• The Journal of Fisheries Business Administration
• /
• v.47 no.1
• /
• pp.31-45
• /
• 2016

This study aims to evaluate the status of implementation of bilateral-fishery order since the Korea-Japan Fisheries Agreement came into effect in 1999 in order to improve fisheries relationships between two countries. The agreement regulates bilateral-fishery order by the principle of the EEZ regime and mutual benefits among countries. (e.g. the mutual agreed fishing in EEZ and cooperation for resource management). However, the Korea-Japan Fisheries Agreement has some limitations such as reducing quotas of the mutual agreed fishing in EEZ, strengthening Japanese fisheries regulation, insufficient cooperation for fisheries management and joint countermeasures. In order to improve fisheries relationships between the two countries, it is imperative to rebalance quotas for the mutual agreed fishing in EEZ, to establish effective resource management systems in the Intermediate zone, to invigorate fisheries cooperation in the private sector, and to introduce new management systems by species over the all waters around East Asia. To accomplish such measures, it is necessary for Korean and Japanese governments to improve fisheries relationships based on trust and cooperation, achieving a win-win situation. Additionally, it is required to incorporate fisheries management among Korea, China, and Japan.

• Strategy21
• /
• s.41
• /
• pp.153-173
• /
• 2017

On 15 December 2015, China seized an underwater drone belonging to the U.S. in the South China Sea. The underwater drone was then about to be retrieved by the Bowditch, a U.S. naval ship.Although China returned the underwater drone to the U.S. on 20 December 2016, the incident resulted in the considerable controversy involving the use of underwater drones. The reason for this is that the seizure of the underwater drone happened in the exclusive economic zone (hereafter referred to as "EEZ") of the Philippines. Part XIII of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (hereafter referred to as "UNCLOS") governs the matters of marine scientific research (hereafter referred to as "MSR"). If a State intends to use an underwater drone in the EEZ of another coastal State for the purpose of MSR, the former has to obtain the consent of the latter in accordance with relevant provisions included in Part XIII of the UNCLOS. However, it is not obvious whether the consent of a coastal State should be required to launch an underwater drone in the EEZ of the State for the purpose of hydrographic surveying or military surveying. Maritime powers such as the U.S. regard hydrographic surveying or military surveying as part of "other internationally lawful uses of the sea related to these freedoms, such as those associated with the operation of ships, aircraft and submarine cables and pipelines" found in Article 58(1) of the UNCLOS, or part of the freedom of the high seas. This interpretation is not incompatible with the implications that the UNCLOS has. Nevertheless, Korea cannot accept this kind of interpretation that is supported by maritime powers. The freedom of hydrographic surveying or military surveying could imply that the EEZ of Korea would be full of underwater drones launched by China, Japan or even Russia. Hence, Korea should claim that the data collected for the purpose of MSR cannot be distinguished from that collected for the purpose of hydrographic surveying or military surveying. This means that hydrographic surveying or military surveying without the consent of a coastal State in the EEZ of the State should not be permitted.

• The Journal of Fisheries Business Administration
• /
• v.34 no.1
• /
• pp.69-85
• /
• 2003

The primary objective of this thesis is to study, case by case, the international disputes for fishing rights between fishing nations and costal states never imagined till the introduction of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea adopted in 1982 and came into effect in November 16, 1994, which governs the high seas and EEZ in a new manner. Such a study is to provide help in the understanding on this new marine system and how to deal with. This is addressed by the perspectives of disputes (a) in the high seas between fishing nations having traditionally enjoyed the principle of the freedom of the high seas and costal states, (b) in the EEZ between fishing nations and costal states possessing the exclusive jurisdiction over living marine resources and sovereign rights for determining allowable catch and the surplus in its EEZ. The article can be divided into four main parts. First, both the general principles of the settlement of international disputes, and the nature and procedures described in the UNCLOS are introduced. Second, it gives cases of tuna long-liner, North Pacific trawler and squid jigger occurred in the coastal states EEZ, and analyses the problem in both terms of its background and final judgment. It further describes the possible issues in case it depends on the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea for its settlement. Third, closely tied to above, important points such as the right of hot pursuit, prompt release of vessel and crew, and the limits of cooperation with costal states inspector on board fishing vessels are considered mostly based on the UNCLOS, Bilateral Agreement and UNIA. Finally, the article concludes as follows ; The need for broad analyses on the nature of international suits and legal system for the settlement, to win the case before the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea or coastal states court, is really acknowledged. However, considering the lack of previous studies about it, it is preferably recommended that governmental efforts for making legal standards to cover the judicial costs, for helping industry out of becoming bankrupt.

