Transboundary conservation has an important, yet often undervalued, role in the international conservation regime. When applied to the legally ambiguous and interconnected marine environment this is magnified. The lack of clear guidance for transboundary marine conservation from the international conservation community exacerbates this problem, leaving individual initiatives to develop their own governance arrangements. Yet, well-managed transboundary marine protected areas (MPAs) have the potential to contribute significantly to global conservation aims. Conversely, in a period where there is increasing interest in marine resources and space from all sectors, the designation of MPAs can create or amplify a regional conflict. In some instances, states have used MPAs to extend rights over disputed marine resources, restrict the freedom of others and establish sovereignty over maritime space. Six case studies were taken from Europe, North Africa and the Middle East to illustrate how states have interpreted and utilized different legislative mechanisms to either come together or diverge over the governance of marine resources or maritime space. Each of the case studies illustrates how different actors have used the same legislative tools, but with different interpretations and applications, to justify their claims. It is clear that the role of science combined with a deeper engagement with stakeholders can play a critical role in tempering conflict between states. Where states are willing to cooperate, the absence of clear guidelines at the global level means that often ad hoc measures are put into place, with the international frameworks then playing catch up. Balancing different jurisdictional claims with the conservation of the marine environment, whilst considering the increasing special economic interests will become increasingly difficult. Developing a transboundary conservation tool, such as the simple conservation caveats found in the Barcelona Convention and Antarctic Convention, which allow for the establishment of intergovernmental cooperation without prejudicing any outstanding jurisdictional issue, would provide a framework for the development of individual transboundary MPAs.
MULTIFILE
Ulus Baker (1960 – 2007) was a Turkish-Cypriot sociologist, philosopher, and public intellectual. He was born in Ankara, Turkey in 1960. He studied Sociology at Middle East Technical University in Ankara, where he taught as a lecturer until 2004. Baker wrote prolifically in influential Turkish journals and made some of the first Turkish translations of various works of Gilles Deleuze, Antonio Negri, and other contemporary political philosophers. His profuse and accessible work and the novelty of the issues he enthusiastically introduced to Turkish-speaking intellectual circles, earned him a widely spread positive reputation in early age. He died in 2007 in Istanbul.The text in this edition is edited from essays and notes Ulus Baker wrote between 1995 and 2002. In these essays, Baker criticizes the sociological research turning into an analysis of people’s opinions. He explores with an exciting clarity the notion of ‘opinion’ as a specific form of apprehension between knowledge and point of view, then looks into ‘social types’ as an analytical device deployed by early sociologists. He associates the form of ‘comprehension’ the ‘social types’ postulate with Spinoza’s notion of ‘affections’ (as a dynamic, non-linguistic form of the relation between entities). He finally discusses the possibilities of reintroducing this device for understanding our contemporary world through cinema and documentary filmmaking, by reinstating images in general as ‘affective thought processes’.Baker’s first extensive translation to English provides us with a much-needed intervention for re-imagining social thought and visual media, at a time when sociology tends to be reduced to an analysis of ‘big data’, and the pedagogical powers of the image are reduced to data visualization and infographics.
MULTIFILE
The development of international relations and the implementation of the Bologna Process have been increasingly given attention by Higher Education Institutions in the Middle East region through the TEMPUS and Erasmus Mundus programmes. The project partners were keen to learn about elements of the Bologna Process that would their students, faculty and citizens to benefit from mutually enriched cooperation with the European Higher Education Area (EHEA), such as the implementation and recog-nition of ECTS and diploma supplements. Through a series of workshops, seminars and pilot projects, the CORINTHIAM pro-ject has attempted to reinforce the understanding of the process of Internationalisation and Internationalisation at Home and strengthen the cooperation mechanisms to facil-itate the mobility of students and scholars between the EU and the Middle East region. The CORINTHIAM project has benefitted member institutions by facilitating the open access to information and knowledge about EHEA, a deeper appreciation for quality of services delivered by the departments of International Relations, and the training of specialists in EHEA and Bologna issues. These handbooks may be considered as a reflection of the sustainable structure that has been obtained through the outcomes of the above mentioned project. Each of the sections focuses on a distinctive pillar of the project: management of international relations, management of international projects, Internationalization at Home, quality of internationalisation and learning experiences of piloting ECTS at third-country in-stitutions. The lessons learned during the three years of the project will provide insti-tutions, teachers and students with a s better understanding of the EHEA as it concerns Israel and the Palestinian Territories, whereby strengthening cooperation between the Middle East region and the EHEA in the years to come.
