Traversing the Seas – Ocean Injustice

 

Hey everyone, we’re about halfway through my blog! 🙂

So far, we’ve seen the pervasiveness of environmental injustice in many different contexts – the USA, Amazonian indigenous communities, Singapore, and more. We’ve explored some causes of injustice, namely low income, racism, and location. Interestingly, we’ve seen that these three factors don’t act independently. 

We’ve also discussed the consequences – greater vulnerability to other threats such as climate change and pathogens (e.g. COVID-19). 

From here on out, we’ll discover more causes and consequences of environmental injustice, moving towards more transboundary issues.

Today, we’ll be talking about ocean injustice. What does it mean? 

It’s a strand of environmental injustice that focuses on the link between the ocean climate, conservation and social injustice. When it comes to ocean-related environmental issues, some that come to mind, if I may assume, are sea-level rise, water pollution, overfishing, and oil spills. Though, we probably think of many more after this week’s lecture by Dr Coleman (Week 6 – Marine Impacts). 

Do these problems, however, affect communities equally?

 

Oil Pollution

Coastal town and city residents experience greater exposure. 

After the recent fuel leakage from the MV Wakashio bulk carrier into the Mauritius coast, many grieved the potential loss of biodiversity in Mauritius’ famous coral reefs. However, the impacts weren’t due to Mauritius’ geographical location alone.

Being heavily dependent on tourism for income, many locals took a hit (alongside losses already caused by COVID-19). Furthermore, the destruction of Mauritius’ beautiful ecosystem is likely to cause long-term losses. The nation’s lack of resources and proficiency in this area also lengthened the emergency. 

Although losses were reduced with aid from France, the potential risk was multiplied due to factors such as location, income, access to resources, and dependence on foreign aid.

 

Overfishing

Overfishing by large commercial fishing companies may cause local fishermen and small-scale fisheries to suffer income losses. These may affect them disproportionately due to their income statuses or level of inclusion in policies that offer support for those affected.

As mentioned briefly in the same lecture, overfishing in West Africa was exacerbated by the lack of regulations. This had me thinking about ocean injustice. 

It is likely that the impacts are heavily dependent on the wealth of not only communities, but entire countries as well. 

Low income, high unemployment, and increasing populations in Kenya, for example, all contribute to greater reliance on coastal ecosystems. Unrestrained fishing by these communities themselves may exacerbate overfishing impacts by large foreign fisheries (where present). 

Furthermore, lower-income nations may be less likely to enact environmental protection laws such as fishing restrictions, due to their occupation with other priorities like economic development. Their lack of resources and funding also leads to an inability to educate the public on sustainable fishing methods and monitor/control fisheries.

The tragedy of the global commons could also cause similar problems. Communities who rely on ecosystems that aren’t owned by any country, such as the High Seas, are likely to be unprotected from extensive exploitation of these ecosystems (without consequence).

Once again, we see how these factors are intertwined.

Ocean injustice is complex and difficult to solve, especially because of its transboundary nature. The ocean still faces countless threats, and the communities that rely on it will only grow more vulnerable to these threats, especially with climate change (to be discussed next week).

– Hope 🙂

 

4 thoughts on “Traversing the Seas – Ocean Injustice

  1. Hey Hope!

    This was such an interesting read! The transboundary nature of the ocean truly complicates matters, since the world likes to divide and put things into neat categories, which is impossible for many things related to the environment!

    How do you think the “common-ness”(?) of the ocean will affect how conservation efforts take place? Since some marine ecosystems aren’t owned by anybody, the onus to cleaning up messes or protecting the ocean can’t fall on anyone.

    – Anna 🙂

    1. Hi Anna!
      Thank you for your comment! 🙂 Definitely, I think the lack of ownership of many parts of the Earth’s oceans makes conservation efforts very difficult to implement. Because oceans are so remote, they require a lot of resources (and likely cost a lot) to monitor/patrol.

      I think that this may be why the ocean was less protected by NGOs (until recent years), and was largely left to governments to protect. Therefore, in addition to what you mentioned, this also makes it difficult for conservation laws or efforts to be implemented successfully.

      – Hope 🙂

  2. Hi Anna & Hope,

    I invite both of you to challenge your own perceptions of what’s in the ‘commons’. Is Nature a collection of ‘resources’ that anybody can truly own ? I’m not saying it is or isn’t, just that it’s worth thinking about the very concept of natural RESOURCES in the first place.

    Says the woman with a MSc in Renewable Resources 😉

    jc

  3. Hi Dr Coleman,

    This is interesting. Personally, I don’t really see nature as a “resource” for us. It definitely does serve that purpose, but only because we view it that way. I think it makes it sound like the natural environment’s purpose is to serve us, when in actual fact, we depend on nature and cannot survive without it. So in this way, I personally don’t think the commons can really be “owned”, and prefer not to think that way as well! However, I guess assigning “ownership” in terms of what laws govern certain areas is quite essential to prevent exploitation as well.

    – Hope

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *