ABSTRACT
Regimes change when the norms and principles of the regime change. A regime for Antarctica within which rights and liability rules for the exploiation of non-living resources are defined couldtake many forms. The regimes which have been selected for review range from very restrictive to very open. Analysis of the regimes should yield clues about which alternatives are preferred by the Antarctic Treaty consultative states. The status quo regime includes the Antarctic Treaty and all the conventions, recommendations, and agreements originating from consultative state meetings or otherwise applicable to Antarctica. There are several reasons for considering this regime in a comparative analysis of alternative future regimes for Antarctica. In a territorial regime for Antarctica claimant states would have absolute control over their territory, unless specifically limited by agreement. A number of important alternatives for a new regime for Antarctica which would include provisions for mineral resource development fall under the heading of joint jurisdiction.
