Maritime Studies
|
|
Home
| Databases
| WorldLII
| Search
| Feedback
Maritime Studies |
|
John Maschke[1]
The International Hydrographic Organization (IHO) has been in existence for nearly eighty years. As an organisation of some prestige in the world of hydrographic surveying and nautical charting, it has quietly gone about its business of providing professional guidance and direction to member States involved in collecting, managing and publishing hydrographic data and nautical charts.
This paper will discuss the origins of the IHO and its effectiveness as an international regime for the promotion and development of hydrography and nautical charting.
The science of hydrography is defined as:
the measuring and depicting those parameters necessary to describe the precise nature and configuration of the seabed, its geographical relationship to the landmass, and the characteristics and dynamics of the sea. These parameters include bathymetry, tides, currents, waves, physical properties of seawater, geology and geophysics.
The primary use of the data collected is to compile marine charts, and other graphic documents; to facilitate and ensure the safety of navigation for mariners in all seas of the world; and for use by others concerned with the marine environment such as ocean engineers, oceanographers, marine biologists and environmental scientists.
Among the most important applications of hydrographic knowledge is its use in planning of exploration and exploitation of marine resources, the determination of seaward limits of national jurisdiction, and the delimitation of maritime boundaries.[2]
There are three main specialisms in the field of hydrography including nautical charting, coastal zone management and industrial offshore surveying. The IHO mainly focuses on nautical charting for safety of navigation; this focus has developed historically from the considerable shipping increases, in both draught and tonnage during in the last 100 years. Maritime transport remains the predominant method of international trade in goods and commodities, e.g., 95 per cent of Australia’s imports and exports are carried by sea.
There is also another specialism, military hydrography. This specialism is focused on military requirements, e.g., charting for naval gunfire support, submarine and anti-submarine operations, beach reconnaissance, amphibious operations and a collection of other hydrographic and oceanographic data specific to military operations. It is noteworthy that many national hydrographic organisations are located within the government defence departments. While nautical charting is very important for trade, it is also important for freedom of manoeuvre (and therefore for flexibility of naval operations), surveillance, disaster relief and search and rescue, all of which are frequently conducted by naval units.
International cooperation in the field of hydrography began with a number of conferences in 1899 in Washington and two others in Saint Petersburg in 1908 and 1912. During the First World War there was a proliferation of shipping and charting standards, and technological changes in methods of hydrography and navigation began increasing at a greater rate. As a result of the increasing importance of hydrography to shipping and the need to rationalise nautical charting standards, the hydrographers of Great Britain and France suggested that a conference be convened. The First International Hydrographic Conference was convened in London from 24 June to 16 July 1919 and was attended by hydrographers or other representatives from twenty-four nations.
The main objective of the Conference was ‘to consider the advisability of all maritime nations adopting similar methods in the preparation, construction and production of their charts and hydrographic publications; of rendering the results in the most convenient form to enable them to be readily used; of instituting a prompt system of mutual exchange of hydrographic information between all countries and of providing an opportunity for consultations and discussions to be carried out on hydrographic subjects generally by the hydrographic experts of the world.[3]
Following the Conference, the International Hydrographic Bureau (IHB) was formed in 1921, and was recognised and functioned officially under the League of Nations.
In 1967, at Monaco, an Intergovernmental Convention on the IHO was drafted during the Ninth International Hydrographic Conference. The Convention came into force in 1970 after ratification by 28 Governments and the name and legal status of the Organisation changed to the IHO, and its headquarters was permanently established in Monaco.[4] The IHB became the ‘administrative’ arm of the IHO comprising the Directing Committee of three Directors, one of whom is elected the President, and a small clerical and technical staff. From an initial nineteen member States in 1921, the IHB/IHO has grown to a current membership of 67 member States with ten more in the process of becoming members.[5]
As an international organisation, the IHO can be described as a regime. Another description that has been offered is that of ‘an epistemic community of hydrographers’.[6] There are many definitions of the term regime. The definitions include:
• an organisation or system in which norms, rules and procedures regulate areas of public policy’[7]
• regulated patterns of practice on which expectations converge[8]
• systematic information gathering, inspection, dispute settlement and enforcement[9]
• formal and written agreements between, and customary practices of, States[10]
• any kind of international cooperation in a formal framework through agreement between States or organisations[11], or
• international interaction.