• Ocean policy research
• /
• v.33 no.2
• /
• pp.57-82
• /
• 2018

This study aimed to review the reorganization of fisheries and the future tasks in accordance with the establishment of new fishery order in the Northeast Asian Seas. As the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which recognized the sovereign rights of Coastal States in a 200-nautical mile exclusive economic zone (EEZ), entered into force in 1994, the three countries of Korea, China and Japan ratified the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea in 1996 and started negotiations to establish a new fishery order consistent with the EEZ system. However, a conflict of interest occurred because of differences in fisheries between countries, negotiations many times have proceeded, resulting in the signing of fishery agreement between China and Japan in 1997, Korea and Japan in 1998, and Korea and China in 2000. Each fishery arrangement consists of a dual system of EEZ and provisional waters (middle waters, provisional waters). The two countries are engaged in mutual fishing based on coastal states in EEZ, and in the fishing operation under the principle of flag state in provisional waters. There are overlapping or ambiguous jurisdictions in the intermediate waters and provisional waters that are jointly available to both fisheries. The presence of these seas is a challenge to the establishment of a reasonable international fisheries management system for the entire Northeast Asian Seas. In this context, the challenges of the reorganization of the new fisheries order are as follows: 1) conversion to a fishery order for coexistence of fisheries, 2) expansion to an international fishery management system, and 3) establishment of a multilateral fishery cooperation system. Although the jurisdiction of their own waters has been expanded through the establishment of EEZ according to new fishery order, the need for mutual cooperation grows when considering the movement and migration of fishery resources, fishery management, fish consumption and trade. In addition to the fisheries cooperation between the governments, it is also necessary to revitalize the civil cooperation focused on fishermen who exploit fishing grounds together.

• Environmental and Resource Economics Review
• /
• v.6 no.2
• /
• pp.275-303
• /
• 1997

최근 각국은 자국의 해양자원을 보존한다는 명분으로 EEZ선포를 서두르고 있다. 한반도 주변과 같이 서로 인접한 수역에서의 EEZ설정은 필연적으로 각국의 이해관계가 상충될 수밖에 없고 따라서 이의 해결을 위해 인접국들은 합의에 의해 공동어로수역을 설정하고 이를 공동을 관할하려 할 것이다. 이 논문은 각국이 공동어로 수역을 설정하여 접속수역에 대해 인접국에게 관할권을 부여할 경우 초래될 수 있는 점을 게임이론과 정치경제적인 접근으로 이러한 문제를 다루었다. 즉, 접속수역에서 인접국은 자원의 채취에 있어서 다국과의 차별적인 규제를 시행하고 타국도 마찬가지의 정책을 구사할 경우 도덕적 위해(moral hazard)에 의해 각국의 접속수역에서의 자원이 가속적으로 고갈될 수 있다는 점을 보이고 있다. 또한 단기적인 전략적 산업정책의 수행은 타국의 희생하에 시장점유율을 확대시키며 그 결과 이윤의 이전을 가져오며 이는 자국 후생의 향상을 가져올 수 있다는 브랜드-스펜서(Brander-Spencer)의 결과는 수산자원과 같은 갱생지원의 경우에는 적용될 수 없다는 점을 보이고 있다.

• Ocean and Polar Research
• /
• v.28 no.3
• /
• pp.259-272
• /
• 2006

The 1982 UNCLOS provided very detailed provisions on marine scientific research and gave coastal stale jurisdiction to regulate marine scientific research in its EEZ. However, due to lack of definition and criteria of MSR, there are some different views, even conflicts, regarding legal Pounds for governing hydrographic surveys and oceanographic data collection by one state in the EEZs of other states. Some coastal states argue that those activities should only be conducted in the EEZ of other states with the consent of the coastal state while it is the opinion of other states, including the U.S.A., that those activities can be conducted freely in the EEZ. This paper reviews different views and recent developments on the issue and suggests some recommendations for future work of the Korean government related to the activities.

