IWC modernization vs. fossilization: The whaling dilemma

Recently in the Chilean press, Japan's alternate commissioner to the International Whaling Commission (IWC), Joji Morishita, stated that “standardization” was the only alternative to saving the Commission. However, a brief analysis of the Japanese proposal shows that Japan prefers to fossilize the IWC rather than establishing protocols.
 

The problems currently faced by the Commission are generated due to the pressure exerted by whaling nations to implement the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW), under an anachronistic perspective, when the social and environmental reality is completely different from 1946, the year in which the ICRW was signed. Back then, the Second World War was recently ended and the United States would soon boost the Japanese whaling industry in order to alleviate the shortage of food in Japan.

However, commercial whaling showed that whales are not a viable alternative to alleviating world hunger, due to their slow reproduction their populations are very likely to be rapidly reduced. Moreover, since the signing of the Convention, the international community has witnessed the rapid development and strengthening of international environmental law in response to strong changes generated by human activities on the environment.

Since 1950, environmental issues have begun to have a higher profile in many countries. During the sixties, international environmental agreements increased significantly. And since 1972, international environmental law has experienced rapid development. The subjects currently covered under international agreements are very different from those established prior to 1950.

The IWC is no stranger to this development since its inception and has taken a series of measures designed to fulfill the mandates of resource conservation and management of whales established under the Convention. Among them, the only effective measure to comply with both provisions has been the adoption of the moratorium on commercial whaling. Since its implementation in 1986, the moratorium has served to provide an opportunity for the recovery of whale populations devastated by commercial exploitation, effectively implementing the mandate set forth in the Convention to protect the whale for future generations [1].

Since the adoption of the moratorium, non-lethal use of whales has become an activity that generates sustainable economic returns well above that of commercial whaling without the extinction of the whale. The IWC is now actively working to ensure that whale-watching tourism is carried out within guidelines that ensure their sustainability and conservation of the whales involved. This is done by the IWC sub-committee on whale watching. In this way, it is clear that the moratorium has been the only effective tool that has allowed the Commission to comply with mandates established by the Convention.