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.