As ocean space increasingly is used for production purposes, such as for the production of food and feed, renewable energy and resource mining, competition for space becomes a concern. A spatial solution to this is to co-locate activities in a multi-use setting. Next to the direct (financial) costs and benefits of multi-use and the societal cost and benefits, there are other factors, in the realm of legal aspects, insurance, health and safety issues and the overall governance of multi-use, that determine whether multi-use can be implemented successfully. This includes transaction costs that arise when for example non-adequate regulation, governance and insurance schemes are in place. Based on the analysis of five case studies across Europe these combined/collective transaction costs of multi-use are analysed and suggestions how to reduce and/or overcome these transaction costs are presented.
The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea contains only general rules concerning the delimitation of the exclusive economic zone and the continental shelf. However, international courts and tribunals have, within their compass, elaborated the law of maritime delimitation through their jurisprudence, thereby maintaining the resilience of the Convention in a particular context of maritime delimitations. The jurisprudence is not a panacea, however. As regards the implications of maritime delimitation judgments for third States in the same region, for example, the jurisprudence has not been consistent. Lack of consistency of the jurisprudence may undermine the predictability of the law of maritime delimitation and weaken the resilience of the Convention. This article critically assesses the approach of the International Court of Justice to the presence of third States in the process of maritime delimitation, by analysing the Nicaragua v. Colombia case and the Costa Rica v. Nicaragua case, respectively.
Illicit maritime activities generate significant scholarly and policy attention. While diverse in nature, governance responses share many regulatory features. This introduction advances the notion of maritime justice, a socio‐legal research agenda. Different from broader maritime security studies, it places law at the centre of the inquiry, studying maritime governance practices through the lens of regulation. Empirically, it covers operational, spatial, and structural junctions between illicit maritime activity and regulatory responses deriving from international and domestic law. Analytically, it is heterogeneous but holds a methodological commitment to studying everyday law enforcement practices of maritime security governance to disentangle its meanings and effects. The introduction posits the junction between illicit maritime activities and regulatory responses as a productive space to study the varied norms that shape order‐making at sea, and vice versa.
Plastic litter is introduced into the oceans from land-based sources located in many countries around the world. Marine plastic pollution may therefore be attributable to multiple states, resulting in shared state responsibility. This article discusses the issue of shared state responsibility for land-based marine plastic pollution by examining (i) primary rules of international law concerning the prevention of land-based marine plastic pollution; (ii) secondary rules of international law on this subject; and (iii) possible ways of strengthening the primary rules. It concludes that the barrier for the invocation of state responsibility may become higher in cases of shared state responsibility. Three cumulative solutions to this problem are proposed: elaborating the obligation of due diligence, strengthening compliance procedures, and interlinking regimes governing the marine environment and international watercourses.
The European Union (EU) seeks to become a global maritime-security actor, yet strategic challenges influence its maritime-security strategy process. Is there a distinctive and coherent EU approach to global maritime security, and how should the EU address the growing range of maritime challenges, including the intensification of militarized competition in the Indo-Pacific?
A tension between two opposing forces, that is, the force of division and that of unity, is increasingly sharpened in the law of the sea today. An essential question that arises is how one can protect community interests in the divided ocean. The law of dédoublement fonctionnel advocated by Georges Scelle provides an insight into this question. According to Scelle’s theory of the law of dédoublement fonctionnel, State organs perform a dual function: the national function of protecting State interests and the public service function of safeguarding community interests. The law of dédoublement fonctionnel seeks to reconcile these functions. Scelle’s harmonistic vision of international law is well worth reconsidering in the law of the sea and beyond. This article examines the relevance of Scelle’s theory in the context of the law of the sea and explores two models for the protection of community interests at sea.
In January 2023 the International Seabed Authority (ISA), an intergovernmental organization established under the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) granted already thirty contracts for exploration of Deep Seabed Mining, but exploitation has not started yet because ISA has not finalized its regulations, expected in 2025. This article intends to address to what extent is the current deep Seabed mining regime factoring risks and uncertainties in a just and sustainable manner in the current legal framework on environmental liability embedded in the green energy transition's processes with the EU as case study and inquiry if there are baseline or best practice to learn from. It unravels which type of precautionary approach fits and is just. Deep Seabed Mining is also a social justice, ethical dilemma demanding equitable and shared solutions to the benefit of current and future generations because activities of this kind can destroy ecosystems that can take decades to regenerate, if not causing irreversible damage. Law and technology, but also technology will be crucial as new methods guaranteeing an "environmentally benign Deep Seabed Mining" will determine how liability law will be shaped.
The 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) has for four decades been considered by many to be one of the most important legislative achievements of international law. It is revered as a “constitution of the oceans”, providing the legal framework for the governance of the oceans. This volume explores how the UNCLOS is functioning in various complex settings, how it adapts to new, emerging developments, as well as how it interacts with other regulations, both within the law of the sea regime and outside. Engaging in themes such as law and order at sea, UNCLOS' interaction with human rights and the role of private actors, the book raises complex questions in the application, understanding, and enforcement of the convention and how it can be envisaged, interpreted, and used in a dynamic world. The volume also raises methodological questions, the answers to which may enhance the predictability and coherence of the law under UNCLOS and thus secure its role as the predominant and relevant system for legal governance at sea for many decades to come. As a contribution to ensuring the future relevance of UNCLOS, the book will be a valuable resource for scholars, diplomats, judges and other practitioners who are working with and interpreting the law of the sea and related issues of maritime law, migration law, human rights law and humanitarian law.
The core function of UNCLOS is to provide a legal order for the oceans and their peaceful uses. This includes providing a legal framework for upholding law and order at sea, as this is a precondition for peaceful use. Part One of this volume deals with different perspectives of upholding law and order at sea; and Chapter 2 creates a backdrop for the following chapters dealing with these various issues. The chapter presents some perspectives on the system of law and order at sea and sets the following chapters in context with themes such as the scope of UNCLOS and its limitations, the adaptability of the convention to new developments, the role of the zonal system created under the convention and the influence of state practice on the system of upholding law and order at sea. By doing so, Chapter 2 also creates a line to the following parts of this volume; and some of the perspectives raised in Chapter 2 will be revisited in the final part (Part Four) of this volume, dealing with UNCLOS as a system of regulation and connected methodologies.
Discusses the challenges of raising finance to build and convert low- and zero-emission ships as required by international law and policy to mitigate climate change.