING GLOBAL COMMONS

08.4.

PROSPECTS OF DYNAMIC DOMAINS 08.4.1.

Global community along with the United Kingdom proposed a future where at least 30% of oceans would be protected. Greenpeace has proposed how 30% ocean protection could look like. But can such dynamic processes be protected through this model?4 The same methodology of dynamic regulation systems of mapping Ocean productivity can also be applied to understand the future projections of our ocean’s health. The socioeconomic scenarios constructed by IPCC are used to predict a specific scenario and they are explained at IPCC’s web portal as follows: “In simple terms, the four storylines combine two sets of divergent tendencies: one set varying between strong economic values and strong environmental values, the other set between increasing globalization and increasing regionalization . The storylines are summarized as follows: A1 storyline and scenario family: a future world of very rapid economic growth, global population that peaks in mid-century and declines thereafter, and rapid introduction of new and more efficient technologies. A2 storyline and scenario family: a very heterogeneous world with continuously increasing global population and regionally oriented economic growth that is more fragmented and slower than in other storylines. B1 storyline and scenario family: a convergent world with the same global population as in the A1 storyline but with rapid changes in economic structures toward a service and information economy, with reductions in material intensity, and the introduction of clean and resource-efficient technologies.

FIG 27. / SIMULATION RESULT OF 30% OF OCEAN PROTECTION source: Greenpeace

B2 storyline and scenario family: a world in which the emphasis is on local solutions to economic, social, and environmental sustainability, with continuously increasing population (lower than A2) and intermediate economic development.”5

4 Margaret Gerber et al., “30X30: A Blueprint For Ocean Protection - Greenpeace International”, Greenpeace International, 2020, https://www.greenpeace.org/international/publication/21604/30x30-a-blueprint-for-ocean-protection/. 5 “Socio-Economic Data And Scenarios”, Sedac.Ciesin.Columbia. Edu, 2020, https://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/ddc/sres/index.html.


57.0

55.7

This trend would also align with the high emissions of greenhouse gases. Using the prediction of ocean productivity, according to a research, it is clear the declining trend will continue in the case of RCP 8.5, which stands for Representative Concentration Pathway (basically measures CO2 levels). We take this worst case scenario to map ocean productivity which would be the basis of dynamic regulation systems.6

52.8 52.0 1920

2100

1

OCEAN PRODUCTIVITY

2020

PREDICTION OF OCEAN PRODUCTIVIT Y FROM 1920 TO 2080 FOR RCP 8.5

Priority on economical values which indicates more extractivist activity

ECONOMIC VALUES

DYNAMIC REGULATION SYSTEMS

YEAR

Kristen M. Krumhardt et al., “Avoidable Impacts Of Ocean Warming On Marine Primary Production: Insights From The CESM Ensembles”, Global Biogeochemical Cycles 31, no. 1 (2017): 114-133, doi:10.1002/2016gb005528.

GLOBALLY INTEGRATED MARINE NPP (PGYR1)

future lies between the extremes of globalisation and regionalisation on one axis, and the other axis lies between economy and environmental values. In order to predict the worst possible scenario, we imagine a globalised world of near future where the economic values are high, we can expect a more extractivist economy in an interconnected world. This would align with the A1 socio-economic scenario of the propose IPCC models.

DIAGRAM 27. / GLOBAL CHANGES IN MARINE NPP FROM 1920 TO 2080.

08.4.2. According to the IPCC’s socio-economic scenarios, the

RCP 8.5

GLOBALISATION

0

1

Globalisational values are high which indicates a more unified regulation system

REGIONALISATION Regional values are high which indicates the regulation systems to be non-systematic

SOCIOECONOMIC

6 Kristen M. Krumhardt et al., “Avoidable Impacts Of Ocean Warming On Marine Primary Production: Insights From The CESM Ensembles”, Global Biogeochemical Cycles 31, no. 1 (2017): 114-133, doi:10.1002/2016gb005528.

DIAGRAM 24. / GLOBAL PROSPECTS / EXTRACTIVIS T ECONOMY IN A GLOBALISED WORLD by Daniel Kiss and Swadheet Chaturvedi

Enviornemtnal values are high which indicates high efficiency in technology

ENVIRONMENTAL VALUES

0

RCP 4.5


MANAGING GLOBAL COMMONS

08.4.3.

Hence, we visualize this gradient change of ocean productivity between 1920 and 2080 under RCP 8.5, which enables us to see the most sensitive systems on our planet. This visualization shows to what extent the ocean productivity will change, for example along the Pacific Ocean or the Polar systems. So we can identify the most dynamic systems to be regulated instead of managing commons in a static manner.

Thus making the proposed protection model rather dynamic, aligning itself to diverse planetary processes and shifting its boundary in space and time. Moreover, this becomes a tool for identifying global systems that are predicted to fluctuate the most in our planet’s near future.


MAP 38. / PREDICTION OF THE CHANGE IN NPP by Daniel Kiss and Swadheet Chaturvedi


MANAGING GLOBAL COMMONS

08.5.

REFERENCES “FAO Fisheries & Aquaculture - About Us”. Fao.Org, 2020. http:// www.fao.org/fishery/about/en. “FAO Fisheries & Aquaculture - Global Statistical Collections”. Fao. Org, 2020. http://www.fao.org/fishery/statistics/en. Gerber, Margaret, B Ramamurti, Frances Calcraft, and Taylor Hattori. “30X30: A Blueprint For Ocean Protection - Greenpeace International”. Greenpeace International, 2020. qhttps://www.greenpeace.org/international/publication/21604/30x30-a-blueprint-for-ocean-protection/. https://www.greenpeace.org/international/publication/21604/30x30-a-blueprint-for-ocean-protection/. Krumhardt, Kristen M., Nicole S. Lovenduski, Matthew C. Long, and Keith Lindsay. “Avoidable Impacts Of Ocean Warming On Malone, Thomas, Maurizio Azzaro, Anotonio Bode, and Euan Brown. Un.Org, 2020. https://www.un.org/depts/los/ global_reporting/WOA_RPROC/Chapter_06.pdf. Marine Primary Production: Insights From The CESM Ensembles”. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 31, no. 1 (2017): 114-133. doi:10.1002/2016gb005528. Sigman, Daniel, and Mathis Hain. Mathis-Hain.Net, 2020. http:// www.mathis-hain.net/resources/Sigman_and_Hain_2012_ NatureEdu.pdf. Society, National. “Ocean Conveyor Belt”. National Geographic Society, 2020. https://www.nationalgeographic.org/ encyclopedia/ocean-conveyor-belt/12th-grade/. Chapman, Christopher, and Jean-Baptiste Sallée. “Isopycnal Mixing Suppression By The Antarctic Circumpolar Current And The Southern Ocean Meridional Overturning Circulation”. Journal Of Physical Oceanography 47, no. 8 (2017): 2023-2045. doi:10.1175/jpo-d-16-0263.1. Elden, Stuart. “Missing The Point: Globalization, Deterritorialization And The Space Of The World”. Transactions Of The Institute Of British Geographers 30, no. 1 (2005): 8-19. doi:10.1111/j.1475-5661.2005.00148.x. Fu, Weiwei, James T. Randerson, and J. Keith Moore. “Climate Change Impacts On Net Primary Production (NPP) And Export Production(EP) Regulated By Increasing Stratification And Phytoplankton Communitystructure In The CMIP5 Models”. Biogeosciences 13, no. 18 (2016): 5151-5170. doi:10.5194/bg-13-5151-2016. Weatherhead, Elizabeth C., Bruce A. Wielicki, V. Ramaswamy, Mark Abbott, Thomas P. Ackerman, Robert Atlas, and Guy Brasseur et al. “Designing The Climate Observing System Of The Future”. Earth’s Future 6, no. 1 (2018): 80-102. doi:10.1002/2017ef000627.



EPILOGUE The idea of protecting the territory by uprooting the industry and banning extraction from within its ecosystem is ill-conceived due to its adverse effects on political claims of nations, relevant commercial stakeholders and their consumer-driven economies. This creates the need for more dynamic techniques of regulating and managing resource extraction that not only conserve the health of underlying sensitive natural systems but also upkeep industrial productivity to better incentivize the fishing industry, inviting them for adoption of this model. The project advocates that, while the extent of industrial fishing might not be a threat to the biomass of the species, the extremely high concentration of this activity within the peninsular regions sets the local ecosystem under severe stress. In stark opposition to the contemporary management of these fisheries which, in addition to being defined more than 30 years ago, is regulated human imposed static boundaries and zones. Thus, the project strategizes a more dynamic way of protecting the sensitive processes. Rather than attacking and banning the fisheries we believe this approach mutually benefits both ecosystem and industry by producing a much higher yield.




09.

APPENDIX

09.1. 09.2. 09.3. 09.4.

TABLE OF DIAGRAMS TABLE OF FIGURES TABLE OF MAPS BIBLIOGRAPHY


09.1.