From the above, it could generally be summarised that a regime is an arrangement motivated primarily by the national interests of sovereign States. The present and future relationship between regimes and States is a matter of contention. There is also an anarchic aspect to international regimes in which the national interests and relative power of particular States and coalitions determine events.
This is not true of the IHO which can be described as a knowledge based regime. It was established to provide professional guidance and is an entirely voluntary organisation albeit mainly comprised of governmental hydrographic and charting authorities.[12] The IHO is both proactive and reactive to the hydrographic and nautical charting requirements of States. It also works closely with other governmental and non-governmental organisations with regard to navigational safety and charting.
Generally, all national hydrographic services are operated and funded by governments due to operating costs and responsibility to service the public good. Keohane states, ‘a regime is the functional equivalent of the government serving to provide international public goods and to reduce the associated transaction costs.’[13] The public good in this instance is international navigational safety through nautical charting. The guidance given by the IHO facilitates States in providing this public good. Funding for the activities of the IHO are provided by each member State providing shares determined by official shipping fleet tonnage reported for each IHO member. Each share is equal to FFr23 100 and each State has two shares for tonnage of 2,000,000 or less with further supplementary shares for tonnage of 100,000 gross tons or more of shipping. In Australia’s case, it has a reported tonnage of 2,788,294 tons and therefore has 2 fixed shares plus 8 for its tonnage. Australia’s current contribution is approximately $A60,000.[14]
It has been stated by Young (1989) that a ‘regime is an institution of social practices consisting of easily recognised roles coupled with clusters of rules or conventions governing relations among the occupants of these roles.’ Further, he states that ‘regimes are more specialised arrangements that pertain to welldefined activities, resources or geographical areas and often involve only some subset of the members of international society.’[15] Rather than provide governance, the IHO provides guidance in best and accepted practice in hydrography and nautical charting. The decision to accept the guidance given is entirely voluntary by member States. The IHO also engages in international promotion or assistance, information exchange (by free exchange of hydrographic information or nautical charts) and policy coordination.[16]
Overall, the Organization relies on the goodwill of the member States plus their input, experience and debate for the regime to operate effectively. The IHO is strictly non-political and works for the good of all seafarers.[17]
The IHO holds regular general meetings at fiveyearly intervals, with ad hoc or interim meetings held as required by member States if there are matters of an urgent or extraordinary nature. The setting of issues is coordinated during the five-yearly meeting by the IHO. Working groups are established at these meetings to provide resolutions and recommendations to the International Hydrographic Bureau (IHB).[18] The resolutions are then passed to all member States for comment, and are ratified only when two-thirds of the member States agree. All recommendations are passed to the member States for endorsement or further comment until majority agreement is obtained.
As governmental bodies represent all member States, the resultant standards are a reflection of a combination of government policy, regulation and procedures followed by member States. Some influence is also given by commercial and private organisations affiliated with some IHO member States.[19] Issues raised at the conferences are normally the result of the introduction of new technology and changes within the organisations of member States. Technology includes methods and equipment, e.g., multi-beam echo sounders, differential global positioning systems (DGPS), wide area DGPS (WADGPS), charting production methods and chart presentation methods (electronic chart display and information system (ECDIS)), raster nautical charts (RNC), electronic nautical charts (ENC). Other issues also arise from training and education standards and professional requirements or from influence generated from other organisations such as the International Maritime Organisation (IMO). The IHO has close liaison with the IMO on matters of charting and navigational safety including the introduction of the ECDIS.
The IHO achieved a significant milestone in 1982 when the standardisation of nautical charts was achieved through the adoption of ‘Chart Specifications of the IHO’. The specifications adopted have realised the aim of maximum standardisation in specifications, symbols, style and formats used for nautical charts and related publications. This allows mariners to use charts compiled by member States with confidence[20].
Decision-making within the organisation is by consensus but coordinated by the IHB. Working groups, made up of member State representatives, work through issues to provide agreed outcomes in the form of recommended standards acceptable to the majority of member, States. The resultant standards are either adopted or rejected by member States, i.e., the decision to accept and follow the recommended professional standards and guidance is entirely voluntary.
