Suchergebnisse

Analysis of detailed statistics shows remarkable fluctuations in the volume and composition of voyages on the Northern Sea Route (NSR) along the northern coast of Russia since international use began in 2010. There has been strong growth in destination shipping between the Arctic and ports outside the region, but transit shipping between the Pacific and the Atlantic has not experienced the growth many had anticipated. Explanations are found in international market conditions as well as in the management of the NSR, with important lessons for the future development of different shipping segments. Shipping companies from several countries took part in the period up to 2019, but they seem to have become less central in the current phase of NSR shipping, which is dominated by the transport of hydrocarbons out of the Arctic. Russia expects international transit to pick up later. However, Russia alone cannot determine the volume of international traffic: it is the international shipping industry that will assess the balance of factors and conditions, and conclude if and when the shorter Arctic routes are safe, efficient, reliable, environmentally sound and economically viable in comparison with other routes.

The year 2019 was "the international year of the salmon" (IYS). The overarching aim was "to inform and stimulate outreach and research that aspires to establish the conditions necessary to ensure the resilience of salmon and people throughout the Northern Hemisphere;" further, to bring people together, share and develop knowledge, raise awareness and take action. This article is intended as a contribution to this goal. The article discusses how international law: the Law of the Sea Convention, the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Convention for the Conservation of Salmon in the North Atlantic Ocean relate to conservation and management of wild salmon. The article has a special focus on bilateral cooperation on salmon stocks in boundary/transboundary rivers, and using as a case study the Tana river in Norway and Finland.

The Minamata Convention, which entered into force on 16 August 2017, is a global, legally binding instrument on mercury. The initiative on the Minamata Convention was mainly driven by research showing negative effects on human health and the environment in the Arctic. The Arctic Council, an intergovernmental forum promoting cooperation on Arctic issues, and its Working Group, AMAP, played an important role in the process leading up to international negotiations on the Minamata Convention. This paper elucidates the evolutionary process in which scientific knowledge, herded by an intergovernmental, regional forum, is involved and forms the basis for a legally binding agreement. The paper provides new insight on multilevel governance of the mercury issue and unravels the role that AMAP has played in this dynamic process.

Negotiations are ongoing to develop an international legally binding instrument (ILBI) under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ). If adopted, the ILBI will likely apply to parts of the Arctic Ocean where the Arctic Council has played an important role for ocean governance. This begs the question of what role the Arctic Council will play vis-à-vis a future ILBI, which is envisioned to "not undermine existing relevant legal instruments and frameworks and relevant global, regional and sectoral bodies" (UN General Assembly Resolution 72/249). Against this backdrop, this article reflects on the future relationship between the Arctic Council and the ILBI. In so doing, the article initially discusses possible meanings of the notion of not undermining and, more broadly, how the ILBI will likely determine its institutional relationship with relevant bodies for BBNJ. Based on that, the article provides a short overview of the role of the Arctic Council in Arctic Ocean governance and explores whether the Arctic Council would qualify as a relevant regional body that shall not be undermined by the future ILBI.

