La zona económica exclusiva: una perspectiva latinoamericana

LA ZONA ECONOMICA EXCLUSIVA. UNA PERSPECTIVA LATINOAMERICANA. plans, fuel costs, interests rates and unpredictable cycles of nature. The second problem is an external one concerning 'straddling stocks' in areas beyond and irnmediately adjacent to the 200·mi1e limito Tbis is of particular concern to Canada in the <nose and taiJ' of the Grand Banks. There are also the 'discrete' stocks, e.g. those in Flemish Cap, upon whlch, some straddling stocks depend and whlch have been l18hed traditional1y by coastal communities. Article 63 of the Draft Law of the Sea Convention provides for cooperation among states for the protection and conservation of these stocks. 'The Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization (NAFO) was created ínter aIia to conserve and regulate l18heries beyond the Canadian 200~mi1e limit. NAFO succeeded ICNAF whose members have aII joined NAFO, with the exception of Spain and the USA., The USA does not fJSh in the NAFO regulatory area. NAFO, however, appears susceptible to the same weakness as ICNAF, reIying on voluntary membership leaving the area it seeks to manage open to the abuses of non-members. Tbis problem is addressed in an artiele by Parzival, Copes, Professor of Economics at Simon Fraser University, Bumaby, B.C., entitled "The Impact of UNCLOS III on Management of the World's Fishe· ries" . He calls it the <free rider' problem and says, "There is a strong temptation for an individual country to stay out of (or pull out of) NAFO and to l18h without restraint, while counting on countries within NAFO to moderate their IJShing effort in accordance with the NAFO management plan. Indeed, Spain has apparently decided to play the role of a free rider; Spain is l18hing in the area adjacent to the Canadian zone without attention to the quota restrictions imposed by NAFO on its members. With no solution in sight for the free rider problem, there must be a presumption tbat sound management of IJSheries resources in the high seas, or areas stradding the outer boundaries of EEZs, will remain difficult to achieve añd equalIy difficult to maintain". Canada is already experiencing this difficulty in its fJShlng relationship with Spain and, as a result, the pressure on 'straddling stocks' is mounting. In the bilateral l18heries agreements negotiated prior to the Canadian ex– tension of fJSheries jurisdiction, Canada sougbt, in particular, recognition of its rigbt to extend its jurisdiction out to 200 miles. Since January 1977, one of the major objectives in our bilateral fisheries negotiations has been to obtain recognition for Canada's special interes{'in stocks beyond 200 miles. Th~ NAFO Convention so recognizes Canadian coastal community interests. In re-negotiating agreements entered ¡nto prior to 1977, e.g. with the USSR and Poland, we are seeking further acknowledgement of tbis special Canadian interest as well as cooperation at the Law of the Sea Conference in amending 148