TABLE OF DIAGRAMS Chapter 1. DIAGRAM 02. - The four global commons DIAGRAM 03. - Timeline of the Antarctic Treaty System Chapter 2. DIAGRAM 03. - Legislative framework https://www.scar.org/policy/antarctic-treaty-system/ DIAGRAM 04. - Evolution of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas DIAGRAM 05. - Statistics: Number of ASPA per country DIAGRAM 06. - Statistics: Proximity to infrastructure Chapter 3. DIAGRAM 07. - Trophic web of Antarctica DIAGRAM 08. - Role of carbon in Antarctica’s metabolism Chapter 4. DIAGRAM 09. - Krill in the Antarctic trophic web DIAGRAM 10. - Krill behavior schematics (series) DIAGRAM 11. - Catalogue of krill Antarctic fishing vessels DIAGRAM 12. - Krill extraction process DIAGRAM 13. - Krill catch history, CCAMLR, https://www.ccamlr.org/en/fisheries/krill Chapter 5. DIAGRAM 14. - Aker Biomarine products DIAGRAM 15. - Chain of krill industry DIAGRAM 16. - Geospatial modelling and projecting onto the globe DIAGRAM 17. - Variety in the imported data types DIAGRAM 18. - Data visualization principles Chapter 6. DIAGRAM 19. - Ranges of complexity in management systems DIAGRAM 20. - Spectrum of dynamism Chapter 7. DIAGRAM. 21. - Schematics of the derivative change computation DIAGRAM 22. - Assigning radial ship fields in accordance with the absolute carrying capacity DiAGRAM 23. - Vessel interaction principles DIAGRAM 24. - Catalogue of the vessels with their respective ship fields DIAGRAM 25. - Consequence on the chain of the krill industry DIAGRAM 26. - Sequence of constructing isochrone Chapter 8. DIAGRAM 27. - Global changes in marine NPP from 1920 to 2080, Krumhardt, Kristen M., Nicole S. Lovenduski, Matthew C. Long, and Keith Lindsay. “Avoidable Impacts Of Ocean Warming On Marine Primary Production: Insights From The CESM Ensembles”. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 31, no. 1 (2017): 114-133. doi:10.1002/2016gb005528. DIAGRAM 28. - Global prospects / Extractivist economy in a globalised world


09.2.

TABLE OF FIGURES Chapter 1. FIG.01. - Ross Ice Shelf, Antarctica, Jacques Descloitres, MODIS Land Rapid Response Team, NASA/ GSFC, 17 November, 2001, https://visibleearth.nasa.gov/images/57340/ross-ice-shelf-antarctica FIG.02. - Shackleton’s Endurance, photography by: James Francis Hurley, (1915), Gelatine dry plate,

Fig 24. Bellingshausen Sea, Antarctica, Jacques Descloitres, MODIS Rapid Response Team, NASA/ GSFC, 30, November 2002, https://visibleearth.nasa.gov/images/63331/bellingshausen-sea-antarctica Fig 25. - Samples of Aqua Modis satellite derived chlorophyll concentration datasets (series)

Henley Collection, National Maritime Museum from Greenwich, UK FIG.03. - Polheim Camp: “Home at the pole”, Robert Falcon Scott (at left) and companions at Polheim, South Pole, 18 January 1911 FIG.04. - Discovery and Exploration, Operation Highjump Maps, Naval Oceanographic Office, 1947, USA, Polar Geospatial Center, 2018, “PGC Map Catalog”, https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/6R8F7U, Harvard Dataverse, V1, [ANT SUM-OP2610-002] FIG.07. - A whaling ship follows in the tracks of the S.S. Hektoria, The Wilkins-Hearst Expedition ship by the island in 1929., Photography by International Newsreel, Nat Geo Image Collection, https://www.nationalgeographic.com/photography/proof/2018/march/deception-island-antarctica-expedition-exploration/ FIG.08. - An inquisitive penguin became a radio operator’s pet on the island in 1955., Photography by International Newsreel, Nat Geo Image Collection, https://www.nationalgeographic.com/ photography/proof/2018/march/deception-island-antarctica-expedition-exploration/ FIG.09. - Following its capture, a whale is hauled to the flensing platform on Deception Island in 1929., Photography by International Newsreel, Nat Geo Image Collection, https://www.nationalgeographic.com/photography/proof/2018/march/deception-island-antarctica-expedition-exploration/ FIG.10. - A view of the surface of the water in Deception Island Harbor, covered with birds., Photography by International Newsreel, Nat Geo Image Collection, https://www.nationalgeographic. com/photography/proof/2018/march/deception-island-antarctica-expedition-exploration/ FIG.11. Postage Stamp, Ervine Metzl, 1958, Chicago, USA Chapter 2. FIG.11. - Sea ice breaking away in Ross Sea, Antarctica, Jaques Descloiters, MODIS Land Rapid Response Team, NASA/GSFC, 28 December 2001, https://visibleearth.nasa.gov/images/57490/ sea-ice-breaking-away-in-ross-sea-antarctica FIG. 12. - Signature of the Antarctic Treaty, Signed by Ambassador Herman Phleger, 1 December 1959 in Washington, D.C., United States, Conference on Antarctica, 15 Oct. - 1 Dec. 1959, in: Berkman, Paul, 2011, President Eisenhower, the Antarctic Treaty, and the Origin of International Spaces. 10.5479/si.9781935623069.17. FIG 13. - The first meeting on Antarctic Treaty countries, 1 July 1961, Antarctica New Zealand Pictorial Collection, https://www.asoc.org/component/content/article/9-blog/1879-the-antarctic-treaty-60-years-on Fig. 14. - Chapel of The Snows, McMurdo Station, Ross Island, Antarctica, November 1962, https://aadl. org/sites/default/files/photos/N031_0594_011.jpg Fig. 15. - Nuclear power plant on Observation Hill circa 1965, Wikimedia Commons, https://en. wikipedia.org/wiki/File:PM3Anuclearpowerplant.JPG Chapter 3. Fig 16. - Phytoplankton bloom along the Princess Astrid Coast, Antarctica, NASA LANCE/EOSDIS Rapid Response Team, 27. February 2012, https://visibleearth.nasa.gov/images/120770/ phytoplankton-bloom-along-the-princess-astrid-coast-antarctica?size=all Chapter 4. Fig 17. - The Most Studied Peninsula on Antarctica, Jesse Allen, NASA Earth Observatory, 24. February 2017, https://visibleearth.nasa.gov/images/89717/the-most-studied-peninsula-on-antarctica Fig 18. - Antarctic krill, https://humannatureprojects.org/blog/species-spotlight-antarctic-krill Fig. 19. - Antarctic Endurance, https://wholefoodsmagazine.com/news/main-news/antarctic-endurance-first-ever-krill-harvesting-vessel-constructed-in-norway/ Fig. 20. - Aker Biomarine’s biggest krill ship, here fishing along the Antarctic continent, Erwin Vermeulen, Sea Shepherd, http://ocean71.com/chapters/krill-antarctica-fishing-sustainable-industry/ Fig. 21. - Aker Biomarine mothership, “Saga Sea”, here fishing along the coast of Antarctica, AKer Biomarine, http://ocean71.com/chapters/krill-antarctica-fishing-relativity-natural-reserve/ Chapter 5. Fig. 22. - Spring on the Antarctic Peninsula, NASA, MODIS Rapid Response Team at NASA GSFC, 18. November 2010, https://visibleearth.nasa.gov/images/47068/spring-on-the-antarctic-peninsula Chapter 6. Fig 23. - Amundsen Sea, Antarctica, Jacques Descloitres MODIS Rapid Response Team, NASA/GSFC, 23 November 2002, https://www.visibleearth.nasa.gov/images/63129/amundsen-sea-antarctica Chapter 7.

Chapter 8. Fig 26. - Ocean color, Ocean beauty, Norman Kuring, NASA, 26 April 2015, https://visibleearth.nasa. gov/images/85764/ocean-color-ocean-beauty?size=all Fig 27. - Simulation results of 30% of ocean protection. Gerber, Margaret, B Ramamurti, Frances Calcraft, and Taylor Hattori. “30X30: A Blueprint For Ocean Protection - Greenpeace International”. Greenpeace International, 2020. https://www.greenpeace.org/international/ publication/21604/30x30-a-blueprint-for-ocean-protection/


09.3.

