International Legal Framework for Joint Governance of Oceans and Fisheries: Challenges and Prospects in Governing Large Marine Ecosystems (LMEs) under Sustainable Development Goal 14
, (Judge) Yan-Ming Lv 3 and (Judge) Yan-E-Wang 3Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsYour conclusions are interesting but you have to be deeper in your analices. You only give us shallow idea of what is happening with RFMOs but you don´t give real solutions or aproaches que support your idea of how Nations and international organizations could improve their participation and understanding of the problem.
Propose the way, that you think, to enforce nations partipations and actions to be made
Author Response
Your conclusions are interesting but you have to be deeper in your analices. You only give us shallow idea of what is happening with RFMOs but you don´t give real solutions or aproaches que support your idea of how Nations and international organizations could improve their participation and understanding of the problem.
Propose the way, that you think, to enforce nations partipations and actions to be made
Response:
Many thanks for the comments and suggestions. The suggestions have been taken seriously and addressed in the section – 4 and the conclusion of the paper. The authors hope that the content amended is according to the suggestions made by the respected reviewer.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis research paper analyses the extent to which the Global and Regional Organisations are coherent with the SDG-14 under the existing frameworks of the United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and International Environmental Law (IEL), it analyses the regional Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) in the context of international fisheries governance and particularly international efforts to combat illegal fishing. This research paper addresses emerging requirements for the development of a joint mechanism for Ocean and Fisheries Governance.
This manuscript provides analyses of the existing and date documents, approaches, and structures in the field of the review aiming at the identification of the gaps between fisheries and ocean governance at different levels, including the regional level, which causes severe impacts on ocean life on one side and on resources management sustainability. Importantly, it considered both the positive and negative aspects of the international legal framework.
There are only very minute shortcomings in the manuscript that, after improvement can be accepted for publication.
The main difficulty for readers is an immense number of abbreviations that though are all necessary and are correctly used, but still are difficult to keep in mind. I`d advised to make an additional table where all abbreviations are placed and clarified so that the readers could have them all at one place when reading the manuscript.
“States” throughout the text is written differently (capitalized and not). I marked some of them, but not all. Please adjust.
Abstract. 7.5 of 15 lines of the Abstract (13-20) concentrate on the goals of the research. It would be more reasonable to write more about the obtained results and not more than 1/3 of the Abstract should be devoted to the research aim.
Introduction presents the subject very detailed. Though it is very well written, taking into account the whole manuscript, the Introduction can be slightly shortened, to 1 page. This is just an advice. However, the exactly formulated goal of the study (review) is here lacking.
111-114. The aim should be moved to the Introduction.
154-157, 241-242 needs citation
377 this abbreviation is already provided at the beginning of the manuscript (35)
Tables 2 – 5 need an addition of the dates when the documents and agreements have been developed.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
This research paper analyses the extent to which the Global and Regional Organisations are coherent with the SDG-14 under the existing frameworks of the United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and International Environmental Law (IEL), it analyses the regional Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) in the context of international fisheries governance and particularly international efforts to combat illegal fishing. This research paper addresses emerging requirements for the development of a joint mechanism for Ocean and Fisheries Governance.
This manuscript provides analyses of the existing and date documents, approaches, and structures in the field of the review aiming at the identification of the gaps between fisheries and ocean governance at different levels, including the regional level, which causes severe impacts on ocean life on one side and on resources management sustainability. Importantly, it considered both the positive and negative aspects of the international legal framework.
Response: Many thanks for acknowledging the work of authors and their contribution in this particular field.
There are only very minute shortcomings in the manuscript that, after improvement can be accepted for publication.
The main difficulty for readers is an immense number of abbreviations that though are all necessary and are correctly used, but still are difficult to keep in mind. I`d advised to make an additional table where all abbreviations are placed and clarified so that the readers could have them all at one place when reading the manuscript.
Response: A table of abbreviations, acronyms and terms used in this paper has been created and added in the introduction. Thanks for pointing out this issue.
“States” throughout the text is written differently (capitalized and not). I marked some of them, but not all. Please adjust.
Response: This issue has been rectified, States with capital ‘S’ has been used.
Abstract. 7.5 of 15 lines of the Abstract (13-20) concentrate on the goals of the research. It would be more reasonable to write more about the obtained results and not more than 1/3 of the Abstract should be devoted to the research aim.
Response: The abstract has been updated according to the given suggestions.
Introduction presents the subject very detailed. Though it is very well written, taking into account the whole manuscript, the Introduction can be slightly shortened, to 1 page. This is just an advice. However, the exactly formulated goal of the study (review) is here lacking.
Response: The introduction has been amended according to the suggestion.
111-114. The aim should be moved to the Introduction.
Response: Many thanks for pointing out this mistake, it has been amended accordingly.
154-157, 241-242 needs citation
Response: Citation provided accordingly. Thanks for suggestions
377 this abbreviation is already provided at the beginning of the manuscript (35)
Response: This issue has been fixed.
Tables 2 – 5 need an addition of the dates when the documents and agreements have been developed.
Response: The dates are provided accordingly.
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsOverall, this draft makes a great contribution to the field. The article discusses the international legal framework for joint governance of oceans and fisheries, focusing on Sustainable Development Goal 14 (SDG-14). It evaluates the coherence of global and regional organizations with SDG-14 under UNCLOS and International Environmental Law, analyzing regional Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) for fisheries governance and efforts against illegal fishing. It proposes a joint mechanism for ocean and fisheries governance, using a policy and literature review methodology.
After some minor revision, the draft should be qualified to be published. I have attached a list of comments and suggestions below, hoping to make the draft more accessible.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Overall, this draft makes a great contribution to the field. The article discusses the international legal framework for joint governance of oceans and fisheries, focusing on Sustainable Development Goal 14 (SDG-14). It evaluates the coherence of global and regional organizations with SDG-14 under UNCLOS and International Environmental Law, analyzing regional Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) for fisheries governance and efforts against illegal fishing. It proposes a joint mechanism for ocean and fisheries governance, using a policy and literature review methodology.
Response: Many thanks for encouraging comments.
After some minor revision, the draft should be qualified to be published. I have attached a list of comments and suggestions below, hoping to make the draft more accessible. Suggestions for improvement:
- Figure I, Some of the fonts could be larger for ease of reading, for example those of the years.
Response: This issue has been fixed accordingly.
- Figure II, Consider using arrows with extra width
Response: This issue has been fixed accordingly.
- Table 1, Consider some different format so the paragraphs would be easier to read and less page space is wasted due to changing lines
Response: This issue has been fixed accordingly.
- Section 3.3, Consider adding some quantitative comparison between different ocean regions and discuss how such difference might affect formation of regional MEAs
Response: this is a good suggestion, a further quantitative analysis based on comparison has been conducted in section – 4. The reason behind doing this in section – 4 is because content of section – 3 was quite firm.
- Figure III, Consider larger fonts or higher resolution for everything outside the Venn Diagram
Response: This issue has been fixed accordingly.
- Discussion and conclusion, consider increasing emphasis on the role of stakeholder engagement, including local communities and the private sector, in enhancing the effectiveness of governance mechanisms.
Response: Many thanks for this suggestion. Discussion and conclusion added about the stakeholder engagement and their role in governance mechanisms.
- Discussion and conclusion, consider adding brief discussion of role of technology in the legal framework.
Response: Many thanks for this suggestion. A brief paragraph on technology has been added to the discussion section and a line justifying those comments has also been added.
