Stuart Kaye

Bio: Stuart Kaye is an academic researcher from University of Wollongong. The author has contributed to research in topics: Law of the sea & International law. The author has an hindex of 11, co-authored 71 publications receiving 435 citations. Previous affiliations of Stuart Kaye include University of Western Australia & Law School Admission Council.

International Fisheries Management

Abstract: 1. Introduction. 2. Regime Theory and International Fisheries Management. 3. Development of International Fisheries Management Prior to UNCLOS III. 4. International Fisheries Management under the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention. 5. The Precautionary Approach and International Fisheries Management. 6. Ecosystem Management and International Fisheries. 7. Co-Management of International Fisheries. 8. Bering Sea Fisheries Prior to 1994. 9. The Bering Sea Doughnut Hole Convention. 10. Antarctic Treaty Management of Southern Ocean Fisheries. 11. The Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources in Action. 12. Lessons from Polar Fisheries Regimes. 13. The Future of International Fisheries Management. Conclusion. Index.

International Law: Cases and Materials with Australian Perspectives

Abstract: Now in its third edition, International Law: Cases and Materials with Australian Perspectives remains an authoritative textbook on international law for Australian students. With a strong focus on Australian practice and interpretation, the text examines how international law is developed, implemented and interpreted within the international community and considers new and developing approaches within this field. This edition has been comprehensively updated to address recent developments in international law. The selection of cases and materials provides a thorough coverage of core areas and addresses a range of contemporary challenges, including climate change, human rights, nuclear proliferation and the South China Sea. A new chapter on international trade law reflects the growing importance of this body of law in Australian practice. Guiding commentary provides a rigorous analysis of key principles. Written by a team of experts with substantial experience in this field, International Law is an essential resource for students.

Current index to legal periodicals

Abstract: American Bankruptcy Institute Law Review 17 Am. Bankr. Inst. L. Rev., No. 1, Spring, 2009. Boston College Law Review 50 B.C. L. Rev., No. 3, May, 2009. Boston University Public Interest Law Journal 18 B.U. Pub. Int. L.J., No. 2, Spring, 2009. Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution 10 Cardozo J. Conflict Resol., No. 2, Spring, 2009. Cardozo Public Law, Policy, & Ethics Journal 7 Cardozo Pub. L. Pol’y & Ethics J., No. 3, Summer, 2009. Chicago Journal of International Law 10 Chi. J. Int’l L., No. 1, Summer, 2009. Colorado Journal of International Environmental Law and Policy 20 Colo. J. Int’l Envtl. L. & Pol’y, No. 2, Winter, 2009. Columbia Journal of Law & the Arts 32 Colum. J.L. & Arts, No. 3, Spring, 2009. Connecticut Public Interest Law Journal 8 Conn. Pub. Int. L.J., No. 2, Spring-Summer, 2009. Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy 18 Cornell J.L. & Pub. Pol’y, No. 1, Fall, 2008. Cornell Law Review 94 Cornell L. Rev., No. 5, July, 2009. Creighton Law Review 42 Creighton L. Rev., No. 3, April, 2009. Criminal Law Forum 20 Crim. L. Forum, Nos. 2-3, Pp. 173-394, 2009. Delaware Journal of Corporate Law 34 Del. J. Corp. L., No. 2, Pp. 433-754, 2009. Environmental Law Reporter News & Analysis 39 Envtl. L. Rep. News & Analysis, No. 7, July, 2009. European Journal of International Law 20 Eur. J. Int’l L., No. 2, April, 2009. Family Law Quarterly 43 Fam. L.Q., No. 1, Spring, 2009. Georgetown Journal of International Law 40 Geo. J. Int’l L., No. 3, Spring, 2009. Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics 22 Geo. J. Legal Ethics, No. 2, Spring, 2009. Golden Gate University Law Review 39 Golden Gate U. L. Rev., No. 2, Winter, 2009. Harvard Environmental Law Review 33 Harv. Envtl. L. Rev., No. 2, Pp. 297-608, 2009. International Review of Law and Economics 29 Int’l Rev. L. & Econ., No. 1, March, 2009. Journal of Environmental Law and Litigation 24 J. Envtl. L. & Litig., No. 1, Pp. 1-201, 2009. Journal of Legislation 34 J. Legis., No. 1, Pp. 1-98, 2008. Journal of Technology Law & Policy 14 J. Tech. L. & Pol’y, No. 1, June, 2009. Labor Lawyer 24 Lab. Law., No. 3, Winter/Spring, 2009. Michigan Journal of International Law 30 Mich. J. Int’l L., No. 3, Spring, 2009. New Criminal Law Review 12 New Crim. L. Rev., No. 2, Spring, 2009. Northern Kentucky Law Review 36 N. Ky. L. Rev., No. 4, Pp. 445-654, 2009. Ohio Northern University Law Review 35 Ohio N.U. L. Rev., No. 2, Pp. 445-886, 2009. Pace Law Review 29 Pace L. Rev., No. 3, Spring, 2009. Quinnipiac Health Law Journal 12 Quinnipiac Health L.J., No. 2, Pp. 209-332, 2008-2009. Real Property, Trust and Estate Law Journal 44 Real Prop. Tr. & Est. L.J., No. 1, Spring, 2009. Rutgers Race and the Law Review 10 Rutgers Race & L. Rev., No. 2, Pp. 441-629, 2009. San Diego Law Review 46 San Diego L. Rev., No. 2, Spring, 2009. Seton Hall Law Review 39 Seton Hall L. Rev., No. 3, Pp. 725-1102, 2009. Southern California Interdisciplinary Law Journal 18 S. Cal. Interdisc. L.J., No. 3, Spring, 2009. Stanford Environmental Law Journal 28 Stan. Envtl. L.J., No. 3, July, 2009. Tulsa Law Review 44 Tulsa L. Rev., No. 2, Winter, 2008. UMKC Law Review 77 UMKC L. Rev., No. 4, Summer, 2009. Washburn Law Journal 48 Washburn L.J., No. 3, Spring, 2009. Washington University Global Studies Law Review 8 Wash. U. Global Stud. L. Rev., No. 3, Pp.451-617, 2009. Washington University Journal of Law & Policy 29 Wash. U. J.L. & Pol’y, Pp. 1-401, 2009. Washington University Law Review 86 Wash. U. L. Rev., No. 6, Pp. 1273-1521, 2009. William Mitchell Law Review 35 Wm. Mitchell L. Rev., No. 4, Pp. 1235-1609, 2009. Yale Journal of International Law 34 Yale J. Int’l L., No. 2, Summer, 2009. Yale Journal on Regulation 26 Yale J. on Reg., No. 2, Summer, 2009.