TABLE OF MAPS

Terauds, A. and Lee, J. R. (2016), Antarctic biogeography revisited: updating the Antarctic Conservation Biogeographic Regions. Diversity Distrib., 22: 836–840. doi:10.1111/ddi.12453 https://data.aad.gov.au/metadata/records/AAS_4296_Antarctic_Conservation_Biogeo-

Chapter 1. MAP 01. - Territorial claims on Lee Conformal projection Lee Conformal Tetrahedric projection, http://www.csiss.org/map-projections/Miscellaneous/Lee_ Conformal_Tetrahedric.pdf Antarctic territorial claims, https://data.aad.gov.au/

graphic_Regions_v2 Antarctic Coastline, SCAR Antarctic Digital Database (ADD) Version 7.0. 2016-2017, http://www.add. scar.org/ Antarctic rock outcrop, SCAR Antarctic Digital Database (ADD) Version 7.0. 2016-2017, http://www. add.scar.org/ Antarctic Specially Managed Areas, ATS/ERA, http://www.ats.aq/devPH/apa/ep_protected_search.

Chapter 2. MAP 02. - Antarctic Treaty members on Lee Conformal projection https://www.ats.aq/index_e.html

aspx?type=2&lang=e Antarctic Specially Protected Areas, Terauds, A. (2016, updated 2016) An update to the Antarctic Specially Protected Areas (ASPAs) March 2016 Australian Antarctic Data Centre https://data.aad.gov.au/metadata/records/AAS_4296_Antarctic_Specially_Protected_Areas_v2

MAP 03. - Human presence in 1980

Liu, H., K. C. Jezek, B. Li, and Z. Zhao. 2015. Radarsat Antarctic Mapping Project Digital Elevation

COMNAP Antarctic Bases, COMNAP 2017, Polar Geospatial Center, //www.pgc.umn.edu

Model, Version 2. Boulder, Colorado USA. NASA National Snow and Ice Data Center Distributed

Terauds, A. and Lee, J. R. (2016), Antarctic biogeography revisited: updating the Antarctic Conserva-

Active Archive Center. doi: https://doi.org/10.5067/8JKNEW6BFRVD.

tion Biogeographic Regions. Diversity Distrib., 22: 836–840. doi:10.1111/ddi.12453 https://data. aad.gov.au/metadata/records/AAS_4296_Antarctic_Conservation_Biogeographic_Regions_v2 Antarctic Coastline, SCAR Antarctic Digital Database (ADD) Version 7.0. 2016-2017, http://www.add. scar.org/ Antarctic rock outcrop, SCAR Antarctic Digital Database (ADD) Version 7.0. 2016-2017, http://www.add. scar.org/

MAP 08. - Protected Areas along the Antarctic Peninsula Terauds, A. and Lee, J. R. (2016), Antarctic biogeography revisited: updating the Antarctic Conservation Biogeographic Regions. Diversity Distrib., 22: 836–840. doi:10.1111/ddi.12453 https://data.aad.gov.au/metadata/records/AAS_4296_Antarctic_Conservation_Biogeographic_Regions_v2 Antarctic Coastline, SCAR Antarctic Digital Database (ADD) Version 7.0. 2016-2017, http://www.add.

MAP 04. - Environmental management in 1990 COMNAP Antarctic Bases, COMNAP 2017, Polar Geospatial Center, //www.pgc.umn.edu Terauds, A. and Lee, J. R. (2016), Antarctic biogeography revisited: updating the Antarctic Conservation Biogeographic Regions. Diversity Distrib., 22: 836–840. doi:10.1111/ddi.12453 https://data. aad.gov.au/metadata/records/AAS_4296_Antarctic_Conservation_Biogeographic_Regions_v2 Antarctic Coastline, SCAR Antarctic Digital Database (ADD) Version 7.0. 2016-2017, http://www.add. scar.org/ Antarctic rock outcrop, SCAR Antarctic Digital Database (ADD) Version 7.0. 2016-2017, http://www.add. scar.org/ Antarctic Specially Managed Areas, ATS/ERA, http://www.ats.aq/devPH/apa/ep_protected_search. aspx?type=2&lang=e

scar.org/ Antarctic rock outcrop, SCAR Antarctic Digital Database (ADD) Version 7.0. 2016-2017, http://www. add.scar.org/ Antarctic Specially Managed Areas, ATS/ERA, http://www.ats.aq/devPH/apa/ep_protected_search. aspx?type=2&lang=e Antarctic Specially Protected Areas, Terauds, A. (2016, updated 2016) An update to the Antarctic Specially Protected Areas (ASPAs) March 2016 Australian Antarctic Data Centre https://data.aad.gov.au/metadata/records/AAS_4296_Antarctic_Specially_Protected_Areas_v2 Liu, H., K. C. Jezek, B. Li, and Z. Zhao. 2015. Radarsat Antarctic Mapping Project Digital Elevation Model, Version 2. Boulder, Colorado USA. NASA National Snow and Ice Data Center Distributed Active Archive Center. doi: https://doi.org/10.5067/8JKNEW6BFRVD.

Antarctic Specially Protected Areas, Terauds, A. (2016, updated 2016) An update to the Antarctic Specially Protected Areas (ASPAs) March 2016 Australian Antarctic Data Centre https://data.aad.gov.au/metadata/records/AAS_4296_Antarctic_Specially_Protected_Areas_v2 Statistical Areas, Marine Protected Areas, CCAMLR, https://gis.ccamlr.org/home, 2017, https://www. ccamlr.org/en/system/files/e-pt11.pdf, FAO, http://www.fao.org/fishery/area/search/en. CCAMLR Secretariat (2013)

MAP 09.- Axonometric view of management boundaries around the Peninsula Antarctic Coastline, SCAR Antarctic Digital Database (ADD) Version 7.0. 2016-2017, http://www.add. scar.org/ Antarctic Specially Managed Areas, ATS/ERA, http://www.ats.aq/devPH/apa/ep_protected_search. aspx?type=2&lang=e Antarctic Specially Protected Areas, Terauds, A. (2016, updated 2016) An update to the Antarctic

MAP 05. - Distribution of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas Antarctic Coastline, SCAR Antarctic Digital Database (ADD) Version 7.0. 2016-2017, http://www.add. scar.org/ Antarctic rock outcrop, SCAR Antarctic Digital Database (ADD) Version 7.0. 2016-2017, http://www.add. scar.org/ Antarctic Specially Managed Areas, ATS/ERA, http://www.ats.aq/devPH/apa/ep_protected_search. aspx?type=2&lang=e Antarctic Specially Protected Areas, Terauds, A. (2016, updated 2016) An update to the Antarctic Specially Protected Areas (ASPAs) March 2016 Australian Antarctic Data Centre https://data.aad.gov.au/metadata/records/AAS_4296_Antarctic_Specially_Protected_Areas_v2

Specially Protected Areas (ASPAs) March 2016 Australian Antarctic Data Centre https://data.aad.gov.au/metadata/records/AAS_4296_Antarctic_Specially_Protected_Areas_v2 Liu, H., K. C. Jezek, B. Li, and Z. Zhao. 2015. Radarsat Antarctic Mapping Project Digital Elevation Model, Version 2. Boulder, Colorado USA. NASA National Snow and Ice Data Center Distributed Active Archive Center. doi: https://doi.org/10.5067/8JKNEW6BFRVD. Statistical Areas, Marine Protected Areas, CCAMLR, https://gis.ccamlr.org/home, 2017, https://www. ccamlr.org/en/system/files/e-pt11.pdf, FAO, http://www.fao.org/fishery/area/search/en. CCAMLR Secretariat (2013) Howat, I. M., Porter, C., Smith, B. E., Noh, M.-J., and Morin, P.: The Reference Elevation Model of Antarctica, The Cryosphere, 13, 665-674, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-13-665-2019, 2019.

MAP 06. - Environmental management in 2020

MAP 10. - View of Deception Island

COMNAP Antarctic Bases, COMNAP 2017, Polar Geospatial Center, //www.pgc.umn.edu

Antarctic Coastline, SCAR Antarctic Digital Database (ADD) Version 7.0. 2016-2017, http://www.add.