This is perhaps the uniqueness of the IHO, it is not part of the UN and it is made up of groups which are focussed only on one goal, that of achieving the highest standards of hydrography and charting, plus it is entirely democratic. It is dependent on the professional goodwill of the member States and relies on those States to implement the recommendations and/or standards set by the majority. Dispute settlement is normally by negotiation or by the Directing Committee. However, if a dispute cannot be settled in the normal manner it is referred to the International Court of Justice. For this action to occur, a request from only one of the parties to the dispute is required.[21]
The above is an example of regime change at work. The IHO is both proactive and reactive to requirements for change. The standards, professional and technical, of hydrographic surveying and nautical charting, plus directional changes by way of policy, are changed by research, consultation and consensus. The Organisation maintains awareness of emerging issues due to governmental policy change and changes in the international arena impacting on hydrography and nautical charting.
As a result of IHB encouragement and advice, eleven Regional Hydrographic Commissions have been established. These Commissions, which are composed of representatives of hydrographic services within a defined area, regularly discuss hydrographic and charting problems and plan joint survey operations.[22]
It is extraordinary that the IHO has existed without external pressure from UN-based organisations such as the IMO to the extent that it is totally voluntary with member States accepting and applying the standards and guidance set. However, there have been concerns that the IHO may be brought under the umbrella of the UN and perhaps merged with the IMO.[23] This may give hydrographic and nautical charting matters greater prominence than provided now by the IHO but, noting the difficulties that the IMO has had in some areas of enforcing international maritime regulations, this could also adversely affect the harmonious relationship that exists within the current IHO regime. Further, the sometimes-protracted debate and negotiations which occurs within the IMO may also affect the policy guidance and recommendations presently provided within reasonable timeframes by the IHO.
The IHO as an organisation supports and supplements various national policies on hydrography and nautical charting. The influence of the IHO covers all internal waterways, territorial seas, the exclusive economic zone and the high seas. This is due to the fact that much of the world’s trade is carried by shipping, from the smallest cargo carrying vessels plying their trade on internal waterways and in coastal regions to the largest vessels which transport cargoes internationally. All these vessels rely on accurate hydrographic information and nautical charts.
The matters with which the IHO concerns itself as a regime are fundamental to safe navigation and maritime safety. The fundamental requirement for safe charts, and the highest standards of hydrographic surveying, have been of great importance ever since man began plying the oceans and seas, whether for exploration, exploitation of resources, trade or defence of national interests. It is therefore natural that the IHO has close ties with the IMO, in particular with those IMO-established committees responsible for charting and navigation. The IHO is and has been active in many areas; some of these are discussed below.
In 1971, the IHO completed the development of a programme for a common, worldwide chart series (INT Charts) of 1:10M and 1:3.5M scale. It assisted in the development of the current Global Maritime Distress and Safety System (GMDSS) which has improved the dissemination of Maritime Safety Information using satellite communications. It is currently coordinating the development of Electronic Chart Display and Information Systems (ECDIS) and the standardisation of ECDIS specifications.
In conjunction with the Federation Internationale des Geometres (FIG), it has developed comprehensive standards of competence for hydrographic surveyors for the guidance of universities and teaching establishments. An international Advisory Board supervises the application of these standards thus allowing internationally recognised hydrographic surveying qualifications. The Board regularly reviews the training syllabi of the training institutes of the Member States and awards international certificates of recognition to those achieving the required standards.
The IHB is a leading source of technical advice and acts as a coordinating body for the promotion of hydrography and hydrographic capability in developing countries. In supporting this activity, the IHO conducts advisory visits to the requesting State and encourages the formation of bilateral and multilateral agreements between nations for technical assistance in hydrography and associated training. It also maintains close contact with international funding programme offices and acts as a repository for specific information on technical assistance programmes occurring within member States.
As mentioned above, the IHO maintains close cooperation with the IMO and FIG. This close liaison is also maintained with other international bodies such as the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission of UNESCO (IOC) and the International Association of Lighthouse Authorities (IALA).
