Participatory justice
The process by which decisions are made in the international
system is integral to the outcome of a fair governance system. As with
all other allocative decisions unless allowing adequate voice for
smaller nations, larger and more influential nations will dominate
sometimes by tacit agreement in any forum where weaker key stakeholders
are able to participate but not have voice or influence. Moreover, the
discussions will centre around economic or resource availability issues
and potential losses of access to fisheries and other resources will
predominate. To achieve better procedural justice would require that a
holistic view of benefits (including social and cultural factors) that
provide the basis of argument. Dispassionate nations who are not
immediately affected by outcomes provide the vehicle for the conduct of
the decision-making process of particular MPAs. They will have equal
influence as affected nations in decision making. An independent
secretariat would be charged to provide scenario-based options based on
consultation with affected players at the sub-national level. Scenarios
will include resource access, food security and cultural considerations.
While such a mechanism is unlikely to preclude the larger nations
forming “cartels” this process would provide accountability in
international discussions in a Rawlsian sense. Indeed, the role of
dispassionate nations in the decision-making process mentioned above is
an echo of the ‘veil of ignorance’ itself. Such dispassionate nations
(even if not literally in the ‘original position’) can put themselves in
the place of all the nations directly affected by any particular MPA and
make a judgement of the fairness of the decision-making process.