Even the best legal framework, embodies in the best institutional framework will remain ineffective if it lacks the material tools for implementation, that is

　

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, that “Constitution for the Oceans,” has fundamental implications for the future. Based on the recognition of the unity of ocean space and the systemic interaction of all its subsystems as well as on the revolutionary concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind, it implies, and indicates the direction toward, a new socio-political, community-based world order, a new economic system, transcending both centralized and market based systems, and a new international technological order, founded on a new science paradigm and High Technology,²⁸ qualitatively different from the old technologies, on which the previous international technological order was founded. In previous phases, technology was resource- and capital-intensive; it was massive; it could be sold, bought, and transferred in a one-time transaction, and neither the producer nor the consumer was concerned with what it might do to the environment; it could be serviced by a mass of fairly untrained workers in a centralized system of production. Today's technology is knowledge- and information-based. It cannot really be “bought” and “transferred”; it has to be “learned.” It is far less resource-intensive, because, the more effective it gets, the smaller it grows (“miniaturization”) It calls for an ongoing relationship between the “producer” and the “consumer;” the “consumer” gets involved in the product design, and has to learn, often through extensive training, the use of the technology, its maintenance, repair and upgrading. “Producer” and “consumer” in a way are linked in an ongoing joint undertaking for the duration of the product. The longer this duration, the higher will be the “utilization value” of the product, which becomes more of a “process” than a “product” in the old sense. The only effective method of “technology transfer” in this new phase of the industrial revolution is the joint venture in research and development. Such joint ventures became an important component of the new industrial system within and among industrialized States in the ⟩Eighties. Research and development in high technology is extremely costly. And not only is it costly, it is also extremely risky, especially in the early phases. The rate of failure has been estimated variously at between 7 to 1 and 20 to 1, or even 40 to 1. The farther back in the process of invention we go, the more overwhelming the rate of failure.²⁹

　

　This, among other things, triggered the trend towards the formation of R&D consortia, to share, and reduce the cost and spread the risk inherent in R&D in high technology during the early phase - the “precompetitive” phase, as it is termed. At the same time we saw an increasing involvement, first of the Banks, and then of Governments, in the financing of this R&D. Even in the United States, the staunchest defender of private enterprise, over 50 percent of R&D today is paid for by the Federal Government. Without Government participation, none of the modern high technologies would have passed the first stage of research and development. In this sense, the boundaries between public sector and private sector are getting blurred.

　

　 For most countries, however, even this public/private co-investment was not strong enough to make technology development competitive on an international scale. Thus, what we saw emerging was a new form of international public/private cooperation, exemplified by systems like EUREKA and half a dozen others. The growth in international, inter-firm technical cooperation agreements represented one of the most important novel developments of the first half of the 1980s.³⁰ The sharing of risk and of cost in many cases served to encourage firms to spend more on R&D than they would have done otherwise. The synergy between private and public investments at the regional, European level generated billions of dollars of investments in R&D, and this is a point not to lose sight of.

　

　This development remained, however, restricted to the industrialized States. Less than 3 percent of all funds invested in science and technology throughout the world was allocated to projects being executed in developing countries. More than 90 percent of scientists and experts lived in industrialized countries, and 93 percent of patents were taken out in these countries..

　

　The picture changed in the ⟩nineties. Joint ventures in research and development have been overtaken by the sweeping merger movement and “globalisation”-- with benefits, clearly, going to the stronger partners. The rich are getting richer, the poor, poorer.

　

　At the same time, however, the proportion between scientists in developed and developing countries is rapidly changing. The number, and the quality of scientists trained in China and India, or Brazil, Mexico and Cuba, is awesome. And, although most of the smaller and poorer developing countries are still left out of this development, it is safe to predict that, in another decade or two, the proportion between scientists in developed and developing countries will be reversed, and the majority of experts and scientists will be from developing countries. This will undoubtedly affect the philosophy of science, which presently has undergone some fundamental changes in the West, as well as the direction of research and development.

　

　Technology today is knowledge- and information based. It depends on the development of human resources. Human resources is what developing countries have, and the time has come for a New International Technological Order. The legal framework for this has already been created, starting with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. The challenge now is to develop the institutional framework for the implementation of this legal framework.

　

　The framers of the Law of the Sea Convention were fully aware of the importance of Science and technology development and “technology transfer.” It may be enough to remember that almost one-third (about 100) of the 320 Articles of this Convention touch in one way or another on science and technology. Technology development and transfer are provided for it in three ways, at the national, regional, and global level.