Terauds, A. and Lee, J. R. (2016), Antarctic biogeography revisited: updating the Antarctic Conservation Biogeographic Regions. Diversity Distrib., 22: 836–840. doi:10.1111/ddi.12453 https://data. aad.gov.au/metadata/records/AAS_4296_Antarctic_Conservation_Biogeographic_Regions_v2 Antarctic Coastline, SCAR Antarctic Digital Database (ADD) Version 7.0. 2016-2017, http://www.add. scar.org/ Antarctic rock outcrop, SCAR Antarctic Digital Database (ADD) Version 7.0. 2016-2017, http://www.add. scar.org/ Antarctic Specially Managed Areas, ATS/ERA, http://www.ats.aq/devPH/apa/ep_protected_search. aspx?type=2&lang=e Antarctic Specially Protected Areas, Terauds, A. (2016, updated 2016) An update to the Antarctic Specially Protected Areas (ASPAs) March 2016 Australian Antarctic Data Centre

scar.org/ Antarctic Specially Managed Areas, ATS/ERA, http://www.ats.aq/devPH/apa/ep_protected_search. aspx?type=2&lang=e Antarctic Specially Protected Areas, Terauds, A. (2016, updated 2016) An update to the Antarctic Specially Protected Areas (ASPAs) March 2016 Australian Antarctic Data Centre https://data.aad.gov.au/metadata/records/AAS_4296_Antarctic_Specially_Protected_Areas_v2 Liu, H., K. C. Jezek, B. Li, and Z. Zhao. 2015. Radarsat Antarctic Mapping Project Digital Elevation Model, Version 2. Boulder, Colorado USA. NASA National Snow and Ice Data Center Distributed Active Archive Center. doi: https://doi.org/10.5067/8JKNEW6BFRVD. Howat, I. M., Porter, C., Smith, B. E., Noh, M.-J., and Morin, P.: The Reference Elevation Model of Antarctica, The Cryosphere, 13, 665-674, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-13-665-2019, 2019.

https://data.aad.gov.au/metadata/records/AAS_4296_Antarctic_Specially_Protected_Areas_v2 Statistical Areas, Marine Protected Areas, CCAMLR, https://gis.ccamlr.org/home, 2017, https://www. ccamlr.org/en/system/files/e-pt11.pdf, FAO, http://www.fao.org/fishery/area/search/en. CCAMLR Secretariat (2013)

MAP 11. - ASPA-s around Deception Island Antarctic Coastline, SCAR Antarctic Digital Database (ADD) Version 7.0. 2016-2017, http://www.add. scar.org/ Antarctic Specially Managed Areas, ATS/ERA, http://www.ats.aq/devPH/apa/ep_protected_search.

MAP 07. - Protected Areas around Mcmurdo Dry Valley

aspx?type=2&lang=e


Antarctic Specially Protected Areas, Terauds, A. (2016, updated 2016) An update to the Antarctic Specially Protected Areas (ASPAs) March 2016 Australian Antarctic Data Centre https://data.aad.gov.au/metadata/records/AAS_4296_Antarctic_Specially_Protected_Areas_v2 Liu, H., K. C. Jezek, B. Li, and Z. Zhao. 2015. Radarsat Antarctic Mapping Project Digital Elevation

Lee Conformal Tetrahedric projection, http://www.csiss.org/map-projections/Miscellaneous/Lee_ Conformal_Tetrahedric.pdf “Statistical Bulletin | CCAMLR”, Ccamlr.Org, 2020, https://www.ccamlr.org/en/publications/ statistical-bulletin.

Model, Version 2. Boulder, Colorado USA. NASA National Snow and Ice Data Center Distributed Active Archive Center. doi: https://doi.org/10.5067/8JKNEW6BFRVD. Howat, I. M., Porter, C., Smith, B. E., Noh, M.-J., and Morin, P.: The Reference Elevation Model of Antarctica, The Cryosphere, 13, 665-674, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-13-665-2019, 2019.

MAP 17. - Krill fishing pattern along the Peninsula by countries (series) Antarctic Coastline, SCAR Antarctic Digital Database (ADD) Version 7.0. 2016-2017, http://www.add. scar.org/ Antarctic rock outcrop, SCAR Antarctic Digital Database (ADD) Version 7.0. 2016-2017, http://www.

MAP 12. - Inadequate environmental management on a dynamic continent Terauds, A. and Lee, J. R. (2016), Antarctic biogeography revisited: updating the Antarctic Conservation Biogeographic Regions. Diversity Distrib., 22: 836–840. doi:10.1111/ddi.12453 https://data. aad.gov.au/metadata/records/AAS_4296_Antarctic_Conservation_Biogeographic_Regions_v2 Antarctic Coastline, SCAR Antarctic Digital Database (ADD) Version 7.0. 2016-2017, http://www.add. scar.org/ Antarctic rock outcrop, SCAR Antarctic Digital Database (ADD) Version 7.0. 2016-2017, http://www.add. scar.org/ Antarctic Specially Managed Areas, ATS/ERA, http://www.ats.aq/devPH/apa/ep_protected_search. aspx?type=2&lang=e Antarctic Specially Protected Areas, Terauds, A. (2016, updated 2016) An update to the Antarctic

add.scar.org/ Statistical Areas, Marine Protected Areas, CCAMLR, https://gis.ccamlr.org/home, 2017, https://www. ccamlr.org/en/system/files/e-pt11.pdf, FAO, http://www.fao.org/fishery/area/search/en. CCAMLR Secretariat (2013) USA: NASA DAAC at the National Snow and Ice Data Center. doi:10.5067/MEASURES/CRYOSPHERE/ nsidc-0498.001. Spreen, G., L. Kaleschke, and G.Heygster (2008), Sea ice remote sensing using AMSR-E 89 GHz channels J. Geophys. Res.,vol. 113, C02S03, doi:10.1029/2005JC003384. Howat, I. M., Porter, C., Smith, B. E., Noh, M.-J., and Morin, P.: The Reference Elevation Model of Antarctica, The Cryosphere, 13, 665-674, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-13-665-2019, 2019. Historical tracks, Fleetmon.com

Specially Protected Areas (ASPAs) March 2016 Australian Antarctic Data Centre https://data.aad.gov.au/metadata/records/AAS_4296_Antarctic_Specially_Protected_Areas_v2

MAP 18. - Depletion risk of predator colonies due fishing coupled with climate change

M. Mazloff, P. Heimbach, and C. Wunsch, 2010: “An Eddy-Permitting Southern Ocean State Estimate.”

Statistical Areas, Marine Protected Areas, CCAMLR, https://gis.ccamlr.org/home, 2017, https://www.

J. Phys. Oceanogr., 40, 880–899. doi: 10.1175/2009JPO4236.1 Ocean Atlas 2017, WOR, SABINE Fetterer, F., K. Knowles, W. Meier, M. Savoie, and A. K. Windnagel. 2016, updated daily. Sea Ice Index, Version 2. Boulder, Colorado USA. NSIDC: National Snow and Ice Data Center. doi: http://dx.doi. org/10.7265/N5736NV7.

ccamlr.org/en/system/files/e-pt11.pdf, FAO, http://www.fao.org/fishery/area/search/en. CCAMLR Secretariat (2013) USA: NASA DAAC at the National Snow and Ice Data Center. doi:10.5067/MEASURES/CRYOSPHERE/ nsidc-0498.001. Spreen, G., L. Kaleschke, and G.Heygster (2008), Sea ice remote sensing using AMSR-E 89 GHz channels J. Geophys. Res.,vol. 113, C02S03, doi:10.1029/2005JC003384.

Chapter 3. MAP 13. - Section view of Thwaites Glacier Terauds, A. and Lee, J. R. (2016), Antarctic biogeography revisited: updating the Antarctic Conserva-

Howat, I. M., Porter, C., Smith, B. E., Noh, M.-J., and Morin, P.: The Reference Elevation Model of Antarctica, The Cryosphere, 13, 665-674, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-13-665-2019, 2019. Fretwell PT, LaRue MA, Morin P, Kooyman GL, Wienecke B, Ratcliffe N, et al. (2012) An Emperor

tion Biogeographic Regions. Diversity Distrib., 22: 836–840. doi:10.1111/ddi.12453 https://data.

Penguin Population Estimate: The First Global, Synoptic Survey of a Species from Space. PLoS

aad.gov.au/metadata/records/AAS_4296_Antarctic_Conservation_Biogeographic_Regions_v2

ONE 7(4): e33751. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0033751

Antarctic Coastline, SCAR Antarctic Digital Database (ADD) Version 7.0. 2016-2017, http://www.add. scar.org/ Antarctic rock outcrop, SCAR Antarctic Digital Database (ADD) Version 7.0. 2016-2017, http://www.add.

Klein, Emily S., Simeon L. Hill, Jefferson T. Hinke, Tony Phillips, and George M. Watters. “Impacts Of Rising Sea Temperature On Krill Increase Risks For Predators In The Scotia Sea”. PLOS ONE 13, no. 1 (2018): e0191011. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0191011.

scar.org/ M. Mazloff, P. Heimbach, and C. Wunsch, 2010: “An Eddy-Permitting Southern Ocean State Estimate.” J. Phys. Oceanogr., 40, 880–899. doi: 10.1175/2009JPO4236.1

Chapter 5. MAP 19. - Global map of Aker Biomarine’s organizations and subsidiaries

Ocean Atlas 2017, WOR, SABINE

Historical tracks, Fleetmon.com

Fetterer, F., K. Knowles, W. Meier, M. Savoie, and A. K. Windnagel. 2016, updated daily. Sea Ice Index,

FAO Statisticsal Fishing Zones, http://www.fao.org/figis/geoserver/area/ows?service=WFS&re-

