The stability and resilience of management agreements on climate-sensitive straddling fishery resources: the blue whiting (Micromesistius poutassou) coastal state agreement

How would the formation, stability, and success of an agreement on cooperative management between neighbouring coastal states for a climate-sensitive fishery resource be affected by changes in the distribution and accessibility of the resource within the exclusive economic zones (EEZs)? In scenario 1, the blue whiting ( Micromesistius poutassou ) is harvestable in the EEZs of Norway, Iceland, the Faroe Islands, and the European Union (EU), as well as in the international waters of the Northeast Atlantic and the Norwegian Sea. The Barents Sea is a fringe area for the species, and there are no fisheries for blue whiting there. Hence, Russia is not regarded as a coastal state with respect to the blue whiting fishery. This severely weakens the stability of the coastal state agreement. In scenario 2, the area of distribution of the harvestable stock expands into the Russian EEZ, giving it status as a coastal state with respect to the resource and, thus, a partner in the management agreement. This secures the coastal state coalition the maximum attainable cooperative value and increases the likelihood of a stable coastal state agreement.