Sources of Transparency: Information Systems in International Regimes

Abstract: Scholars and practitioners alike have stressed the important role of transparency in promoting international regime compliance and effectiveness. Yet many regimes fail to create high levels of transparency: governments and nongovernmental actors regularly fail to monitor or report on their own behavior, the behavior of other actors, or the state of the problem these regimes seek to resolve. If more transparency often, if not always, contributes to regime effectiveness, then identifying the sources of transparency becomes an important research task. Regime transparency depends upon both the demand for information and the supply of information. Specifically, regimes can seek “effectiveness-oriented” information to assess whether regime members are collectively achieving regime goals or “compliance-oriented” information to assess whether particular actors are individually fulfilling regime commitments. The incentives and capacities that relevant actors—whether governments, nongovernmental organizations, or corporate actors—have to provide such information depend on whether the regime's information system is structured around self-reporting, other-reporting, or problem-reporting. Although many of these factors are determined by characteristics of the actors involved or the structure of the problem, regimes can increase transparency by enhancing the incentives and capacity actors have to contribute to a particular regime's transparency.

INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL AGREEMENTS: A Survey of Their Features, Formation, and Effects

Abstract: ▪ Abstract International environmental agreements (IEAs), legally binding intergovernmental efforts directed at reducing human impacts on the environment, are common features of global environmental governance. Using a clear definition allowed creation of a comprehensive database [available online at (31)] listing over 700 multilateral agreements (MEAs) and over 1000 bilateral agreements (BEAs), which included treaties, protocols, and amendments that address numerous pollutants; preservation of many species; and, increasingly, protection of various habitats. Research into the factors that explain the timing, content, and membership in environmental agreements clarifies that the interests and power of influential states create pressures for, or constraints on, progress in global environmental governance but that discourse, actors, and processes also play important roles. Variation in the effects of these agreements on environmental behaviors and outcomes often depends as much on characteristics of member c...

Piracy and Armed Robbery Against Ships

Abstract: Piracy is both an historical and a contemporary problem. In the past decade it has also proven to be a legal problem. Under international law, many of the attacks against ships that are commonly characterized as piracy actually fall outside of the legal definition of piracy. This has widespread implications for States seeking to undertake law enforcement activities to combat attacks and address maritime security concerns in order to establish a safe maritime environment for shipping and seafarers. This chapter examines some of the challenges presented by the current legal framework for ‘piracy’ and ‘armed robbery against ships’. It first sets out the applicable international law and distinguishes between the two terms. It then provides an overview of piracy and armed robbery against ships in two regions of the world that have been subject to a large number of attacks in the past decade, Southeast Asia and Somalia.