Description
The Antarctic Treaty has successfully overcome sovereignty disputes in the region by ensuring governance based on peace, scientific cooperation and environmental protection. But there are limits to its domestic implementation. Since 2004, the Treaty Measures 4 (2004) and 1 (2005) managing human and environmental risks in Antarctica have not become effective because not all Treaty Parties have implemented them. To find out what affects the implementation by Treaty Parties in a region of undefined sovereignty, I compare 12 European Antarctic National Programmes to identify which domestic factors foster or delay the implementation of these measures. By analysing documents, and interviewing national Antarctic policy actors, I use Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) to shed some light on the limits of environmental governance in areas of disputed sovereignty.