Version 2. Boulder, Colorado USA. NSIDC: National Snow and Ice Data Center. doi: http://dx.doi. org/10.7265/N5736NV7. Fretwell, P., H. D. Pritchard, D. G. Vaughan, J. L. Bamber, N. E. Barrand, R. Bell, and C. Bianchi et al. “Bedmap2: Improved Ice Bed, Surface And Thickness Datasets For Antarctica”. The Cryosphere 7,

quest=GetFeature&version=1.0.0&typeName=area:FAO_AREAS&outputFormat=SHAPE-ZIP Smith, W. H. F., and D. T. Sandwell, Global seafloor topography from satellite altimetry and ship depth soundings, Science, v. 277, p. 1957-1962, 26 Sept., 1997. https://www.akerbiomarine.com/

no. 1 (2013): 375-393. doi:10.5194/tc-7-375-2013. Bindschadler, R., Vornberger, P., Fleming, A., Fox, A., Mullins, J., Binnie, D., Paulson, S., Granneman, B.,

MAP 20. - Aker Biomarine’s krill industry from Antarctic point of view

and Gorodetzky, D., 2008, The Landsat Image Mosaic of Antarctica, Remote Sensing of

Historical tracks, Fleetmon.com

Environment, 112, pp. 4214-4226

FAO Statisticsal Fishing Zones, http://www.fao.org/figis/geoserver/area/ows?service=WFS&re-

Rignot, E., J. Mouginot, and B. Scheuchl. 2011. MEaSUREs Antarctic Grounding Line from Differential Satellite Radar Interferometry [indicate subset used]. Boulder, Colorado USA: NASA DAAC at the National Snow and Ice Data Center. doi:10.5067/MEASURES/CRYOSPHERE/ nsidc-0498.001. Sentinel 1 SAR Imagery, https://www.polarview.aq/antarctic

quest=GetFeature&version=1.0.0&typeName=area:FAO_AREAS&outputFormat=SHAPE-ZIP Smith, W. H. F., and D. T. Sandwell, Global seafloor topography from satellite altimetry and ship depth soundings, Science, v. 277, p. 1957-1962, 26 Sept., 1997. https://www.akerbiomarine.com/ https://www.biomar.com/ https://www.scottishseafarms.com/

MAP 14. - Shifting sea ice around Antarctica (series)

https://www.salmar.no/en/

Spreen, G., L. Kaleschke, and G.Heygster (2008), Sea ice remote sensing using AMSR-E 89 GHz channels J. Geophys. Res.,vol. 113, C02S03, doi:10.1029/2005JC003384. Chlorophyll concentration, https://oceandata.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/MODIS-Aqua/Mapped/8-Day/4km/ chlor_a/2018/

MAP 21. - Global map of Aker Biomarine’s krill industry Historical tracks, Fleetmon.com FAO Statisticsal Fishing Zones, http://www.fao.org/figis/geoserver/area/ows?service=WFS&request=GetFeature&version=1.0.0&typeName=area:FAO_AREAS&outputFormat=SHAPE-ZIP

Chapter 4. MAP 15. - Gateways of Antarctic Krill fisheries

Smith, W. H. F., and D. T. Sandwell, Global seafloor topography from satellite altimetry and ship depth soundings, Science, v. 277, p. 1957-1962, 26 Sept., 1997.

Historical tracks, Fleetmon.com

https://www.akerbiomarine.com/

FAO Statisticsal Fishing Zones, http://www.fao.org/figis/geoserver/area/ows?service=WFS&re-

https://www.biomar.com/

quest=GetFeature&version=1.0.0&typeName=area:FAO_AREAS&outputFormat=SHAPE-ZIP Smith, W. H. F., and D. T. Sandwell, Global seafloor topography from satellite altimetry and ship depth

https://www.scottishseafarms.com/ https://www.salmar.no/en/

soundings, Science, v. 277, p. 1957-1962, 26 Sept., 1997. Chapter 6. MAP 16. - Krill fishing nations

MAP 22. - Inadequate marine management system around Antarctica


Chlorophyll concentration, https://oceandata.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/MODIS-Aqua/Mapped/8-Day/4km/

channels J. Geophys. Res.,vol. 113, C02S03, doi:10.1029/2005JC003384.

chlor_a/2018/ Statistical Areas, Marine Protected Areas, CCAMLR, https://gis.ccamlr.org/home, 2017, https://www. ccamlr.org/en/system/files/e-pt11.pdf, FAO, http://www.fao.org/fishery/area/search/en. CCAMLR Secretariat (2013) Historical track, Fleetmon.com Antarctic Coastline, SCAR Antarctic Digital Database (ADD) Version 7.0. 2016-2017, http://www.add. scar.org/

MAP 31. - Chlorophyll based density mapping: iso-density domains with respect to 10.12.2018 Howat, I. M., Porter, C., Smith, B. E., Noh, M.-J., and Morin, P.: The Reference Elevation Model of Antarctica, The Cryosphere, 13, 665-674, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-13-665-2019, 2019. Chlorophyll concentration, https://oceandata.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/MODIS-Aqua/Mapped/8-Day/4km/ chlor_a/2018/ Spreen, G., L. Kaleschke, and G.Heygster (2008), Sea ice remote sensing using AMSR-E 89 GHz channels J. Geophys. Res.,vol. 113, C02S03, doi:10.1029/2005JC003384.

MAP 23. - Soufriere Marine Management in St Lucia Gell, Fiona R., and Callum M. Roberts. “Benefits Beyond Boundaries: The Fishery Effects Of Marine Reserves”. Trends In Ecology & Evolution 18, no. 9 (2003): 448-455. doi:10.1016/s01695347(03)00189-7.

MAP 32. - Vessel behavior in accordance with the tool Howat, I. M., Porter, C., Smith, B. E., Noh, M.-J., and Morin, P.: The Reference Elevation Model of Antarctica, The Cryosphere, 13, 665-674, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-13-665-2019, 2019.

Roberts, Callum M, and Julie P Hawkins. Effects Of Marine Reserves On Adjacent Fisheries, 2001.

Chlorophyll concentration, https://oceandata.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/MODIS-Aqua/Mapped/8-Day/4km/

MAP 24. - Ecocast Decision Support tool in USA

Spreen, G., L. Kaleschke, and G.Heygster (2008), Sea ice remote sensing using AMSR-E 89 GHz

chlor_a/2018/ Flanders Marine Institute (2019). Maritime Boundaries Geodatabase: Maritime Boundaries and

channels J. Geophys. Res.,vol. 113, C02S03, doi:10.1029/2005JC003384.

Exclusive Economic Zones (200NM), version 11. Available online at http://www.marineregions. org/. https://doi.org/10.14284/386

MAP 33. - Spatial distribution of the vessels

ERDAPP, Ecocast Project, NOAA, https://coastwatch.pfeg.noaa.gov/erddap/griddap/ecocast.graph

Howat, I. M., Porter, C., Smith, B. E., Noh, M.-J., and Morin, P.: The Reference Elevation Model of

MAP 25. - Real time tariff incentive system in Ireland

Chlorophyll concentration, https://oceandata.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/MODIS-Aqua/Mapped/8-Day/4km/

Antarctica, The Cryosphere, 13, 665-674, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-13-665-2019, 2019. Kraak, Sarah B.M., David G. Reid, Guillaume Bal, Amos Barkai, Edward A. Codling, Ciarán J. Kelly, and Emer Rogan. “RTI (“Real-Time Incentives”) Outperforms Traditional Management In A Simulated Mixed Fishery And Cases Incorporating Protection Of Vulnerable Species And Areas”. Fisheries

chlor_a/2018/ Spreen, G., L. Kaleschke, and G.Heygster (2008), Sea ice remote sensing using AMSR-E 89 GHz channels J. Geophys. Res.,vol. 113, C02S03, doi:10.1029/2005JC003384.

Research 172 (2015): 209-224. doi:10.1016/j.fishres.2015.07.014. Chapter 8. Chapter 7

MAP 34. - Man-made statistic zones along the oceans (series)

MAP 26. - Planetary processes as an apparatus for cartographies

FAO Statisticsal Fishing Zones, http://www.fao.org/figis/geoserver/area/ows?service=WFS&re-

Flanders Marine Institute (2019). Maritime Boundaries Geodatabase: Maritime Boundaries and Exclusive Economic Zones (200NM), version 11. Available online at http://www.marineregions. org/. https://doi.org/10.14284/386 Chlorophyll concentration, https://oceandata.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/MODIS-Aqua/Mapped/8-Day/4km/ chlor_a/2018/ Spreen, G., L. Kaleschke, and G.Heygster (2008), Sea ice remote sensing using AMSR-E 89 GHz

quest=GetFeature&version=1.0.0&typeName=area:FAO_AREAS&outputFormat=SHAPE-ZIP Flanders Marine Institute (2019). Maritime Boundaries Geodatabase: Maritime Boundaries and Exclusive Economic Zones (200NM), version 11. Available online at http://www.marineregions. org/. https://doi.org/10.14284/386 Smith, W. H. F., and D. T. Sandwell, Global seafloor topography from satellite altimetry and ship depth soundings, Science, v. 277, p. 1957-1962, 26 Sept., 1997.

channels J. Geophys. Res.,vol. 113, C02S03, doi:10.1029/2005JC003384. Sallée, J.B.; Speer, K and Morrow, R. Southern Ocean fronts and their variability to climate modes, Journ. of Climate, 2008, Vol.21(12), pp. 3020-3039 FAO Statisticsal Fishing Zones, http://www.fao.org/figis/geoserver/area/ows?service=WFS&request=GetFeature&version=1.0.0&typeName=area:FAO_AREAS&outputFormat=SHAPE-ZIP Smith, W. H. F., and D. T. Sandwell, Global seafloor topography from satellite altimetry and ship depth soundings, Science, v. 277, p. 1957-1962, 26 Sept., 1997.

