Not ratifying the treaty could lessen U.S. chances of benefiting from new Arctic opportunities, according to the study committee.

The study, co-chaired by Mead Treadwell of the Arctic Research Council, and Tim Wiepking, of Odom Corp., was issued in early May, in advance of a Commonwealth North forum on the Law of the Sea, scheduled for May 20 in Anchorage.

Featured speakers will include John Norton Moore, director of the Center of Oceans Law and Policy at the University of Virginia School of Law, Commander James Kraska, of the U.S. Naval War College, and Stephen de Boer, director of the Oceans and Environmental Law Division of the Canadian Department of Foreign Affairs.

The study notes that the latest iteration of the UNCLOS was designed as a single agreement that would codify and clarify all international maritime rules, including maritime boundaries and economic rights, rights of passage, and protection of the marine environment. The majority of United Nations participating countries, including all eight Arctic nations, has ratified UNCLOS. The United States has not signed off on the agreement.

While critics claim the convention could impinge on U.S. sovereignty over its own waters, they represent a shrinking minority, the report said.

"The current administration, the Pentagon, the majority of Congress and a wide variety of scientific, environmental and business groups all support ratification," the report said.

Ratification is important because UNCLOS has become the accepted international legal framework in the region for defining boundaries and for establishing environmental, safety and other regulations, according to the report.

It is also the framework under which all of the Arctic coastal nations are submitting their claims to exploration for oil and gas on the outer continental shelf.

"Despite the arguments of critics, proponents of ratification argue that any drawbacks are greatly outweighed by the need for the United States to be an equal partner at the table during any negotiations on boundaries and OCS claims. If it does not engage with other Arctic nations as a signatory to UNCLOS, it may not be able to exert as much influence over the decision-making process as it would like," according to the report.

The report also found a need to continue to support and expand basic research in the Arctic, to raise the standard of living of Arctic residents, to help Arctic residents implement effective strategies to adapt to climate chance, and to make infrastructure investments that will allow increased human activity in the Arctic to occur safely and efficiently.

Also recommended was consideration of the region's unique needs, as well as the contribution the Arctic and Alaska can make as a national/global regime is established to mitigate climate change.

Authors of the report present it not as an exhaustive exploration of Arctic issues, but rather as an attempt to frame these issues so that state and national policy makers understand that a number of seemingly disparate trends all fit within the context of a rapidly changing Arctic, they said.

"Given that the nation has a large stake in the future of the region, it will be both necessary and beneficial to pursue a variety of policy actions in order to minimize risks, profit from future development and protect indigenous cultures and the environment," the report said.

On the Web: www.commonwealthnorth.org

Margaret Bauman can be reached at margiebauman.@alaskajournal.com.