زمینه و هدف: کمبود مواد غذایی، تغییرات اقلیمی و دیگر عوامل سبب شده تا تولید گیاهان تغییر شکل‌یافته ژنتیکی (محصولات تراریخته) از دهه 90 میلادی مورد توجه قرار گیرد. تولید این گیاهان همان‌گونه که موجب امیدواری در رفع گرسنگی بود، به دلیل تأثیر احتمالی بر محیط زیست موج نگرانی را نیز برانگیخت. هدف از این تحقیق، بررسی تعهدات زیست‌محیطی دولت‌ها در حوزه محصولات تراریخته در پرتو اصول حقوق بین‌الملل محیط زیست، اتحادیه اروپا و ایران است. مواد و روش‌ها: نوشتار حاضر به شیوه توصیفی ـ تحلیلی ابتدا اصول پیش‌گفته حاکم در حقوق بین‌الملل محیط زیست را بررسی می‌کند تا دریابد تعهدات زیست‌محیطی دولت‌ها درباره محصولات تراریخته از نظر اصول حقوق بین‌الملل چگونه است و سپس رویکرد اختصاصی اتحادیه اروپا را بررسی و تطبیق داده و بالاخره گذرا این وضعیت را در ایران مرور می‌کند. یافته‌ها: اتحادیه اروپا برخلاف ایالات متحده دیدگاهی احتیاط‌آمیز توأم با سخت‌گیری در حمایت از مصرف‌کننده و محیط زیست پیش گرفته که ریشه در اصول کلی حقوق بین‌الملل محیط زیست دارد. اصولی مانند توسعه پایدار، اقدام احتیاطی، ارزیابی و اطلاع‌رسانی که به جمع رعایت مصالح دولت‌ها در دستیابی به توسعه و پیشرفت و حفظ محیط زیست می‌انجامد، در حالی که در ایران از سویی قوانین حمایتی از محیط زیست به صورت کارآمد تصویب نشده است و یا این‌که در برخی موارد محیط زیست و حمایت از آن مغفول مانده است. ملاحظات اخلاقی: در تمام مراحل نگارش پژوهش حاضر، ضمن رعایت اصالت متون، صداقت و امانتداری، رعایت شده است. نتیجه‌گیری: نتایج این جستار نشان می‌دهد که دولت‌ها در خصوص محصولات تراریخته متعهد به رعایت اصول کلی یا عرفی توسعه پایدار، اقدام احتیاطی، ارزیابی و اطلاع‌رسانی بوده و رعایت اصول مزبور بهترین راهکار جهت صیانت از حقوق مصرف‌کننده و حمایت از محیط زیست است. ; Background and Aim: Food scarcity, climate change and other factors have led to the production of genetically modified crops (transgenic crops) since the 1990s. The production of these plants, as they had hoped to eliminate hunger, also raised concerns about the potential impact on the environment. The purpose of this study is to examine the Governments' Environmental Obligations on Genetically Modified Organism (GMO) in the light of the International Environmetal Law, European Union and Iran. Materials and Methods: The present paper is descriptive-analytical paper and firstly examines the aforementioned principles of international environmental law in order to understand what is the environmental commitment and obligation of governments in the process of cultivation and supply for transgenic products from the perspective of international law. Then, it examines and applies the EU-specific approach and finally reviews this situation in Iran. Findings: The European Union, unlike United States, has taken a cautious approach to consumer and environmental protection. This approach is rooted in the general principles of international environmental law. Principles such as sustainable development, precautionary principle and the principle of notification that bring together the interests of governments in achieving development, improvement and environmental protection, while in Iran,It has not been enacted environmental laws effectively on the GMO or in some cases the environment and its protection have been neglected. Ethical Considerations: In order to organize this research, while observing the authenticity of the texts, honesty and fidelity have been observed. Conclusion: The results show that governments are committed to adhering to the general or customary principles of sustainable development, precautionary principle and the principle of notification in the process of cultivating and supplying for Genetically Modified Organism (GMO), and adhering to these principles is the best way to safeguard consumer rights. Cite this article as: Pouresmaeili A, keykhosravi M, Vaezi Kakhki MR. The Studying of Governments' Environmental Obligations on Genetically Modified Organism (GMO) in the light of the International Environmetal Law, European Union and Iran. Bioethics Journal 2020; 10(35): e16.

This article discusses how the war in Ukraine, started by Russia, impacts the lives of Russian Indigenous small-numbered peoples. First, one can observe Russia's growing disregard for its international legal obligations. Second, the Russian State is continuously introducing new sanctions against persons and organizations who do not support the Russian regime. Third, the pressure on Indigenous peoples' representatives is increasing. Fourth, a significant number of members of Indigenous small-numbered peoples actively participate in the war due to, inter alia, socio-economic problems and lack of reliable and objective information about it. Fifth, there is a decline in international cooperation with the Indigenous small-numbered peoples of Russia. Finally, it is visible that the role of Indigenous peoples, including Russian Indigenous peoples, in international decision-making changes.

The Arctic has been home to Indigenous peoples since long before the international legal system of sovereign states came into existence. International law has increasingly recognized the rights of Indigenous peoples, who also have status as Permanent Participants in the Arctic Council. In northern Canada, the majority of those who live in the Arctic are recognized as Indigenous. However, in northern Russia, a much smaller percentage of the population is identified as Indigenous, as legal recognition is only accorded to groups with a small population size. This article will compare Russian and Canadian approaches to recognition of Indigenous peoples and Indigenous rights in the Arctic with attention to the implications for Arctic Ocean governance.
The article first introduces international legal instruments of importance to Indigenous peoples and their rights in the Arctic. Then it considers the domestic legal and policy frameworks that define Indigenous rights and interests in Russia and Canada. Despite both states being members of the Arctic Council and parties to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, there are many differences in their treatment of Indigenous peoples with implications for Arctic Ocean governance.

This article examines current Russian expert and official narratives on the Arctic, situating them in the broader context of the debate on Russia's role in the international system. Combining a critical geopolitics approach to the study of international relations with content analysis tools, we map how structural geopolitical changes in the wider region have shaped narratives on the Arctic in Russia today. Two types of Russian narratives on the Arctic are explored—the one put forward by members of the Russian expert community, and the one that emerges from official documents and statements by members of the Russian policymaking community. With the expert narratives, we pay particular attention to the Arctic topics featured and how they are informed by various mainstream approaches to the study of international relations (IR). In examining policy practitioners' narrative approaches, we trace the overlaps and differences between these and the expert narratives. Current expert and official Russian narratives on the Arctic appear to be influenced mostly by neorealist and neoliberal ideas in IR, without substantial modifications after the 2014 conflict, thus showing relatively high ideational continuity.

This article deals with the duty to consult indigenous peoples and the obligation to involve these peoples in decision-making processes in matters that concern them. After a general review of international legislation and obligations, particularly the ILO Convention no. 169 on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples, the article focuses on how these obligations are implemented towards the indigenous Sámi in Norwegian law. Here, the consultation agreement from 2005 and the Sámi Rights Committee's 2007 draft are still central. The review includes an analysis of the extent to which these duties meet international law requirements, and a deliberation on the concept of free, prior and informed consent.