This article is the fifth of a six-part bi-weekly series culminating in an editorial piece advocating for an integrated ocean policy for Malaysia.
PART FIVE: NATIONAL OCEAN POLICY
Just as we have worked together in combatting the Covid-19 pandemic, we must now support a much-needed transformative change in the form of an adaptive ocean policy supported by a dynamic form of governance to address many decades-old ocean problems that have turned into a crisis.
Tioman Waters, Photo Credit: Alvin Chelliah
The ocean is one huge inter-connected water body that covers more than 70% of the Earth’s surface, driving weather, regulating temperature, and ultimately supporting all living things on Earth, including us.
The ocean is key to addressing many of the global challenges facing the planet from world food security and climate change to the provision of energy, natural resources, and improved medical care. In 2010, the OECD very conservatively estimated the value of the ocean economy at USD1.5 trillion. It is forecasted that by 2030, the ocean economy would double in size to USD3 trillion, providing full-time employment for around 40 million people.
Unfortunately, as the ocean economy expands, so will the growing pressures on marine resources and ocean space.
As we prosper from these finite resources, we neglected the health of the ocean, treating it as our dumping ground and plundering its resources, causing unpredictable, uneven, and uncertain effects for society, including varied risks for human health.
Ocean crises such as plastics, trash, pollution, and overexploitation of fishing resources are not new, and inadequately addressed. Governments around the world recognise that these are serious issues. Nevertheless, progress is painfully slow.
While the commitment of the United Nations member countries, including Malaysia, towards achieving the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) 20 Aichi Biodiversity Targets are commendable, the world has failed to meet any of the targets (refer to the Global Biodiversity Outlook 5 report).
“Earth’s living systems as a whole are being compromised. And the more humanity exploits nature in unsustainable ways and undermines its contributions to people, the more we undermine our own wellbeing, security and prosperity.”
___________________________
Elizabeth Maruma Mrema,
Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) Executive Secretary
Institutional and Legal Challenges
One factor attributable to the slow progress of the Aichi Targets is that ocean issues and challenges are nestled within conflicting political, social, economic, and environmental systems across multiple scales of time, space, location, involving a diversity of stakeholders.
In most countries, ocean industries and coastal-based resource management (including conservation) are typically managed sectorally by multiple government authorities guided by exclusive policies, institutional arrangements, and legal instruments. This creates overlaps in jurisdiction and authorities; inconsistencies and gaps in legislative frameworks; amplifies multiple-use conflicts; increases duplication of efforts; creates unclear paths for stakeholders in pursuing interests and raises concerns on many uncoordinated approaches by different parties in similar issues. The same can be said for Malaysia with the inherently delicate relationship between the Federal and State governments. There are at least 32 key legislations (both Federal and State) concerning biodiversity conservation in Peninsular Malaysia; seven (7) in Sabah and eight (8) in Sarawak. These legislations are enforced by several authorities; each with its own objectives and coordination mechanisms.
National Ocean Policy around the world
Learning from the Covid-19 crisis management experience, cross-cutting policies must be adaptive, and implementation will require a dynamic form of governance that allows managers to respond rapidly to changes in space and time(1). In other words, an adaptive ocean policy must institutionalise participatory processes across systems and sectors and be able to support integrative and dynamic management.
By 2015, fifteen developed and developing nations[1] had articulated and implemented an integrated, ecosystem-based ocean policy governing the ocean areas under their jurisdiction. This includes developing goals and procedures to harmonize existing uses and laws to foster sustainable development of ocean areas, protect biodiversity and vulnerable resources and ecosystems, and coordinate the actions of the many government agencies that are typically involved in oceans affairs.
Since then, countries such as Fiji (2020 – working draft), Solomon Islands (2018), Indonesia (2017), and Vanuatu (2016) have developed their version of a National Ocean Policy.
Malaysia
In 2011, Malaysia drafted a version of a “National Ocean Policy” through the office of the National Oceanographic Directorate (NOD), Ministry of Science, Technology, and Innovation (MOSTI). It serves as a basis for developing future strategies, framework and action plans concerning the management of ocean and coastal environment and resources.
The draft policy covers a range of recommendations that include a sustainable ocean economy that encourages public-private partnerships; transforming ocean and coastal-based industries; and strengthening knowledge in marine science and technology to drive innovation-led growth. It also proposes a National Ocean Data Management Strategy to address issues such as data standardisation.
Furthermore, the draft policy dedicated a whole chapter on building awareness, developing and retaining a marine talent base by increasing the competency of tertiary graduates, nurturing marine science and innovation entrepreneurs, increasing opportunities in upskilling for the existing workforce, and growing our capacity to train and certify seafarers.
The draft policy also emphasised building a coastal and marine environment that enhances the quality of life of the people. It encourages the development of a climate-resilient ocean sector, undertakes measures for climate adaptation and mitigation, exploration of ocean renewable energy by applying ecosystem-based management and marine spatial planning approaches.
Several recommendations were made to affect changes to the current national ocean governance system that includes updating and harmonising ocean-related legislation and rationalising existing governmental institutions and structures.
Since then, individual experts and organisations have called for the development of (or revisit) the (draft) National Ocean Policy for Malaysia. The draft requires updating and considers current initiatives, which include moving towards a blue economy; and embrace digital and technological advances in big data analytics, artificial intelligence (AI), the Internet of Things (IOT) and robotics as tools for problem-solving. Another critical element to the NOP would be the allocation for a robust ocean literacy program to improve knowledge in sciences to drive science-policy interface and decision-making; and building awareness amongst people.
As a responsible nation, Malaysia is expected to meet its international obligations such as those committed in the Convention of Biological Diversity (CBD) and the UN Sustainable Development Goals by translating those commitments into national actions.