　

　

First, the Convention imposes on the “competent international organisations” (FAO, IOC, IMO, UNEP and others) the duty of assisting developing countries to acquire the technologies they need to benefit from, and comply with, the provisions of the Convention. Thus Article 202, in Part XII of the Convention which covers the protection of the marine environment, provides that each State, directly or through competent international organizations, shall promote training of scientific and technical personnel in developing countries and supply them with the necessary equipment and facilities as well as enhance their capacity to manufacture such equipment. Article 271 provides for international cooperation for the development and transfer of technology through existing programmes, or new programmes to be established, bilaterally, or through the competent international organisations; and there are half a dozen other articles calling for the assistance of these organisations to developing States.

　

　The efficacy of these articles, of course, is limited by the budgets and organisational capacities of these organisations, which, in fact, are quite inadequate. While they have done their best, they have not really been able to narrow the technology gap. The important point, however, is that the Convention fully reflects the awareness that technology development must start at home. Developing countries themselves must lay the foundation: must build, as a matter of priority, the scientific and technological infrastructure on which international cooperation can be based. It is a matter of goal-setting and political will. Pacem in Maribus 16, in Canada (1988) took up a recommendation made by the Third World Academy of Science:

　

　

　The building of national infrastructure might include a policy making and implementing agency; the building up, under the auspices of such an agency, of a strong industrial information system; the establishment of engineering design and consultancy organisations; and the establishment of R&D laboratories to provide specialised advanced training, do applied research, assist the policy-making agency and industrial enterprises in identifying, selecting and negotiating with, foreign technology suppliers.³² These recommendations were based on the Indian experience, which, as is well known, has been one of the most successful in the development of marine technology, e.g. in Sea-bed mining; offshore oil production; Antarctic research; remote sensing applications.

　

　In the ⟩Seventies, when the Convention was framed and the basis for the new international technological order was being laid, awareness of the importance of local, indigenous traditional technological experience was far less understood than it is today. This includes, e.g., the utilization, medical, culinary and otherwise, of genetic resources; the sustainable use of living resources; vermiculture; water management including irrigation, where ancient wisdom and experience is often ahead of modern science or, in many cases re-confirmed by modern science. This source of knowledge most certainly should be fully utilised in national policy making, and this can best be achieved, as is generally recognized today, through community-based co-management systems, an essential component of integrated coastal management, comprising technology management and development. The inclusion of local communities among the “major groups” participating in regional and global fora of decision-making today should encourage the development of socially and environmentally sustainable technologies, “eco-technologies,” recombining ancient traditions with modern science-based technology, thus enhancing efficiencies while facilitating social acceptability.

　

　It is on the basis of such national efforts that regional cooperation, both South-South and North-South, can become effective.

　

　

Regional cooperation is provided for in Articles 276 and 277 of the Law of the Sea Convention. These articles prescribe the establishment of Regional Centres for the advancement of marine sciences and technologies, in accordance with yet another Resolution adopted by UNCLOS III, the Resolution on Development of National Marine Science, Technology and Ocean Service Infrastructures.³³ This Resolution is important in that it expresses awareness of the rapid advances being made in the field of marine science and technology, and the need for the developing countries to share in these achievements if the goals of the new ocean regime are to be met, and it warns that, unless urgent measures are taken, the marine scientific and technological gap between the developed and the developing countries will widen further and thus endanger the very foundations of the new regime. Regional centres, fostering South-South as well as North-South cooperation, and based on cost-sharing and economies of scale, can play a crucial role in narrowing this gap.

　

　The scope of the activities of these Centres are described in some detail in the two above mentioned Articles. They include the acquisition and processing of marine scientific and technological data and information. The range of technologies considered covers marine biology, including the management of living resources, oceanography, hydrography, engineering, geological exploration of the sea-bed, mining and desalination technologies as well as technologies related to the protection and preservation of the marine environment and the prevention, reduction and control of pollution.

　

　The Convention does not identify the “regions” within which such Centres are to be established, nor does it give a time schedule for their establishment, or any indication as to how they should be financed. Quite a number of international, regional or global, institutions have been established over the past quarter of a century,³⁴ and all of them have been performing extremely useful functions. They have provided training to scientists and engineers from developing countries. They have facilitated networking among scientific and technological institutions; they have conducted pilot projects; they have enhanced international cooperation, both South-South and North-South. But, apart from their financial limitations, and the limitations entailed by their sectoral mandates, there is no linkage whatsoever between them and Articles 276 and 277, which have not been implemented as yet. The only attempt to implement these articles, and thus to build an essential component of the new international technological order postulated by the Convention, was made by the International Ocean Institute a quarter of a century ago. It may be worth while to recall this effort. It was premature at its time, but its time may have come, and it could easily be revised, updated, and adjusted to today's, and tomorrow's technological, economic and socio-political trends and needs.

