Hayley Roberts
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Hayley Roberts has a total of 7 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Arturo Rey da Silva
School of History, Classics and Archaeology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH8 9JX, UK
1 shared publication - Caesar Bita
National Museum of Kenya, Nairobi, Kenya
1 shared publication - Christopher N. S. Poonian
UNEP Indigenous Peoples Consultant,UNEP Marine and Coastal Ecosystems Unit, UK
1 shared publication - Georgia Holly
School of History, Classics and Archaeology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH8 9JX, UK
1 shared publication - Jon Henderson
Department of Archaeology, School of History, Classics and Archaeology, University of Edinburgh, Teviot Place, Edinburgh EH8 9AG, UK
1 shared publication - Wes Forsythe
Ulster University
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- Open Access
- 19 May 2022
- Published by MDPI AG in Journal of Marine Science and Engineering
- Vol. 10 (5) , 693
Utilizing Marine Cultural Heritage for the Preservation of Coastal Systems in East Africa
This paper presents the key contributions of marine cultural heritage to the survival of coastal ecosystems and the communities that rely on them in East Africa. Marine cultural heritage (MCH) describes the evidence of past human interactions with coastal and marine space, encompassing tangible material culture remains and associated intangible cultural expressions within coastal communities. By incorporating the protection of MCH into local and regional environmental frameworks, we gain an essential indicator to monitor change dynamics in natural habitats, the cumulative impacts of climate change, and the development of social adaptation strategies. An essential aspect of this development is the move away from global sustainability strategies towards community-centric management and stewardship. Such processes utilise a combination of traditional knowledge systems and scientific approaches designed to harness targeted economic, ecological, and social sustainable development. To argue for the incorporation of MCH into local and regional environmental frameworks in the area, this paper presents four case studies from the Rising from the Depths Network, a challenge-led research network focusing on harnessing the potential of MCH to bring sustainable development strategies to East Africa.
- 19 May 2022
- Published by MDPI AG in Journal of Marine Science and Engineering
- Vol. 10 (5) , 693
Open AccessUtilizing Marine Cultural Heritage for the Preservation of Coastal Systems in East Africa
This paper presents the key contributions of marine cultural heritage to the survival of coastal ecosystems and the communities that rely on them in East Africa. Marine cultural heritage (MCH) describes the evidence of past human interactions with coastal and marine space, encompassing tangible material culture remains and associated intangible cultural expressions within coastal communities. By incorporating the protection of MCH into local and regional environmental frameworks, we gain an essential indicator to monitor change dynamics in natural habitats, the cumulative impacts of climate change, and the development of social adaptation strategies. An essential aspect of this development is the move away from global sustainability strategies towards community-centric management and stewardship. Such processes utilise a combination of traditional knowledge systems and scientific approaches designed to harness targeted economic, ecological, and social sustainable development. To argue for the incorporation of MCH into local and regional environmental frameworks in the area, this paper presents four case studies from the Rising from the Depths Network, a challenge-led research network focusing on harnessing the potential of MCH to bring sustainable development strategies to East Africa.
- 5 March 2021
- Published by Taylor & Francis in Ocean Development & International Law
- Vol. 52 (2) , 113-142
Identifying “Exclusionary Agreements”: Agreement Type as a Procedural Limitation in UNCLOS Dispute Settlement
The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) is heralded as a constitution for the oceans and, as part of this, provides for a compulsory dispute settlement procedure entailing binding decisions. However, case law and academic commentary have highlighted significant issues in definitively identifying other agreements that could preclude these compulsory procedures—a concept permitted by the Convention in certain circumstances. This article begins to explore this challenge by contending that the type of agreement plays a significant role in whether or not it could be determined to be an “exclusionary agreement.” In doing so, the article conducts a systematic interpretation of Articles 281 and 282 UNCLOS, underpinned by the application of relevant provisions in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. This provides a conclusive basis as to whether the status of an agreement as an “ad hoc agreement” (specific; adopted for the dispute) or an “existing agreement” (general; adopted prior to the dispute) holds any significance in the context of these articles.
- 5 March 2021
- Published by Taylor & Francis in Ocean Development & International Law
- Vol. 52 (2) , 113-142
Identifying “Exclusionary Agreements”: Agreement Type as a Procedural Limitation in UNCLOS Dispute Settlement
The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) is heralded as a constitution for the oceans and, as part of this, provides for a compulsory dispute settlement procedure entailing binding decisions. However, case law and academic commentary have highlighted significant issues in definitively identifying other agreements that could preclude these compulsory procedures—a concept permitted by the Convention in certain circumstances. This article begins to explore this challenge by contending that the type of agreement plays a significant role in whether or not it could be determined to be an “exclusionary agreement.” In doing so, the article conducts a systematic interpretation of Articles 281 and 282 UNCLOS, underpinned by the application of relevant provisions in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. This provides a conclusive basis as to whether the status of an agreement as an “ad hoc agreement” (specific; adopted for the dispute) or an “existing agreement” (general; adopted prior to the dispute) holds any significance in the context of these articles.
- 3 September 2018
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in International and Comparative Law Quarterly
- Vol. 67 (4) , 833-865
THE BRITISH RATIFICATION OF THE UNDERWATER HERITAGE CONVENTION: PROBLEMS AND PROSPECTS
The UNESCO Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage 2001 came into force in 2009, providing a much-needed international legal framework for the protection of underwater cultural heritage (UCH). This article explores the reasons why the UK has neglected to ratify the Convention and why accession should now be prioritized. In doing so, the article reconciles the UK's stance with the agreement; moving the State into a position where it can reconsider ratification. In this context, it examines the definition of UCH and the purpose of the Convention, the extension of sovereign immunity for wrecked warships, and the likelihood of creeping coastal State jurisdiction beyond the competences conferred by the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. This transformative analysis moves forward the debate on these issues and is of international significance to States that have been similarly hesitant to ratify the Convention until now.
- 3 September 2018
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in International and Comparative Law Quarterly
- Vol. 67 (4) , 833-865
THE BRITISH RATIFICATION OF THE UNDERWATER HERITAGE CONVENTION: PROBLEMS AND PROSPECTS
The UNESCO Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage 2001 came into force in 2009, providing a much-needed international legal framework for the protection of underwater cultural heritage (UCH). This article explores the reasons why the UK has neglected to ratify the Convention and why accession should now be prioritized. In doing so, the article reconciles the UK's stance with the agreement; moving the State into a position where it can reconsider ratification. In this context, it examines the definition of UCH and the purpose of the Convention, the extension of sovereign immunity for wrecked warships, and the likelihood of creeping coastal State jurisdiction beyond the competences conferred by the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. This transformative analysis moves forward the debate on these issues and is of international significance to States that have been similarly hesitant to ratify the Convention until now.