In some ways the IHO is similar to the Antarctic Treaty System regime[24] in that there is complete reliance on national compliance with standards, it is restricted to those States who can demonstrate an active interest and it is not part of the UN regime. The IHO regime could be said to be partly strategic but mainly adaptive. Vogler cites these terms, plus the term symbolic, when applying descriptions to regimes.[25]
The IHO is adaptive because the professional guidance provided and the standards promulgated by the IHO normally arise from new technological advances and surveying methods. While there is some extra pressure given by dominant States, the ‘strategic’ purpose of the IHO regime is not necessarily achieved, e.g. the United States of America is not necessarily the dominant State as it may be in other international regimes such as those under the umbrella of the UN. This is because there are a number of States that have an equal or greater dominance in the area of hydrography and nautical charting. These include Great Britain, France, Australia, Canada and Japan. These States have become dominant because of either historical reasons, major commercial exploration and exploitation of oil and gas in their adjacent offshore areas[26] or the relevant size of their maritime areas of responsibility.
The IHO is effective in that it affects or alters the way in which hydrography and/or nautical charting is conducted. These changes are normally effected after the necessary issues have been raised, the consultative process between all States has occurred, and changes to guidelines and standards have been issued. While it may be said that the Organisation is ‘liberal’,[27] it is effective in that it does provide the necessary guidance for member States. Whether the States choose to follow the guidance or standards, or not, is a matter for individual States. Generally, the standards are followed.
The IHO is also a type of ‘think tank’ and information exchange. Ideas are sought plus information exchanged and discussed through direct meetings, by correspondence or through published writings or journals. The Convention on the IHO states that signatories to the Convention should participate in free exchange of hydrographic and nautical charting information. This does occur and requests are normally satisfied.[28] One copy of every unclassified new chart and publication produced by a member State is passed to the IHB for examination and archiving; today, IHB has more than 21 000 charts in its archives.[29] It also has a computerised Tidal Constituent Data Bank, operated for the IHO by a member State (Canada) which can supply data on request for over 4 000 tidal stations.
The standards that the IHO promulgates are not legally binding. They are simply agreed standards between expert governmental bodies for the conduct of hydrographic surveying and nautical charting. The member States apply these standards, or at least closely follow them, in the conduct of these two areas. The standards issued generally become the norm and are followed by both commercial practitioners and governmental bodies alike.
There is no central monitoring agency for the purpose of ascertaining the effectiveness of the IHO. However, it could be argued that correlation between the implementation of IHO standards and the number of grounding or shipping accidents could be a measure of the actual effectiveness of the Organisation as an international regime. Also, membership of the IHO is increasing which also attests to its effectiveness as an organisation and regime.
The standards developed within the IHO regime provide a common and generally accepted means of conducting hydrographic surveying and nautical charting to provide uniformity of operations and derived products. This is essential if safety of navigation and safety of life at sea is to be paramount when conducting maritime operations. The fundamental nature of nautical charting is recognised by the IMO (a UN organisation).
From its origins in 1921, the Organisation has become an effective regime, focussed on hydrography and nautical charting. It has managed to remain independent of influence from other larger and more powerful international regimes such as the UN. The nonpolitical stance taken by the IHO places it in a good position to remain effective, however because of its stance and effectiveness it could be open to being ‘taken into the UN fold’. It provides effective service and guidance to its member States and is proactive in encouraging and advising developing States. The IHO is a dynamic regime that maintains an awareness of developing technology and methods and has a strategic outlook, which will allow it to continue its role effectively into the 21st Century.