MAP 35. - Global conveyor belt (series) Sallée, J.B.; Speer, K and Morrow, R. Southern Ocean fronts and their variability to climate modes, Journ. of Climate, 2008, Vol.21(12), pp. 3020-3039 Smith, W. H. F., and D. T. Sandwell, Global seafloor topography from satellite altimetry and ship depth soundings, Science, v. 277, p. 1957-1962, 26 Sept., 1997. Ocean Atlas 2017, WOR, SABINE

MAP 27. - Identifying the productive part of the krill movement

MAP 36. - Ocean productivity in different seasons (series)

Statistical Areas, Marine Protected Areas, CCAMLR, https://gis.ccamlr.org/home, 2017, https://www.

Sallée, J.B.; Speer, K and Morrow, R. Southern Ocean fronts and their variability to climate modes,

ccamlr.org/en/system/files/e-pt11.pdf, FAO, http://www.fao.org/fishery/area/search/en. CCAMLR Secretariat (2013) Historical tracks, fleetmon.com Howat, I. M., Porter, C., Smith, B. E., Noh, M.-J., and Morin, P.: The Reference Elevation Model of Antarctica, The Cryosphere, 13, 665-674, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-13-665-2019, 2019. Antarctic Coastline, SCAR Antarctic Digital Database (ADD) Version 7.0. 2016-2017, http://www.add. scar.org/

Journ. of Climate, 2008, Vol.21(12), pp. 3020-3039 Smith, W. H. F., and D. T. Sandwell, Global seafloor topography from satellite altimetry and ship depth soundings, Science, v. 277, p. 1957-1962, 26 Sept., 1997. Ocean Atlas 2017, WOR, SABINE Behrenfeld, Michael J., and Paul G. Falkowski. “Photosynthetic Rates Derived From Satellite-Based Chlorophyll Concentration”. Limnology And Oceanography 42, no. 1 (1997): 1-20. doi:10.4319/ lo.1997.42.1.0001. Ocean Productivity, http://sites.science.oregonstate.edu/ocean.productivity/index.php

MAP 28. - Gradient change of chlorophyll concentration Howat, I. M., Porter, C., Smith, B. E., Noh, M.-J., and Morin, P.: The Reference Elevation Model of Antarctica, The Cryosphere, 13, 665-674, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-13-665-2019, 2019. Chlorophyll concentration, https://oceandata.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/MODIS-Aqua/Mapped/8-Day/4km/ chlor_a/2018/

MAP 37. - Gradient change of seasonal NPP (series) Sallée, J.B.; Speer, K and Morrow, R. Southern Ocean fronts and their variability to climate modes, Journ. of Climate, 2008, Vol.21(12), pp. 3020-3039 Smith, W. H. F., and D. T. Sandwell, Global seafloor topography from satellite altimetry and ship depth soundings, Science, v. 277, p. 1957-1962, 26 Sept., 1997.

MAP 29. - Establishing exclusive zones in Bransfield Strait

Ocean Atlas 2017, WOR, SABINE

Howat, I. M., Porter, C., Smith, B. E., Noh, M.-J., and Morin, P.: The Reference Elevation Model of

Behrenfeld, Michael J., and Paul G. Falkowski. “Photosynthetic Rates Derived From Satellite-Based

Antarctica, The Cryosphere, 13, 665-674, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-13-665-2019, 2019. Chlorophyll concentration, https://oceandata.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/MODIS-Aqua/Mapped/8-Day/4km/ chlor_a/2018/

Chlorophyll Concentration”. Limnology And Oceanography 42, no. 1 (1997): 1-20. doi:10.4319/ lo.1997.42.1.0001. Ocean Productivity, http://sites.science.oregonstate.edu/ocean.productivity/index.php

MAP 30. - Chlorophyll based density mapping: iso-density domains with respect to 02.12.2018

MAP 38. - Prediction of the change in NPP

Howat, I. M., Porter, C., Smith, B. E., Noh, M.-J., and Morin, P.: The Reference Elevation Model of

Krumhardt, Kristen M., Nicole S. Lovenduski, Matthew C. Long, and Keith Lindsay. “Avoidable

Antarctica, The Cryosphere, 13, 665-674, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-13-665-2019, 2019.

Impacts Of Ocean Warming On Marine Primary Production: Insights From The CESM

Chlorophyll concentration, https://oceandata.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/MODIS-Aqua/Mapped/8-Day/4km/ chlor_a/2018/ Spreen, G., L. Kaleschke, and G.Heygster (2008), Sea ice remote sensing using AMSR-E 89 GHz

Ensembles”. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 31, no. 1 (2017): 114-133. doi:10.1002/2016gb005528.



09.4.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

fishery/statistics/en. Flores, H, A Atkinson, S Kawaguchi, BA Krafft, G Milinevsky, S Nicol, and C Reiss et al. “Impact Of Climate Change On Antarctic Krill”. Marine Ecology Progress Series 458 (2012): 1-19. doi:10.3354/

2020. https://www.unenvironment.org/delc/GlobalCommons/tabid/54404. Conservationecologylab.Com, 2020. http://www.conservationecologylab.com/ uploads/1/9/7/6/19763887/ecocast_for_web.pdf. Ccamlr.Org, 2020. https://www.ccamlr.org/en/system/files/00%20KRI48%202018.pdf. St.Nmfs.Noaa.Gov, 2020. https://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/Assets/Quality-Assurance/documents/ peer-review-reports/2016/2016_05_05%20Thomson%20SWFSC%20Antarctic%20krill%20 stock%20assessment%20report.pdf. Digitalcommons.Wcl.American.Edu, 2020. http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1198&context=sdlp. “01. Antarctic Treaty, Done At Washington December 1, 1959. - United States Department Of State”. United States Department Of State, 2020. https://www.state.gov/antarctic-treaty/. “About CCAMLR | CCAMLR”. Ccamlr.Org, 2020. https://www.ccamlr.org/en/organisation. Annex V To The Protocol On Environmental Protection To The Antarctic Treaty. Reprint, [London]: Stationery Office, 2006. Antarctica, Coming. “Coming Back From The Brink: The Fur Seals Of Antarctica”. Oceanwide-Expeditions.Com, 2020. https://oceanwide-expeditions.com/blog/coming-back-from-the-brink-thefur-seals-of-antarctica. Archives, Naval. “February 1, 1955: Task Force 43 Commissioned To Plan And Execute Operation Deepfreeze”. Naval History Blog, 2020. https://www.navalhistory.org/2013/02/01/february-11955-task-force-43-commissioned-to-plan-and-execute-operation-deepfreeze. “Area Protection And Management / Monuments | Antarctic Treaty”. Ats.Aq, 2020. https://www.ats. aq/e/protected.html. Armstrong, Sue, Robert Lockhart, RB Woodward, Sonia Ritter, Catherine W, Colleen Wallis, and Paul Tuff. “Licence To Krill - Greenpeace International”. Greenpeace International, 2019. https://www. greenpeace.org/international/publication/15255/licence-to-krill-antarctic-krill-report/. ASA, Marit. “History / About Aker - Aker ASA”. Eng.Akerasa.Com, 2020. https://eng.akerasa.com/ About-Aker/History. Behrenfeld, Michael J., and Paul G. Falkowski. “Photosynthetic Rates Derived From Satellite-Based Chlorophyll Concentration”. Limnology And Oceanography 42, no. 1 (1997): 1-20. doi:10.4319/ lo.1997.42.1.0001. BioMarine, Aker. “Download The Annual Report From Aker Biomarine”. Akerbiomarine.Com, 2020. https://www.akerbiomarine.com/download-annual-report. BioMarine, Aker. “Innovation From Within”. Akerbiomarine.Com, 2020. https://www.akerbiomarine. com/innovation-from-within-. BioMarine, Aker. “Operations”. Akerbiomarine.Com, 2020. https://www.akerbiomarine.com/ operations. BioMarine, Aker. “Our Products”. Akerbiomarine.Com, 2020. https://www.akerbiomarine.com/ our-products. Brooks, Shaun T., Julia Jabour, John van den Hoff, and Dana M. Bergstrom. “Our Footprint On Antarctica Competes With Nature For Rare Ice-Free Land”. Nature Sustainability 2, no. 3 (2019): 185-190. doi:10.1038/s41893-019-0237-y. “Carbon Sinks”. Coolantarctica.Com, 2020. https://www.coolantarctica.com/Antarctica%20fact%20 file/science/carbon_sinks.php. Chapman, Christopher, and Jean-Baptiste Sallée. “Isopycnal Mixing Suppression By The Antarctic Circumpolar Current And The Southern Ocean Meridional Overturning Circulation”. Journal Of Physical Oceanography 47, no. 8 (2017): 2023-2045. doi:10.1175/jpo-d-16-0263.1. Chatila, Iryna. “Andrew Thompson”. Web.Gps.Caltech.Edu, 2019. http://web.gps.caltech.edu/~andrewt/research/acc.html. Deppeler, Stacy L., and Andrew T. Davidson. “Southern Ocean Phytoplankton In A Changing Climate”. Frontiers In Marine Science 4 (2017). doi:10.3389/fmars.2017.00040. Docquier, David, David Pollard, and Frank Pattyn. “Thwaites Glacier Grounding-Line Retreat:

