太平洋島嶼的區域經濟整合：機會與考驗 / The PICs have placed regional integration as the priority dimension to sustain and promote economic growth and prosperity in the region. Presently, these island nations buckle under the lengthy and complicated negotiation process for FTAs within the region and with the outside world. This paper examines the opportunities and challenges posed by the current FTAs under negotiation and/or under implementation. The analysis undertaken in this research indicates that due to low economic interdependence and high risk of political instability among the leading economies of the region, any regional FTA will only bring marginal benefit to the region, most of which will be enjoyed by few leading players. However, the region has the greatest potential to gain by integrating into the global economy. The current pace of liberalization and globalization suggests that delaying any FTA with the developed partners will only add on to the opportunity cost as well as adjustment costs in the long-run. Hence, the leading economies need to take the first step in negotiating bilateral or multilateral FTAs with ANZ as well as their close trading partners from the Asia. Regional Economic Integration within Pacific Island Countries: Opportunities and Challenges By Rakesh Prasad

京都大学 / 0048 / 新制・課程博士 / 博士(理学) / 甲第18103号 / 理博第3981号 / 新制||理||1574(附属図書館) / 30961 / 京都大学大学院理学研究科生物科学専攻 / (主査)教授 疋田 努, 准教授 本川 雅治, 准教授 森 哲 / 学位規則第4条第1項該当 / Doctor of Science / Kyoto University / DFAM

每一個沿岸國皆多多少少擁有島嶼，不論是近岸島嶼或洋中島嶼。而全球島嶼面積共3,823,000平方英里，佔地表的百分之七(不包括內陸河流及湖泊中之島嶼)，有些國家甚至完全由島嶼構成。據統計，全球島嶼中，大於1,000平方英里者(相當於牙買加或賽浦路斯的大小)者至少有123個，其中共有61個面積達4,000平方英里(相當於盧森堡的大小)者。這些數據顯示了島嶼地位的重要性，因為在今日，島嶼的存在已不再只是一個單純的地理問題，在國際海洋法上，它不僅可以影響一國海域管轄權(領海、鄰接區、專屬經濟區和大陸礁層)的劃定，甚至足以引起海岸相鄰或相向國家海域管轄權的衝突。解決海域管轄權衝突的最基本辦法，即為針對重疊 區域的「平均分攤」。但此一「平均分配」有時反會因島嶼的存在而導致「不公平劃界」或「疆界線的扭曲」。由於上述結果易使當事國之一方劃得不成比例的海域，[甚至引發更複雜的海域糾紛，因此有必要在海疆劃界中適當控制島嶼的海域管轄權，即---藉賦與島嶼適當之效力，以達公平劃界之目的。本文之研究動機即在於此。而研究目的，則在於就公約規定、學者意見、國際司法判例及國家實踐四者，探討島嶼對海疆劃界的影響，找出解決島嶼造成劃界不公平之方，以及賦與島嶼適當效力之道。本文第一章為「島嶼」的概念性介紹，即何謂島嶼，其定義、種類、存在的形式及形成的過程為何?而一般所謂的島嶼與國際法上的島嶼又有何分別? 此皆為本章重點。第二章為島嶼與領海的關係，討論的焦點包括:(一)領海基線的劃定與島嶼的關係、(二)海灣島嶼的效力、(三)島嶼對領海劃界原則的影響以及(四)島嶼在海岸相鄰或相向國家領海劃界中可得之效力程度等等。三章重點在於介紹島嶼與大陸礁層、專屬經濟區劃界原則之關係，並從公約規定、學者意見、國際司法判例及國家實踐等方面探討島嶼存在時，大陸礁層與專屬經濟區的衡平劃界，以及島嶼在「衡平考量﹞U應得的效力。第四章除介紹「群島制度」的內涵，主要重點則為(一)關於劃定群島基線的國家實踐，以及(二)群島基線的劃定對劃界的影響。此外 南海問題亦是本章重點之一。

