Research/Random Thoughts.
History of Compliance with International Mandates
Geneva Convention
- ignored by terrorists - nothing to lose
- personal motivation to comply - self-preservation
- Korean/Vietnam War...
- does not really apply either
Kyoto Accords (most relevant)
http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=1307667221&sid=5&Fmt=2&clientId=5482&RQT=309&VName=PQD
http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=801652851&sid=5&Fmt=2&clientId=5482&RQT=309&VName=PQD
http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=784211311&sid=5&Fmt=3&clientId=5482&RQT=309&VName=PQD
- all nations have stake in global climate, just like oceans
- unlike oceans, will cost a lot extra to conform
- still exist many economic incentives to violate
- punitive measures...effective?
Peace Treaties
- mutual destruction consequence - self-preservation; does not really apply
World Trade Organization (somewhat relevant)
- no clue yet
Consider: how to enforce a closed area? Or any other international policy?
- Most all countries will serve own interests first
- In cases of war, threat of mutual destruction/fear of similar treatment to own people can prompt compliance
- When the stakes are distributed...much harder to enforce
- Economical - international clout can cut off nations
- Environmental - international clout can't do much w/o economic side retribution
Enforcement policy:
- Large international organization? like UN
- not enough resources to properly enforce. miles of oceans to patrol/monitor...what can it do even if it catches a violator? punish individual breeds discontent, punish country may not be appropriate.
- Countries self-enforce?
- may be sympathetic to individuals, would not work. economic incentives to allow violations, economic sanctions to punish country would have to be severe to outweigh.