meps09831. Fretwell, P., H. D. Pritchard, D. G. Vaughan, J. L. Bamber, N. E. Barrand, R. Bell, and C. Bianchi et al. “Bedmap2: Improved Ice Bed, Surface And Thickness Datasets For Antarctica”. The Cryosphere 7, no. 1 (2013): 375-393. doi:10.5194/tc-7-375-2013. Fu, Weiwei, James T. Randerson, and J. Keith Moore. “Climate Change Impacts On Net Primary Production (NPP) And Export Production(EP) Regulated By Increasing Stratification And Phytoplankton Communitystructure In The CMIP5 Models”. Biogeosciences 13, no. 18 (2016): 5151-5170. doi:10.5194/bg-13-5151-2016. Gell, Fiona R., and Callum M. Roberts. “Benefits Beyond Boundaries: The Fishery Effects Of Marine Reserves”. Trends In Ecology & Evolution 18, no. 9 (2003): 448-455. doi:10.1016/s01695347(03)00189-7. Gerber, Margaret, B Ramamurti, Frances Calcraft, and Taylor Hattori. “30X30: A Blueprint For Ocean Protection - Greenpeace International”. Greenpeace International, 2020. https://www. greenpeace.org/international/publication/21604/30x30-a-blueprint-for-ocean-protection/. GRANT, RUTH W., and ROBERT O. KEOHANE. “Accountability And Abuses Of Power In World Politics”. American Political Science Review 99, no. 1 (2005): 29-43. doi:10.1017/s0003055405051476. GRANT, RUTH W., and ROBERT O. KEOHANE. “Accountability And Abuses Of Power In World Politics”. American Political Science Review 99, no. 1 (2005): 29-43. doi:10.1017/s0003055405051476. Howkins, Adrian. “Melting Empires? Climate Change And Politics In Antarctica Since The International Geophysical Year”. Osiris 26, no. 1 (2011): 180-197. doi:10.1086/661271. Hughes, Kevin A., and Susie M. Grant. “The Spatial Distribution Of Antarctica’S Protected Areas: A Product Of Pragmatism, Geopolitics Or Conservation Need?”. Environmental Science & Policy 72 (2017): 41-51. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2017.02.009. Iudicone, Daniele, Sabrina Speich, Gurvan Madec, and Bruno Blanke. “The Global Conveyor Belt From A Southern Ocean Perspective”. Journal Of Physical Oceanography 38, no. 7 (2008): 1401-1425. doi:10.1175/2007jpo3525.1. Johnson, Robert, Peter G. Strutton, Simon W. Wright, Andrew McMinn, and Klaus M. Meiners. “Three Improved Satellite Chlorophyll Algorithms For The Southern Ocean”. Journal Of Geophysical Research: Oceans 118, no. 7 (2013): 3694-3703. doi:10.1002/jgrc.20270. Kawaguchi, So, Toshihiro Yoshida, Luke Finley, Paul Cramp, and Stephen Nicol. “The Krill Maturity Cycle: A Conceptual Model Of The Seasonal Cycle In Antarctic Krill”. Polar Biology 30, no. 6 (2006): 689-698. doi:10.1007/s00300-006-0226-2. Kim, Hyewon, Hugh W. Ducklow, Doris Abele, Eduardo M. Ruiz Barlett, Anita G. J. Buma, Michael P. Meredith, Patrick D. Rozema, Oscar M. Schofield, Hugh J. Venables, and Irene R. Schloss. “Correction To ‘Inter-Decadal Variability Of Phytoplankton Biomass Along The Coastal West Antarctic Peninsula’”. Philosophical Transactions Of The Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical And Engineering Sciences 376, no. 2130 (2018): 20180170. doi:10.1098/rsta.2018.0170. Klein, Emily S., Simeon L. Hill, Jefferson T. Hinke, Tony Phillips, and George M. Watters. “Impacts Of Rising Sea Temperature On Krill Increase Risks For Predators In The Scotia Sea”. PLOS ONE 13, no. 1 (2018): e0191011. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0191011. Kraak, Sarah B.M., David G. Reid, Guillaume Bal, Amos Barkai, Edward A. Codling, Ciarán J. Kelly, and Emer Rogan. “RTI (“Real-Time Incentives”) Outperforms Traditional Management In A Simulated Mixed Fishery And Cases Incorporating Protection Of Vulnerable Species And Areas”. Fisheries Research 172 (2015): 209-224. doi:10.1016/j.fishres.2015.07.014. “Krill | National Geographic”. Nationalgeographic.Com, 2020. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/ animals/invertebrates/group/krill/. Krumhardt, Kristen M., Nicole S. Lovenduski, Matthew C. Long, and Keith Lindsay. “Avoidable Impacts Of Ocean Warming On Marine Primary Production: Insights From The CESM Ensembles”. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 31, no. 1 (2017): 114-133. doi:10.1002/2016gb005528. Lewison, Rebecca, Alistair J. Hobday, Sara Maxwell, Elliott Hazen, Jason R. Hartog, Daniel C. Dunn, and Dana Briscoe et al. “Dynamic Ocean Management: Identifying The Critical Ingredients Of

Influence Of Width And Buttressing Parameterizations”. Journal Of Glaciology 60, no. 220 (2014):

Dynamic Approaches To Ocean Resource Management”. Bioscience 65, no. 5 (2015): 486-498.

305-313. doi:10.3189/2014jog13j117.

doi:10.1093/biosci/biv018.

Dodds, Klaus, Alan D Hemmings, and Peder Roberts. Handbook On The Politics Of Antarctica, 2017. Dodds, Klaus, Alan D Hemmings, and Peder Roberts. Handbook On The Politics Of Antarctica, n.d. Dodds, Klaus, Alan Hemmings, and Peder Roberts. “Handbook On The Politics Of Antarctica”, 2017, 426. doi:10.4337/9781784717681. “Effects Of Sealing And Whaling In Antarctica”. Coolantarctica.Com, 2020. https://www.coolantarctica. com/Antarctica%20fact%20file/science/threats_sealing_whaling.php. Elden, Stuart. “Missing The Point: Globalization, Deterritorialization And The Space Of The World”. Transactions Of The Institute Of British Geographers 30, no. 1 (2005): 8-19. doi:10.1111/j.1475-5661.2005.00148.x. Elzinga, Aant. “Antarctica: The Construction Of A Continent By And For Science”, 2020.

“List Of Authorised Vessels | CCAMLR”. Ccamlr.Org, 2020. https://www.ccamlr.org/en/compliance/ authorised-vessels-0. Malone, Thomas, Maurizio Azzaro, Anotonio Bode, and Euan Brown. Un.Org, 2020. https://www. un.org/depts/los/global_reporting/WOA_RPROC/Chapter_06.pdf. Martin, Jonathan Andrew. “Do Antarctic Specially Protected Areas Provide Further Entrenchment Of A Sovereign Claim?”. Ir.Canterbury.Ac.Nz, 2020. https://ir.canterbury.ac.nz/handle/10092/13835. Maxwell, Sara M., Elliott L. Hazen, Rebecca L. Lewison, Daniel C. Dunn, Helen Bailey, Steven J. Bograd, and Dana K. Briscoe et al. “Dynamic Ocean Management: Defining And Conceptualizing Real-Time Management Of The Ocean”. Marine Policy 58 (2015): 42-50. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2015.03.014.

“Environmental Protocol | Antarctic Treaty”. Ats.Aq, 2020. https://www.ats.aq/e/protocol.html.

“Members | CCAMLR”. Ccamlr.Org, 2020. https://www.ccamlr.org/en/organisation/members.

“FAO Fisheries & Aquaculture - About Us”. Fao.Org, 2020. http://www.fao.org/fishery/about/en.

Method, Our. “Our Exclusive Eco-Harvesting Method”. AKER Biomarine, 2020. https://video.