1. IHB Structure
2. IHO Structure
3. List of IHO Committees and Boards
4. List of IHO Working Groups
5. List of Regional Hydrographic Commissions
6. List of Bodies with which IHO Liaises (International, Governmental and Nongovernmental)
Appendix 3
List of IHO Committees and Boards (as at July 1998)
IHO Commission on Promulgation of Radio Navigation Warnings (CPRNW)
Join IHO-IOC Guiding Committee for the General Bathymetric Chart of the Oceans (GEBCO)
GEBCO Sub-Committees:
Sub-Committee on Undersea Feature Names (SCUFN)
Sub-Committee on Digital Bathymetry (SCBD)
FIG-IHO International Advisory Board on Standards of Competence for Hydrographic Surveyors
IHO Committee on the Hydrographic Dictionary (S-32)
IHO Tidal Committee (TC)
FIG-IHO Technical Assistance and Cooperation Coordination Committee (TACC)
IHO-IAG Advisory Board on the Law of the Sea (ABLOS)
IHO Legal Advisory Committee (LAC)
IHO Worldwide Electronic Navigational Chart Data Base Committee (WEND)
IHO Hydrographic Committee on Antarctica
Appendix 4
List of IHO Working Groups (as at July 1998)
CHRIS Colours and Symbols Maintenance Working Group (C&SMWG) (CHRIS: IHO Committee on Hydrographic Requirements for Information Systems)
CHRIS Data Quality Working Group (DQWG)
CHRIS Transfer Standard Maintenance and Application Development Working Group TSMAD)
CHRIS Technology Assessment Working Group (TAWG)
IMO-IHO Harmonization Group on Electronic Chart Display and Information Systems (ECDIS)-(HGE)
IHO Permanent Working Group on Cooperation in Antarctica (PWGCA)
IHO Working Group on Standards for Hydrographic Surveys (S-44)
IHO Working Group on Standardization of Sailing Directions
Strategic Planning Working Group (SPWG)
Appendix 5
List of Regional Hydrographic Commissions
Nordic Hydrographic Commission (NHC)
North Sea Hydrographic Commission (NSHC)
East Asia Hydrographic Commission (EAHC)
US/Canada Hydrographic Commission (USCHC)
Mediterranean and Black Seas Hydrographic Commission (MBSHC)
Baltic Sea Hydrographic Commission (BSHC)
East Atlantic Hydrographic Commission (EAtHC)
South-East Pacific Hydrographic Commission (SEPHC)
South-West Pacific Hydrographic Commission (SWPHC)
Caribbean Sea and Gulf of Mexico Hydrographic Commission (CGMHC)
Southern Africa and Islands Hydrographic Commission (SAIHC)
Appendix 6
List of Some Bodies with which IHO Liaises (International, Governmental and Nongovernmental) (as at December 1998)
United Nations (UN)
UN Division for Ocean Affairs and Law of the Sea
International Maritime Organization (IMO)
IMO Maritime Safety Committee (MSC)
IMO Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC)
IMO Sub-Committee on Radiocommunications and Search and Rescue (COMSAR)
IMO Sub-Committee on Safety of Navigation (NAV)
International Maritime Academy
Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC)
European Commission
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
International Mobile Satellite Organization (INMARSAT)
International Association of Marine Aids to Navigation and Lighthouse Authorities (IALA)
World Meteorological Organization (WMO)
International Federation of Surveyors (FIG)
International Cartographic Association (ICA)
International Organization for Standardization (ISO)
International Association of Institutes of Navigation (IAIN)
International Union for Surveys and Mapping (IUSM)
International Association of Ports and Harbours (IAPH)
International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC)
Antarctic Treaty Consultative Party (ATCP)
Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research (SCAR)
Council on Managers of National Antarctic Programmes (COMNAP)
Standing Committee on Antarctic Logistics and Operations (SCALOP)
International Association of Antarctic Tour Operators (IAATO)
International Commission for the Scientific Exploration of the Mediterranean (ICSEM)
Pan American Institute of Geography and History (PAIGH)
Trinity House Service
All IHO Member States’ Hydrographic Offices and Services
Universities and teaching establishments of member States providing hydrographic survey instruction and training
Armstrong, D., L. Lloyd and J. Redmond, From Versailles to Maastricht, International Organisation in the Twentieth Century, St Martin’s Press, New York, 1996.
Bond, B.A., ‘Strategic Considerations for International Hydrography in the 21st Century’, The International Hydrographic Review, vol. LXXIII no. 2, IHB, Monaco, September 1996, pp. 7-15.
Donnelly, J., ‘International Human Rights: A Regime Analysis’, International Organization, vol. 40, no. 3, 1986.
Gorziglia, Captain H., ‘Some Considerations for the Establishment of a National Maritime Policy and its Relation with Hydrographic Services’ International Hydrographic Review, Edition 1, IHB, Monaco, 1996, p. 141.
IHB Working Paper (unpublished draft), IHO Strategic Plan, IHB, Monaco, 1999.