2001年5月29日第11次《聯合國海洋法公約》締約國會議通過SPLOS/72號決定，於1999年5月13日以前對其生效之公約締約國，如欲依《聯合國海洋法公約》第76條規定主張200海里以外之大陸礁層，必須在1999年5月13日起算10年內向聯合國大陸礁層界限委員會提交與其所主張大陸礁層外部界限相關科學及技術佐證資料。由於《聯合國海洋法公約》所定義之大陸礁層外部界限範圍可能超越專屬經濟海域範圍，而大陸礁層不僅是魚類資源較豐富也是漁業活動重要資源地，同時也是海底油氣與礦場等重要自然資源的集中地區。因此，包括我國相鄰之日本、菲律賓、越南、馬來西亞等公約締約國紛紛進行大陸礁層調查來擴展自己國家的海洋權益。至2009年12月止，已有51個延伸大陸礁層外部界限之提案，及44個初步資訊，聯合國大陸礁層界限委員會並已就部分提案作成決議。 日本於2008年11月12日向聯合國大陸礁層界限委員會提出該國延伸大陸礁層外部界限之申請，卻也因此引起中國大陸及韓國對日本提案中以「沖之鳥礁」為基礎劃定超出200海里延伸大陸礁層之主張提出反對意見，質疑「沖之鳥礁」之法律地位及其所能享有的海域管轄空間。本論文爰由《聯合國海洋法公約》第121條「島嶼制度」形成的過程、相關國家實踐及學者見解，以及《聯合國海洋法公約》中「大陸礁層」之相關規範及聯合國大陸礁層界限委員會之組織與運作情形，探討日本的延伸大陸礁層外部界限提案中以「沖之鳥礁」為基礎主張延伸大陸礁層之適法性問題，並分析以聯合國大陸礁層界限委員會作為「沖之鳥礁」法律地位爭端解決途徑之可能性等。研究結果顯示，日本提案以「沖之鳥礁」為基礎主張延伸大陸礁層外部界限不符合《聯合國海洋法公約》第121條第3項規定，但該項規定並未具備有習慣國際法的效力，亦缺乏客觀的認定標準，聯合國大陸礁層界限委員會的場域無法解決「沖之鳥礁」的法律地位爭端，其他沿海國僅能利用聯合國大陸礁層界限委員會中「第三國意見」之機制凸顯爭端的存在，提醒國際社會注意此類島礁的海域管轄空間主張的合理性問題，並應尊重公約所賦予的權利與義務。 / On 29 May 2001, the 11th Meeting of States Parties to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) adopted the SPLOS/72 Decision regarding the date of commencement of the ten-year period for making submissions to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf set out in Article 4 of Annex II to the UNCLOS. It was decided that, in the case of a State Party for which the Convention entered into force before 13 May 1999, the ten-year time period for it to submit the scientific and technical data supporting the outer limits of its continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles under Article 76 of the UNCLOS shall be taken to have commenced on 13 May 1999. For quite a few States the outer limits of their continental shelf as defined by the UNCLOS may go beyond the limits of the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). Besides, continental shelf is abundant in fisheries resources, crude oil, natural gas and minerals. Consequently, the neighboring States of Taiwan, including Japan, the Philippines, Viet Nam, and Malaysia, have already begun their surveys on continental shelf in order to expand their interests hidden in the ocean. As of December of 2009, there have been 51 formal submissions and 44 Preliminary Information delivered to the United Nations. The Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS) has been undertaking the consideration of these submissions and already completed such process for some of them with recommendations. For Japan, the submission to support the outer limits of its extended continental shelf was made on 12 November 2008 to the CLCS. Such submission was challenged by China and Korea whose focus is on the part of extended continental shelf generated by Oki-no-tori Shima. The legal status of Oki-no-tori Shima as being capable of generating EEZ, continental shelf, and extended continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles, is being disputed by the communications from China and Korea. To provide educated comments on such controversy, this thesis will discuss the legislative process of Article 121 of the UNCLOS, namely, the regime of islands. Related state practices and teachings of the most highly qualified publicists will be studied in this connection. The author will also examine the regime of continental shelf under the UNCLOS and the institution of the CLCS. These will pave the way to scrutinize the legality of using Oki-no-tori Shima as the basis to generate extended continental shelf as having been done by Japan in its submission. The author will also explore the feasibility for the CLCS to settle the dispute over the legality of Japanese submission with respect to Oki-no-tori Shima. As shown by research works, the Japanese submission using Oki-no-tori Shima to generate extended continental shelf is inconsistent with Article 121(3) of the UNCLOS. However, the rule as contained in Article 121(3) has not yet been received into customary international law. Also lacking are the objective criteria to decide whether a given rock meets the conditions as stipulated by Article 121(3) or not. The forum of the CLCS is not suitable to settle the dispute over the legality of using Oki-no-tori Shima by Japan to generate extended continental shelf. Other coastal States can only use the forum of the CLCS to demonstrate the legal controversy over this case through sending third party communications to notify the CLCS the existence of dispute and their unwillingness to support the CLCS to consider the Japanese submission with respect to the part of Oki-no-tori Shima. As submitted by this author, the international community should be reminded of the necessity to respect the integrity of the rights and duties enshrined by the UNCLOS. Also worthy of careful scrutiny is the legitimacy of such kinds of exaggerated maritime claims generated by the rock as defined by Article 121(3) of the UNCLOS.