“FAO Fisheries & Aquaculture - Aquatic Species”. Fao.Org, 2020. http://www.fao.org/fishery/ species/3393/en. “FAO Fisheries & Aquaculture - Global Statistical Collections”. Fao.Org, 2020. http://www.fao.org/

akerbiomarine.com/our-exclusive-eco-harvesting-method. News, Undercurrent. “Aker Biomarine: New Study Shows Krill Is The Most Effective Growth Enhancer For Shrimp”. Undercurrent News, 2020. https://www.undercurrentnews.com/2019/09/20/


aker-biomarine-new-study-shows-krill-is-the-most-effective-growth-enhancer-for-shrimp/. NICOL, STEPHEN. “Krill, Currents, And Sea Ice: Euphausia Superba And Its Changing Environment”. Bioscience 56, no. 2 (2006): 117. doi:10.1641/0006-3568(2006)056[0111:kcasie]2.0.co;2. NICOL, STEPHEN. “Krill, Currents, And Sea Ice: Euphausia Superba And Its Changing Environment”. Bioscience 56, no. 2 (2006): 111. doi:10.1641/0006-3568(2006)056[0111:kcasie]2.0.co;2. Oliver, Amy. “Lochmuir Salmon? It Doesn’t Exist: How Supermarkets Invent Places And Farms To Trick Shoppers Into Buying Premium Food”. Mail Online, 2020. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ article-2100863/Revealed-How-supermarkets-invent-places-farms-trick-shoppers-buyinggoods.html. Packham, Chris. “Fishing For Krill Is An Eco-Disaster: We Must Protect The Antarctic | Chris Packham”. The Guardian, 2020. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/13/fishing-krill-eco-disaster-ocean-sanctuary-protect-antarctic. Parizek, B. R., K. Christianson, S. Anandakrishnan, R. B. Alley, R. T. Walker, R. A. Edwards, and D. S. Wolfe et al. “Dynamic (In)Stability Of Thwaites Glacier, West Antarctica”. Journal Of Geophysical Research: Earth Surface 118, no. 2 (2013): 638-655. doi:10.1002/jgrf.20044. Pritchard, H D, and R G Bingham. “Exploration Glaciology: Radar And Antarctic Ice”. Physics Education 42, no. 5 (2007): 442-456. doi:10.1088/0031-9120/42/5/001. Pritchard, Hamish D. Extensive Dynamic Thinning On The Margins Of The Greenland And Antarctic Ice Sheets. Reprint, London, Eng., 2009. Readfearn, Graham. “Antarctic Marine Park: Conservationists Frustrated After Protection Bid Fails For Eighth Time”. The Guardian, 2020. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/ nov/02/antarctic-marine-park-conservationists-frustrated-after-protection-bid-fails-for-eight-time. Rignot, E., J. Mouginot, and B. Scheuchl. “Ice Flow Of The Antarctic Ice Sheet”. Science 333, no. 6048 (2011): 1427-1430. doi:10.1126/science.1208336. Roberts, Callum M, and Julie P Hawkins. Effects Of Marine Reserves On Adjacent Fisheries, 2001. Sala, Enric, Juan Mayorga, Christopher Costello, David Kroodsma, Maria L. D. Palomares, Daniel Pauly, U. Rashid Sumaila, and Dirk Zeller. “The Economics Of Fishing The High Seas”. Science Advances 4, no. 6 (2018). doi:10.1126/sciadv.aat2504. Schofield, Oscar, Michael Brown, Josh Kohut, Schuyler Nardelli, Grace Saba, Nicole Waite, and Hugh Ducklow. “Changes In The Upper Ocean Mixed Layer And Phytoplankton Productivity Along The West Antarctic Peninsula”. Philosophical Transactions Of The Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical And Engineering Sciences 376, no. 2122 (2018): 20170173. doi:10.1098/rsta.2017.0173. “Scottish Sea Farms - Our Locations | Scottish Sea Farms”. Scottish Sea Farms, 2020. https://www. scottishseafarms.com/about/our-locations/. “Seattle Firms Merge Into Norway’s Aker | The Seattle Times”. Archive.Seattletimes.Com, 2020. https:// archive.seattletimes.com/archive/?date=19961002&slug=2352169. Shaw, Justine D., Aleks Terauds, Martin J. Riddle, Hugh P. Possingham, and Steven L. Chown. “Antarctica’S Protected Areas Are Inadequate, Unrepresentative, And At Risk”. Plos Biology 12, no. 6 (2014): e1001888. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1001888. Siders, Anne, Rose Stanley, and Kate M. Lewis. “A Dynamic Ocean Management Proposal For The Bering Strait Region”. Marine Policy 74 (2016): 181. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2016.09.028. Siegel, Volker, Christian S. Reiss, Kimberly S. Dietrich, Matilda Haraldsson, and Gerhard Rohardt. “Distribution And Abundance Of Antarctic Krill (Euphausia Superba) Along The Antarctic Peninsula”. Deep Sea Research Part I: Oceanographic Research Papers 77 (2013): 63-74. doi:10.1016/j.dsr.2013.02.005. Sigman, Daniel, and Mathis Hain. Mathis-Hain.Net, 2020. http://www.mathis-hain.net/resources/ Sigman_and_Hain_2012_NatureEdu.pdf. Society, National. “Ocean Conveyor Belt”. National Geographic Society, 2020. https://www. nationalgeographic.org/encyclopedia/ocean-conveyor-belt/12th-grade/. “Socio-Economic Data And Scenarios”. Sedac.Ciesin.Columbia.Edu, 2020. https://sedac.ciesin. columbia.edu/ddc/sres/index.html. Sokolov, Serguei, and Stephen R. Rintoul. “On The Relationship Between Fronts Of The Antarctic Circumpolar Current And Surface Chlorophyll Concentrations In The Southern Ocean”. Journal Of Geophysical Research 112, no. 7 (2007). doi:10.1029/2006jc004072. “Statistical Bulletin | CCAMLR”. Ccamlr.Org, 2020. https://www.ccamlr.org/en/publications/ statistical-bulletin. Summerhayes, Colin P. “International Collaboration In Antarctica: The International Polar Years, The International Geophysical Year, And The Scientific Committee On Antarctic Research”. Polar Record 44, no. 4 (2008): 321-334. doi:10.1017/s0032247408007468. Taylor, Matthew. “Antarctic’s Future In Doubt After Plan For World’s Biggest Marine Reserve Is Blocked”. The Guardian, 2020. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/nov/02/plan-create-worlds-biggest-nature-reserve-antarctic-rejected. Taylor, Matthew. “Decline In Krill Threatens Antarctic Wildlife, From Whales To Penguins”. The Guardian, 2020. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/feb/14/decline-in-krill-threatens-antarctic-wildlife-from-whales-to-penguins. Tejedo, Pablo, Berta Gutiérrez, Luis R. Pertierra, and Javier Benayas. “Analysis Of Published Scientific Research From Deception Island, South Shetland Islands”. Antarctic Science 27, no. 2 (2014): 134-149. doi:10.1017/s0954102014000455. “The Antarctic Treaty Explained - British Antarctic Survey”. Bas.Ac.Uk, 2020. https://www.bas.ac.uk/ about/antarctica/the-antarctic-treaty/the-antarctic-treaty-explained/.

“The Fight To Own Antarctica | Financial Times”. Ft.Com, 2020. https://www.ft.com/content/ 2fab8e58-59b4-11e8-b8b2-d6ceb45fa9d0. “The Tragedy Of The Commons”. Science 162, no. 3859 (1968): 1243-1248. doi:10.1126/science.162.3859.1243. Thorpe, S.E., E.J. Murphy, and J.L. Watkins. “Circumpolar Connections Between Antarctic Krill (Euphausia Superba Dana) Populations: Investigating The Roles Of Ocean And Sea Ice Transport”. Deep Sea Research Part I: Oceanographic Research Papers 54, no. 5 (2007): 792-810. doi:10.1016/j.dsr.2007.01.008. “UKAHT - The Heroic Era”. Ukaht.Org, 2020. https://www.ukaht.org/learn/the-heroic-era/. “UKAHT - Whalers Bay”. Ukaht.Org, 2020. https://www.ukaht.org/discover/other-historic-sites/ whalers-bay/. Weatherhead, Elizabeth C., Bruce A. Wielicki, V. Ramaswamy, Mark Abbott, Thomas P. Ackerman, Robert Atlas, and Guy Brasseur et al. “Designing The Climate Observing System Of The Future”. Earth’s Future 6, no. 1 (2018): 80-102. doi:10.1002/2017ef000627. “What Are Phytoplankton?”. Earthobservatory.Nasa.Gov, 2020. https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/ features/Phytoplankton/page2.php. “Wildlife Is Thriving On This Eerie Polar Volcano”. Nationalgeographic.Com, 2020. https://www. nationalgeographic.com/photography/proof/2018/march/deception-island-antarctica-expedition-exploration/.