IHB Working Paper (unpublished draft), IHO Work Programmes 2000-2004, IHB, Monaco, 1999.
IHO Website, www.shom.fr/ohi.html.
IHO, Index to Papers Published and Authors from January 1986 to July 1990 (Volumes LXIII to LXVII inclusive), The International Hydrographic Review, IHB, Monaco, April 1991.
IHO, 1996, Basic Documents of the International Hydrographic Organization (IHO), IHB, Monaco, 1996.
IHO, 1998, General Index 1991-1997, The International Hydrographic Review, IHB, Monaco, January 1998.
IHO, International Hydrographic Organization Annual Report 1998, Part 1 – General, IHB, Monaco, 1998.
IHO Yearbook 1999, IHB, Monaco, 1999.
IMO Website, www.imo.org/imo/introd.html, 9 September 1999.
Keohane, R.O., After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy, Princeton University Press, New Jersey, USA, 1984.
Kerr, A.J., 1996, ‘Probing the Problems and Prospects of International Hydrography’, The International Hydrographic Review, vol. LXXIII no. 2, IHB, Monaco, September 1996, pp. 89-97.
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Regulatory Co-operation for an Independent World, Public Management Studies, OECD, Paris, 1994.
UN Website, www.un.org/Overview/brief.html, 9 September 1999.
Vogler, J., The Global Commons: A Regime Analysis. John Wiley and Sons Ltd, Chichester, England, 1995.
Young, O.R., International Cooperation Building Regimes for Natural Resources and Environment, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, USA, 1989.
[1] Commander John Maschke has served in the Royal Australian Navy Hydrographic Service (RANHS) since 1974. He is currently Head, Operations and Surveying in the Australian Hydrographic Office at Wollongong, New South Wales and is responsible for the day-to-day operations and issue of hydrographic instructions to the RAN’s Hydrographic Survey Force. He has had command of three RAN survey vessels and has carried out hydrographic surveying operations within Australian and Southwest Pacific waters.
[2] IHO web site www.shom.fr/ohi/hs.html, 9 September 1999. The description of the science of hydrography and its application to charting is provided by the IHO website. It is a particularly complete description that provides a very good scope of hydrography.
[3] IHO Yearbook 1999, IHB, Monaco, 1999, p. 3.
[4] IHO, Basic Documents of the International Hydrographic Organization (IHO). Convention on the IHO, Articles XVIII-XIX, IHO, Monaco, July 1996.
[5] IHO website www.shom.fr/ohi/English/general/files/ back.html, 9 September 1999. This website provides a background on the IHO and gives a general description of its activities and justification.
[6] This description was kindly offered by Sam Bateman of the Centre of Maritime Policy, University of Wollongong, September 1999.
[7] E.B. Haas, ‘Why collaborate? Issue linking and international regimes’, World Politics, vol. xxxii, no. 3, April 1980, p. 358.
[8] S.D. Krasner, (ed.), International Regimes, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York, 1983, p. 2, cited in O.R. Young, ‘International regimes: toward a new theory of institutions’, World Politics, vol. xxxix, no. 1, October 1986, p. 105.
[9] O.R. Young, ‘International regimes: problems of concept formation’ World Politics, vol. xxxii, no. 3, April 1980, p. 344.
[10] This definition describes the basis of international law but could also be used to describe a regime.
[11] Haas, op. cit., p. 359. Haas used the phrase ‘any kind of international cooperation’ when stating a loose definition of regimes. However, formalised international cooperation could be described as a regime.
[12] IHO, Basic Documents of the International Hydrographic Organization (IHO). Convention on the IHO, Article II, July 1996. This article provides a full description of the objectives of the IHO. The objectives include: the coordination of the activities of national hydrographic offices; the greatest possible uniformity in nautical charts and documents; the adoption of reliable and efficient methods of carrying out and exploiting hydrographic surveys; the development of sciences in the field of hydrography and the techniques employed in descriptive oceanography.
[13] R.O. Keoliane, After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy, Princeton University Press, New Jersey, USA, 1984.