　

　The IOI launched its proposal in February 1987, at an international seminar in Malta, organised by the IOI in cooperation with the Foundation for International Studies and the Malta Oceanographic Commission While aiming at the establishment of such Centres in each one of the Regional Seas, the proposal focussed on a pilot project in the Mediterranean, considered as the most advanced of the Regional Seas Programmes. The purpose of establishing such a Centre in the Mediterranean was:

　

　

　The structure of the proposed Centre was very simple. It was suggested that each member State would appoint its own national Coordinator, to whom industrial enterprises would submit their project proposals. The national Coordinators would meet periodically to discuss these projects and make a semi-final selection. As the technical/advisory body of the Centre, they would propose this selection to the Conference of Ministers which would be the decision-making organ and make the final selection. The Conference of Ministers would also appoint the Director General of the Centre and determine its general policy. Projects adopted by the Conference of Ministers would be financed half by the industrial enterprises that made the proposal, and half by the Governments of participating States, with the assistance of regional organizations (Trust Fund for the Mediterranean Action Plan) or regional divisions of international organisations (UNEP, UNIDO, Regional Economic Commissions and Banks, etc.): It was these latter that should have facilitated the participation of the developing countries of the Southern Mediterranean in the projects.

　

　The Centre itself, when fully developed, should have been spacious enough to accommodate 300 professionals and support staff, most of whom would be seconded by their firms or Governments. It should have been furnished with some basic equipment such as a deep, free surface diving tank for development and testing of underwater equipment; a pressurized diving tank for deep water system development; a large cavitation tunnel for propeller research and instrument calibration, ship construction facilities, etc.

　

　The Centre should have specialised, inter alia, in the following sectors of R&D:

　

　In conclusion, the proposal recommended, as a first step, the preparation of a feasibility study, for which it gave the terms of reference.

　

　The proposal was endorsed by the Government of Malta, and IOI proceeded with a detailed feasibility study, under the direction of Dr. Krishan Saigal, then a senior consultant to the Office for Ocean affairs and the Law of the Sea of the UN. Dr. Saigal visited a number of Mediterranean countries and talked to scientists, industrialists, and government officials. The IOI circulated a questionnaire among hundreds of Mediterranean scientific and technical institutions. This work was supported both by UNEP and UNIDO.

　

　The initial cost of establishing the Centre was estimated as very modest. A figure somewhere between $100,000 and $500,000 was proposed. When fully developed, the cost was projected to be about 5.5 million dollars a year.

　

　Upon the completion of the feasibility study, UNIDO organized a Mediterranean workshop at the technical level, for its discussion. The proposal and the study were well received. The address of UNIDO=s Director General, at the opening of the workshop is attached to this Annex. After the workshop, UNIDO issued a Report, fully endorsing the project. Several Mediterranean countries, besides Malta, offered to host the Centre.

　

　This, however, was the end of the success story. Invisible hands began to pull invisible brakes. Most European States considered the proposal “premature.”

　

　That was almost a quarter of a century ago. Today the proposal is no longer “premature.” It is overdue. The changes that have taken place and make the establishment of such Centres or systems or mechanisms dramatically more urgent, and more possible, are the following:

　

　The need for technology cooperation and transfer has become more pressing. And it is today not only the developing countries who are making the request, it is the industrialized countries who realize that, without the full cooperation of the majority of the world's people, i.e., the developing countries, it would be impossible to implement the Conventions, Agreements, Codes and Programmes, adopted especially since Rio, 1992, to conserve the environment, biodiversity, react to climate change and, quite simply, survive on this planet. If, however, developing, small, disadvantaged, poor States are to cooperate, they need the technologies required for implementation. Most industrialized States, therefore, are far more ready to contribute what they far more stingily tried to withhold in the seventies, when the Law of the Sea Convention was drafted Funding options have increased, especially through the establishment of the Global Environment Fund (GEF).

　

　During the past twenty years the Regional Seas Programme has been developed and consolidated. The implementation of the Global Programme of Action (GPA) on land-based pollution has acted as a new stimulus to regional development and “the revitalization of the Regional Seas Programme” and requires a strong technological input. This, however, could be utilized to satisfy the needs of the other Conventions and programmes as well; the science, and the technology needs in each case are mostly the same. The Mediterranean Regional Seas Programme, on the basis of the revised Barcelona Convention and Action Plan is still the most advanced of the regional systems, and still is perhaps the most suitable venue for a pilot project, especially through the establishment of the Mediterranean Commission on Sustainable Development, to which the new mechanism or process could conveniently be hitched, but the need for new mechanisms for technology cooperation and transfer is universal, and the “discussion model” annexed to this part of the study is therefore not limited to any one region, but is flexible enough to be adaptable to any regional sea. Let it be stressed again that the model is purely illustrative: an attempt to show up issues that have to be faced as concretely and concisely as possible.