• The Journal of Fisheries Business Administration
• /
• v.30 no.2
• /
• pp.1-23
• /
• 1999

In the Northeast Asian region fisheries agreements of the past regarding high seas as an agreement area were transformed or new agreements were introduced in order to conform to the EEZ regime. However, the existing joint regulatory zone which “open” status is somewhat similar to the high sea not only disappear, but also two new systems were established. To begin with, parties of the agreement claimed their EEZs to be from the territorial sea baselines to the extent set forth, problem of the fishery access of the other party under the agreement is to be solved on the principle of reciprocity and on recognizing of the catch results achieved in the past. In regards to the overlapping zones like neutral zone of the East Sea of Korea(Sea of Japan) and neutral zone to the south of the Cheju Island, provisional measures zones in the Yellow Sea and in the East China Sea, and transitional zone of the Yellow Sea special fisheries management systems reflecting the legal character of the zone involved are applied. Moreover, as fisheries agreements defining open sea as an agreement zone are not able to conform to the EEZ regime, so new fisheries agreements must be taken out from old systems and conceptions, and must be understood and enforced from the new point view. Therefore, countermeasures needed to do so should be developed, and their basic structure is as follows. Firstly, the basic concept of the EEZ regime requires that the coastal states have sovereign rights on their sea zones' natural resources and bear responsibilities appropriate to their allowed jurisdiction. Each Northeast Asian state should adjust the structure of fishing industries and employ advanced fisheries management system, and should make efforts toward such issues of the state policy as increasing fishery resources and preserving ocean environment. Secondly, measures should be developed to solve the international fisheries disputes which are to occur under enforcement of the new fisheries agreements system. In regards to the acts of violation the fisheries laws in the foreign EEZ the principle of jail sentence prohibition is established by the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, and every fisheries agreement reflects this principle. Therefore, the present question is to consider concrete measures to enable the easy release of the seamen, who violated fisheries laws slightly and well-intently, through establishment and management of the guarantee fund needed to make collateral reasonable. Thirdly, Korean-Russian and Russian-Japanese fisheries relations were formed on the basis of the EEZ regime, since 1992 and 1977 respectively, and are expected to maintain mutually beneficial cooperative character. As for Korean-Chinese-Japanese fisheries relations, the operational problems of overlapping zones, and problem of the permits for EEZ mutual access should be solved on the basis of the principle of reciprocity and equity rather than unilaterally from any side.

• Korean Aquaculture
• /
• v.14 no.1
• /
• pp.37-46
• /
• 2002

• Journal of the Korean Society of Marine Environment & Safety
• /
• v.6 no.1
• /
• pp.99-109
• /
• 2000

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea(hereinafter referred as "the Law") adopted in 1982 was enacted on November 16, 1994. South Korea, China, and Japan signed and ratified the Law, respectively. These three countries announced their domestic laws relating to Exclusive Economic Zone(EEZ) with reserving their applications. The enactment of the Law and announcement of EEZ inevitably brought new order on the seas. The New Fishery Agreement based on the Law with EEZ was concluded between South Korea and Japan and ratified by each country′s parliament. Another New Fishery Agreement between South Korea and China is also going to be concluded in near future. The New Fishery Agreements, however, do not include regulations relating to the marine scientific research, the protection of the marine environment, and so forth, which are essential for the States to fully implement the Law According to the New Fishery Agreements, it is impossible for the Coastal States to excercise their jurisdiction. Because the agreement of delimitation ocean boundaries among the three countries are not easy to settle, provisional agreements can only be concluded. Thus, many problems including the sovereignty over Dok-do between South Korea and Japan and delimitation of EEZ between South Korea and China can be arose anytime. This paper investigates the problems and possible counter measures in legal excercise on the seas by South Korean Government. The above mentioned problems introduced by the New Fishery Agreements include potential problems in the Middle Sea Zone, Provisional Zone, and so forth. In this paper, only the legal aspect of the Zones will be discussed excluding the law enforcement and the economic aspect of the Zones.

• Convergence Security Journal
• /
• v.14 no.3_2
• /
• pp.13-21
• /
• 2014

Three sides by the waters of the country in which the topography of the peninsula is a treasure trove of natural resources in the country to recognize the importance of the sea and maritime territorial and maritime policy for the protection of rights, such as to promote the country striving to strengthen haeyangryeok. However, marine activities is 200 sea miles exclusive economic zone of the stage (EEZ) and the continental shelf extends as the, EEZ waters of the overlapping jurisdiction, Books sovereignty, marine scientific research and development, including the continental shelf surrounding the deepening relationship between the neighboring countries and complex understanding including international cooperation and coexistence between countries to be competitive. This time the Coast Guard 's maritime sovereignty existing patron driven from the accident prevention safety management system, from our sea, has been kept firmly. However, due to the new issue of disaster lies in the fate of marine police became dismantled. This real time so that you can be reborn as a marine police force structure. Structure to change the way the rescue operation. Expenses, Shore, you will need to increase the professionalism of pollution.