[14] IHO Yearbook 1999. Appendix D, Table of Shares, Contributions and Votes 1999 Financial Year, p. 325. IHB, Monaco, 1999, p. 325. See also, IHO, Basic Documents of the International Hydrographic Organization (IHO), Financial Regulations of the IHO, Articles 4-5. IHO, Monaco, July 1996. These documents describe the procedure for calculating shares for contributions by Governments to the IHO. Art 5. of the Financial Regulations is pertinent to warships. Australia’s contribution is provided by the Department of Defence (in particular, the RAN Hydrographic Service). This responsibility stems from a 1946 Cabinet decision for the Naval Board to have responsibility for national nautical charting. Currently, the Chief of Navy has this responsibility. He has delegated the day-to-day national charting responsibility to the Hydrographer, RAN.
[15] O.R. Young, International Cooperation Building Regimes for Natural Resources and the Environment, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, USA, 1989, p. 32.
[16] J. Vogler, The Global Commons: A Regime Analysis, John Wiley and Sons Ltd, Chichester, England, 1995, pp. 163-164. Vogler describes this process by which a regime encourages data exchange to assist in promoting and encouraging international cooperation. He quotes Donnelly (1986) who describes this process within human rights regimes. The process is also applicable to the IHO. See J. Donnelly, ‘International Human Rights: A Regime Analysis’, International Organization, vol. 40, no. 3, Summer, 1986, p. 604.
[17] IHO Yearbook 1999, IHB, Monaco, 1999, p. 5.
[18] IHO Yearbook 1999, IHB, Monaco, 1999, p. 3. The IHB is the executive and administrative arm of the IHO that is made up of ‘a committee of three elected directors who must be of different nationalities, all of whom are required to be ‘men of considerable sea experience and with great knowledge of practical hydrography. One of the three is elected President of the Directing Committee. A small permanent staff of technical experts and clerical assistants, currently standing at 18 people, aids the Directing Committee in its work.’
[19] Vogler, op. cit. Vogler provides examples of influence upon during the Montreal Protocol negotiations by Du Pont, Atochem and ICI. Instances of interference or undue influence by private commercial organisations also occurred during the most recent IHO five-yearly Conference by C-Map upon the Italian delegation, another company attempted to use the Russian delegation to influence proceedings at the same conference. The companies were attempting to influence the control and regulation of non-official data for use in raster and electronic chart displays. This was unsuccessful due to an agreed stance that only official hydrographic office data should be used for navigational safety reasons and to ensure that appropriate standards of charting were maintained.
[20] IHO website, www.shom.fr/ohi/english/general/files/ listact.html, 9 September 1999.
[21] IHO, Basic Documents of the International Hydrographic Organization (IHO), Convention on the IHO, Article XVII, July 1996.
[22] IHO Yearbook 1999, IHB, Monaco, 1999, Appendices I-S. The appendices give details on the dates that each Regional Hydrographic Commission was established and provides the names of the Chairman plus members of each Commission and the languages used.
[23] Anon, correspondence, 1999. Although the IHO is very effective, industry is increasingly moving into the field of surveying and provision of associated services. Also, there is some difficulty in dealing with UN organisations such as the IMO because they have influence in many areas including those associated with hydrography and nautical charting. Due to these influences, there are some concerns that the effectiveness and standing of the IHO may be may be subsumed by an organisation such as the IMO.
[24] Vogler, op. cit., p. 94.
[25] Vogler, op. cit., p. 153. Vogler cites S. Strange, ‘Cave! Hic Dragones: a critique of regime analysis’ in S.D. Krasner (ed.), International Regimes, Ithaca, Cornell University Press, 1983, pp. 337-54, when using these descriptions applied to regimes.
[26] For example, countries such as Great Britain and France have developed extensive charting coverage of the world’s seas over hundreds of years. In Australia’s case, this country was under the umbrella of the Royal Navy Hydrographic Service until 1920, and over the last 30-40 years there has been considerable surveying activity to assist in opening up mineral export ports and oil and gas exploration.
[27] Vogler, op. cit., p. 154.
[28] This has been the experience of the author with regard to requests to and from Australia when dealing with other States.
[29] IHO website, www.shom.fr/ohi/English/general/files/ listact.html, 9 September 1999.
AustLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/MarStudies/1999/2.html